When I went into bookshop Broekhuis, I heard a lot of noise coming from the third floor. There was an opening of an art exhibition related to the Bridges conference. (Earlier this year I had a short email exchange with someone attending this conference.) I only found the work of Jennifer Townley interesting. I paid a short visit to Photo gallery Objektief and at galery Beeld en Aambeeld, I studied the polyhedrons made from paper by Ulrich Mikloweit. They were not for sale, but must represent a great value as he has obviously spend many hours working on building these.
Next I went to gallery WVIII to see the work of Billy Foley. There were four large painting and seven smaller paintings. The smaller paintings are recent works made in the past year, with very light strokes in bright colours. The four larger works resemble works he made a long time ago, using mostly black paint with some red accents. Again, I was surpriced by his works.
In Tetem, I went saw Untitled. Zimoun & Scheidler. At first I thought there were hidden loudspeakers because I could not believe that the sound was made by the little soft balls bumbing against the carton boxes. There were also some young children walking around and making a video as part of a workshop, I guess. Interesting to see how they experienced the art works on display. I also studied the little mechanic works by Léon van Opstal and I was impressed by the paintings by Anya Janssen because at first I thought the paintings were just pictures. Very special.
Next, I went to to the building of ArtEZ Institute of the Arts to view some the final exam work of the art students. With these kind of exhibitions there is always a lot of works that cannot attract my attention for a split second, but there I talked a little with Nicole Urban about her work "Little Lava Factory, refined", mainly discussing the random generator that she used in the Arduino controller. I argued that it must have been a pseudo-random generator. I mentioned that there are images that look random, but are not random at all. But when she pointed at her work "Rhythm Incubator", which had glass bottles with small cotton balls being blown around by a small computer fan, and asked me if the moved at random, I could but agree with her.
I talked with Corrie van de Pol about her ceramic tiles with geometric patterns. Quite interesting. I mentioned her the diagonal mazes.
I watched some people play the game Tellit with Friederike Borngässer who designed and produced the game. Very clever idea. Would not surprise me if it is becoming a popular game. I also watched the animation by Leo Pfeiffer, shown a dark room. Quite impressive, a little dark story, reminded me of game Dear Esther. I also talked with some one who had a huge collection of old negatives and slides. Finally, I talked with Gerda van de Glind about the pictures she took of dinners and someone diaries. I showed her my diaries and told her a little about my diary writing. She seemed to find it interesting.
I found it a quite refreshing afternoon to look ata all these forms of art. It really makes you think and see things differently.
We also had some interesting conversations. He is very much into mixing and selecting colours. He want to focus on selecting six colours and paint those on a square divided in six by six smaller squares such that all colours touch exactly four times. He even wants to restrict himself further by keeping the hue the same and only variate the brightness and the saturation. He already made two of those paintings. He explained it was was difficult to find an arrangement of the colours such that your eye is not caught by a pattern. Even before we talked about it, I already had started looking for patterns in one of the paintings on the wall.
While going through the publications, I also found a booklet about the collection Eyck in the Hedge House, which contained a picture of Komputerstrukturen 2. In this picture is clearly visible that it has the annomality I described before. So it seems that the reproductions are correct (I did not yet compare them in detail) and the annomality was introduced by Struycken himself. He was a little surprised about it, when I told him. It was very nice staying with him and talking about all kind of things. We hope to meet again in the future.
If you do not allow that a square is placed between two squares with the same colour, or otherwise said, when you do not allow squares with the same colour at distance two, then there are only 36 unique solutions left. But these contain a lot of knight moves. If you allow at most two of such two jumps in different directions and using different colours, there are 491 unique solutions. If you look to the maximum number of knight moves per colour and combine these these solutions, you get the following table:
0 0 0 1 0 0 2 5 0 3 1041 0 4 51436 4 5 197075 128The four solutions from the 491 solutions with at most four knight moves per colour, all contain a 'square' of four knight moves, which really jumps out. If you do not allow these, and do not restrict the maximum number of knight moves, then there are 16 solutions. But 15 of these solutions contain a 'triangle' configuration consisting of two squares at distance two that are connected with a knight move with a third square. The one solution that does not have this, looked very similar to the configuration that Peter Struycken used in one of the paintings that he showed me yesterday. But this solution has some other patterns, that once you have seen them, cannot escape your attention.
If you allow one 'square' of four knight moves and a maximum of five knight moves per colour, there are seven solutions. Maybe this is acceptable if you use the least saturated/grey colour such that your eye would not easily catch it. The four, the one and the seven solutions are displayed below with six 'ugly' colour. (Of course, the results presented here depend on the correctness of the programs.)
(Corrections to the results)
0 0 0 1 0 0 2 13 0 3 1053 0 4 52119 4 5 199294 142There are 27 (instead of 16) solutions with no square of knight jumps and two (instead of one) have no 'triangle'. If you allow one 'square' of four knight moves and a maximum of five knight moves per colour, there are nine (instead of seven) solutions.
Peter Struycken when seeing the results of last Tuesday, remarked that many of the solutions contain an adjecent pair of rows or columns that have many of the same colour combinations. In the 611 solutions there are no solutions that do not have any such same colour combinations. But there are 184 that do at most have two for each adjecent pair of rows and columns. Futhermore, I discovered that many of the remaining solutions do contain a pair of rows or columns that have an equal sequence of at least three the same colours. There is only one solution with no equal sequence of three or more the same colours. There are 78 solutions with at most three same colours. There are also many solutions where many of the four combinations of two colours occur in the same directions. By excluding the solutions that for all combinations of colours have them all four in the same direction, the number of solutions is further reduced to 50. (The extended filter program.)
Below a selection of these solutions can be made to add combinations of extra restrictions. To prevent a 'wheel' pattern of two colours around the central four central squares, select 'None' or 'At most one' with squares of four horse jumps. Many combinations of restriction return no solution at all.
Yesterday, Annabel found that a version of the Chinese Wooden Puzzle is sold by Dille & Kamille. I went to check it out. They cost € 13.95, which I found a little too expensive to buy one. On their online shop it is sold as Puzzel Tetris, Hout, 40 Stukjes (Tetris puzzle, wood, 40 pieces). I do not understand why it is named after Tetris, because three of the eight types of pieces are not found in the original Tetris game. The description with the puzzle mentions that there are six ways to solve the puzzle. I do not understand what they mean with this. There is a description under the pieces that explains it. I can hardly believe that the mean it to be number of ways the pieces can be put in the frame, because that is many times larger. I did some internet search and found Tetris 1 on MadeInChina.com and Wood Intellegence (note the incorrect spelling) on Aliexpress.com. It seems that all of these are produced in China.
I visited bookshop Polare (Selexyz Scheltema) and bought two books:
When looking at these, I do not really see a great difference in quality between the different rows. It surprises me how different some of patterns in each row look, while they are basically the same with except for rotation of hue. Maybe the algorithm contains an error. Probably the 'badness' metric used is not good enough with respect to what we as humans consider bad. I have made some attempts to make all colour look balanced, such that only the hue would matter, but for some reason certain combinations of colours are more prominent than others. I also think this is quite subjective, maybe also with respect to your favourite colour. I notice that my eyes often follow the trails of red, purple and blue squares.