tom moody

Archive for the ‘animation – others’ Category

huffing man (abstract phase)


- tom moody

July 26th, 2014 at 3:57 pm

maxlabor orb mod


modification of a GIF posted by maxlabor

- tom moody

July 17th, 2014 at 11:27 am



modification of a GIF found by blingscience

- tom moody

July 14th, 2014 at 9:26 am

stretched curve


animated fragment found on, vertically stretched

- tom moody

July 11th, 2014 at 8:16 am

circular jets


Hat tip Sucrete for the found science GIF chopped up by yrs truly to make the above puffy mandala. These amoebas or smoke rings assume laboratory conditions of idealized gravitational and atmospheric stability, making this GIF fall somewhere among art, science and sublime thought experiment.

- tom moody

June 18th, 2014 at 2:14 pm

piet de resistance


More on the conventional wisdom especially rife among computer programmers that anyone can make a Mondrian. Hat tip Jeffrey Henderson for a link to Piet, an abstract art generating language from an Australian programmer, David Morgan-Mar.
Making a web-friendly "Mondrian," in my opinion, is one of the dumber, more cliched things you could ever want to do, but Morgan-Mar's example page of various geeks' efforts isn't all "Mondrians" -- there is some nice pixel art-y stuff (see example above). Using machines to make art isn't inherently bad but the process should perhaps develop its own way, not as recreations of beginner textbook Modernism.

see also

Update: Jules Laplace emails: "Slight correction.. Piet is not really an 'abstract art generating language' so much as an esoteric, 2-dimensional programming language where color encodes signal flow. It no more generates abstract art than Befunge, a similar language, generates ASCII art -- although the author states his intent to produce an interpretable language which is also decorative."

My reply: I was paraphrasing the Piet author's sentence - "Piet is a programming language in which programs look like abstract paintings." The word "generate" is perhaps inappropriate if the code is itself the image. (But something gave birth to the image, right?) My rant was aimed more at the results of the code, or coding. A scientist I know hates it when artists use the word "experiment" and I hate it equally when someone accidentally stumbles on a pleasing pattern and says "hey! I'm kind of a good abstract artist!"

- tom moody

June 18th, 2014 at 2:07 pm

Posted in animation - others

right up to your face and DIS you


hat tips appleiphone, DIS magazine, karim rashid mousepad and whoever made the original arch GIF

- tom moody

May 29th, 2014 at 6:42 am

blurred woman with rectangles


A clip of a woman either auto-eroticizing or taken out of context to look like she was made the dump rounds a few days ago. I took a version by thengb and pasted it into my sketch_j4 GIF for a modern take on Frances Bacon, or something.

Addendum: GucciSoFlosy made the original ecstatic woman screenshot -- it came from YouTube -- a "Dutch girl band" that, quote, "gets orgasms while singing." 10,000,000+ views.

- tom moody

May 20th, 2014 at 6:59 am



animated GIF from the Tumblr codecartooning, by John Pound (via ptato0)

Pound's caption for the above is

#061, “NO MYSTERIES HERE”, a randomly generated animated landscape drawn purely in JavaScript and HTML5 Canvas, then converted to GIF.

The conversion to GIF is still a necessary step because (i) it makes the animation readable in any browser and (ii) for me at least, it adds a slight tinge of frame-lagged imperfection that I might not get from say, one of those sucky Google search page illustrations. Pound has posted his own pros & cons of drawing with code:


Learning curve
Less direct or intuitive
Slower than using a pencil
Bigger effort for a single drawing
No original art
Uses electricity


Reuseable code parts
Many varied drawings from one source
Easy reproduction
Makes animations
Luminous screen
Vector art scales to any size
Source code can be shared
Free code = free tools

Am not terribly interested in learning the Javascript/CSS method [so-called HTML5] myself. My own "pros" of not drawing with code are, liking the control, discipline, and individual quirky result of drawing frame by frame using hand-drawn lines, curves and shading [tablet and/or drawing program], seeing what happens when the frames come together, and then revising -- much the way I might work on a painting. Revisions and uncertainty that you can see or feel in the result are a necessary part of art, for me. "Using electricity" is going to be an ultimate downer once our unsustainable culture burns itself out, but that's also one reason I kind of want to use these tools while we have them, to be part of the current moment, rather than keeping a candle going for historical working methods.

- tom moody

May 20th, 2014 at 6:22 am

Posted in animation - others

error strata


Crop from a larger GIF posted by a user/troll. I took a section out of the middle of his GIF, which was about twice this size.

I like these GIFs that look like pixelated analog TV static, and prefer the above to similar ones of more self-consciously made or art nature, such as this elegant but rather stiff and claustrophobic specimen by Dylan Fisher or even these neo-psychedelic pixel art examples by Emilio Gomariz (to cite a couple from Art F City's "Gif of the Day" posts). Those have a very controlled, art-directed look in the sense of, "made by a professional illustrator." Whereas the one above looks like it just happened, or happened onstage when a punk band's amplifier blew during a two-note lead guitar solo and accidentally fried the Veejay's video display (if punk bands had Veejays). Or, think, early Steve Reich with tape recorders vs Music for 18 Musicians after Reich became polished and self-consciously classical.
The one above is 400 x 400 pixels, 221 KB, so rather modest in terms of trying to impress anyone with a "blow you away" art experience. It's relatively easy, however, to enlarge it for more walk-up impact: see this 800 x 798 pixel version at 572 KB.
Opening the GIF up, I noticed it had several 1 x 1 pixel frames. I removed them to see what would happen, and realized they were important in creating the jerky, random movement of the "strata" above. So they came back in. On the subject of randomness, one of the most appealing things here is the apparent directional movement of those strata, some fast, some slow, some going right, some going left, some bouncing up and down. A programmer could put all those variables in (maybe someone did here) but the trick would be to hide the methodology or obvious thought processes. Otherwise you have a "library music" version of punk.

- tom moody

May 14th, 2014 at 9:42 am