01-31-2017, 12:00 AM
you are aware that things "look" different depending apon the position of the assembage point.
i did an expereiment on aesthetic and vision of potential about 13 years ago.experiment involved melting glass into 2 ingotsthen smashing 2 ingots into 1000s of pieces using an iron V shaped tool.next i would identify (with the larger pieces) which ones i liked the look of
and which ones i did not.i would then take the two heaps of broken glass place back into kiln and melt them down into ingots again.repeat step 1)
every "work" day,, i would open the kiln take out two glass ingotssmashe them to pieces.. sort into 2 aesthetic heapsand place back into kiln..so the next days ingots..one ingot would be made of nice shapes identified the previous day melted down and cooledand one made of nasty shapes melted down and cooled.
every work day i would put two sets of smashed glass into the kiln (one nice , one nastyswitch it on.and know tommorow there would be two near identical ingots ready to smash.
gradually the glass degraded and became blue and vitrified from over processsand i threw it in the dumpster.
you would think it was a completley pointless experimentexcept each night when i lay down to dreami would think about my next days workand think about the two streams of melting glass in the kilns.
FACT 1)- Both streams of glass were the same chemical composition. Both streams of glass were heated to identical temp in the same kiln for the same ramping time in the same atmosphere.Fact 2) I could only foresee the process ocurring in the glass shapes i "liked". It seemed that the aesthetic is did not agree with was RESISTENTto my vision .prediction of its process.
eventually i identified the common link between the two aesthetics.the ones i liked could have all been shattered from a glass sphere.the ones i didnt like could have all been made from a glass cube (minus its contained sphere).
and so the cube was resistent to the truth of processthe sphere was almost too maleable or predictable within process.
so the sphere moves too easy.that it passes through does not move easy enough- even when it does.
.....................
I appreciate its badly written. i blame the cube.
i did an expereiment on aesthetic and vision of potential about 13 years ago.experiment involved melting glass into 2 ingotsthen smashing 2 ingots into 1000s of pieces using an iron V shaped tool.next i would identify (with the larger pieces) which ones i liked the look of
and which ones i did not.i would then take the two heaps of broken glass place back into kiln and melt them down into ingots again.repeat step 1)
every "work" day,, i would open the kiln take out two glass ingotssmashe them to pieces.. sort into 2 aesthetic heapsand place back into kiln..so the next days ingots..one ingot would be made of nice shapes identified the previous day melted down and cooledand one made of nasty shapes melted down and cooled.
every work day i would put two sets of smashed glass into the kiln (one nice , one nastyswitch it on.and know tommorow there would be two near identical ingots ready to smash.
gradually the glass degraded and became blue and vitrified from over processsand i threw it in the dumpster.
you would think it was a completley pointless experimentexcept each night when i lay down to dreami would think about my next days workand think about the two streams of melting glass in the kilns.
FACT 1)- Both streams of glass were the same chemical composition. Both streams of glass were heated to identical temp in the same kiln for the same ramping time in the same atmosphere.Fact 2) I could only foresee the process ocurring in the glass shapes i "liked". It seemed that the aesthetic is did not agree with was RESISTENTto my vision .prediction of its process.
eventually i identified the common link between the two aesthetics.the ones i liked could have all been shattered from a glass sphere.the ones i didnt like could have all been made from a glass cube (minus its contained sphere).
and so the cube was resistent to the truth of processthe sphere was almost too maleable or predictable within process.
so the sphere moves too easy.that it passes through does not move easy enough- even when it does.
.....................
I appreciate its badly written. i blame the cube.