LO-09

https://www.archdaily.com/868540/this-mysterious-3d-printed-grotto-challenges-boundaries-of-computational-geometry-and-human-perception

As a concept artist, I basically do visual design for games. I am very interested in generative art, so that I checked back to week 2 LO and found Robert’s post about Dillenberger & Hansmeyer’s 3D printer grotto. (Thank you for your post)
I think the working process of computer generative art and concept design are very different but concept art can borrow some essence from computer generative art for sure. Especially about the weird shape and repetitive technology feeling, this aspect is very hard for the human brain to create.
But as always, I don’t think computer generative art can be directly used in concept design. It is very easy to tell the picture is to some extent lack of deep thinking and art re-twist. People’s eyes like to see something that has big, medium, small reads. The problem of computer generative art is that it is very even. I definitely think the 3D work I referenced here is awesome and also I definitely think it is not suitable for any game or film without re-design by designers. It is full of details. Just imagine if audience need to watch a movie and it has so many details for 90 minutes long, they will be so bored after 10 minutes because they don’t know what to look at.
In one sentence, I think computer generative art is awesome as a starting point for design, but it is far from excellent in terms of using it in mature visual products.
( Here is my portfolio just in case someone is curious about what I am literally doing for games: www.yolishen.com)