For my responses to Georg Nees, I took the ideas behind his work “Gravel” and incorporated them in my responses. The idea behind “Gravel” are the disruption of a formal pattern. Nees also enjoyed the idea of variation within a pattern, something that can be seen in Response #2.
I like to think that Response #1 focuses more on the disruption of a formal pattern. When compared to “Gravel,” the main idea is all the more obvious. As the grid continues, the pattern rapidly unravels.
Nees’s pieces known as the “corner graphics,” one comprised of eight and the other twenty-three, each have variety in their patterns. Looking at each fragment, no two are the same. In Response #2, I played around with the code. While not bearing similarities to Nees’s corner graphics, there is still variation in the pattern.
Finally, Response #3 seems to be a combination of the former two. Once again, I played with the code, trying out random numbers until the image before me made me pause and want to revise it. There could be a pattern, but it is random and all over the place and varied.
