1. the artwork is square
  2. many short black lines
  3. white background
  4. thin white border at edge
  5. lines are the same length
  6. empty gaps in piece with no lines
  7. most lines are not parallel
  8. not all lines intersect
  9. intersections are not crowded or clumped
  10. many lines form a V/Y formation
  11. appears to be a general direction the lines point to


GitHub repository//

My gut feeling when I first viewed what we were to copy was worry–and I was not let down. Instinctively I started with the structure similar to how I coded my linesIntersect from deliverable01, and as expected, the lines were arranged too randomly, and from then I had to look closer. I hence noted the generally one-directional slope of each line–this prompted me to somehow control the slopes of the lines so that they were not too haphazard, and I did so with trial-and-error constants being applied to PI. The next consideration was that each line was not too messily spaced–they seemed to follow a grid pattern such that each line appeared per grid of the overall square canvas. So, I consequently scrapped the truly random implementation of my lines and restructured my loops so that the x and y values of each line strictly iterated by the hard-coded size of my imaginary grid, which amongst many other variables like gaps (where lines didn’t show) and slopes were visually estimated and set to actual numbers. It goes without saying that I have immense respect for any coder, programmer, artist–regardless of the era they were active; and naturally if anything, it is incredible that Vera Molnar created this during her time when technology was not as advanced or thoroughly explored. Re-coding this was a challenge (and I expected, admittedly–and I’m curious as to how Vera created this herself.)


Comments are closed.