I wrote those words in 1986 to start off an article
for Science News magazine about an
attempt to develop a set of rules—a shape
grammar or formal description—that would allow someone to analyze the
structure of a set of paintings and to generate similar images. Such a
computer-mediated effort would, at the same time, provide insights into an
artist’s working process.
My article focused on the pioneering work of computer
scientist Russell
A. Kirsch and art historian Joan L. Kirsch to create such a design grammar (or
computer model) for the "Ocean Park" paintings of Richard Diebenkorn (1922-1993).
His work lent itself to such an effort because Diebenkorn painstakingly layered his
paintings, with thin washes of paint overlapping each other and an underlying framework
of lines dividing the canvas into rectangular and triangular areas. His
technique made it possible to trace the order in which he put down the elements
of his composition.
I was reminded of that long-ago reporting and writing
project when an expansive exhibition devoted to
Diebenkorn's "Ocean Park" artworks recently arrived at the Corcoran Gallery of Art in Washington,
D.C. It was thrilling for me to see this extensive collection, ranging from
large canvases to small drawings and painted cigar-box lids, in the sky-lit,
wide-open galleries of the Corcoran.
I had seen individual paintings before, but viewing works
that spanned Diebenkorn's Ocean Park period (he lived in the Ocean Park
neighborhood of Santa Monica, California, from 1967 to 1988), vividly revealed
how his vision and technique evolved over the years.
Unable to capture the colors, texture, or brushwork of a
completed Diebenkorn painting, the Kirsches concentrated on the geometric
framework on which the artist draped his paint. They discovered that Diebenkorn's
line patterns were tightly constrained—every line depended on every other line.
The Kirsches ended up with about 42 rules that encompassed the
logical sequence in which the artist put down his lines and his fondness for
nesting forms within forms. They used those rules to generate frameworks for
credible simulations of Diebenkorn paintings (Digital Diebenkorn: A video of a system implementing a shape grammar of the artist Diebenkorn's paintings. Refer to the paper: J. Kirsch, Russell Kirsch, and Sandy Ressler: "Computers Viewing Artists at Work," Proceedings of Syntactic and Structural Pattern Recognition, March, 1987).
I was lucky enough to interview Diebenkorn about the Kirsch
project. He was gently skeptical.
In the Science News article,
I quoted Diebenkorn: "In my work, I'm continually trying to do it
differently. For a picture to come to life for me, it necessitates a series of
surprises or maybe one big bang of a surprise. That's the crux of
my work. It's surprise that keeps it alive for me."
He added, "I'm not sure that the computer allows for that."
He added, "I'm not sure that the computer allows for that."
The Diebenkorn
exhibition was put together by Sarah C. Bancroft of the Orange County Museum of Art
(OCMA). The show
opened at the Modern Art Museum of Fort Worth
in 2011, then appeared at OCMA February 26 to May 27, 2012. It is at the
Corcoran until September 23, 2012, and will then travel to other art museums.
References:
Bancroft, S.C., S. Landauer, and P. Levitt. 2011. Richard
Diebenkorn: The Ocean Park Series. Prestel USA.
Kennicott, P. 2012. "Richard
Diebenkorn: The Ocean Park Series" at the Corcoran Gallery reviewed. Washington Post (June 28).
Peterson, I. 1986. Computing art. Science News 129(March 1):139-140.
Photos by I. Peterson
No comments:
Post a Comment