Recognizing Patterns

[kuranes]

This subject has been discussed before - though maybe not in Creative Theory. Using Pareidolia as a "muse".

[Zephyrus055]

I think I automatically recognize them subconsciously.

[waxwing]

Pareidolia. I am a firm believer in art being about seeing something extraordinary in the commonplace, so in that sense, yes, I do believe it can be a muse. I took this college art class called Creativity Practicum in which we talked a lot about what it means to see patterns as opposed to static objects. For example, if I look at a tree, and am inspired to create something from what I see, is it because I see something besides leaves, bark, and branches? Yes, I think so. It's not necessarily that I see a face or form or something readily definable in the tree, but in a looser sense of the word Pareidolia, I do see something in the way the tree moves, or in the way the light on the branches makes me think of something else.

When we made collages during the semester, we were required to cut pictures from National Geographic, but the catch was that we could not look at the magazines rightside up. We had to turn them upsidedown so we weren't seeing the pictures as they were actually presented. The natural outgrowth of that positional change was to see patterns and connecting points rather than objects in themselves.

I think this has a lot to do with rendering reality in a new and interesting light. Sometimes it requires actually purposefully "flipping" our minds and bodies upsidedown to take a different look, and other times the "otherness" of the picture or vision just jumps out of the scene, becoming the impetus for "seeing through," and then, a work of art.

[kuranes]

Recognizing patterns that are important to us is so much a part of survival that the brain has a region that is dedicated to it, I believe I read. There was a thread on Recognizing Faces by Maniac that had a post by Jkrs. in it that had some great links.

Young Zebras need to be able to know which stripes are Mom's and birds to recognize birdsong etc. Yet those stripes have to be confusing enough when the herd is running from a big cat to make it hard to find those patterns.

[kuranes]

I always turn my paintings upside down while I'm doing them - to see what they look like. Sometimes they look even better that way!

[Ivy]

When we made collages during the semester, we were required to cut pictures from National Geographic, but the catch was that we could not look at the magazines rightside up. We had to turn them upsidedown so we weren't seeing the pictures as they were actually presented. The natural outgrowth of that positional change was to see patterns and connecting points rather than objects in themselves.

I think this has a lot to do with rendering reality in a new and interesting light. Sometimes it requires actually purposefully "flipping" our minds and bodies upsidedown to take a different look, and other times the "otherness" of the picture or vision just jumps out of the scene, becoming the impetus for "seeing through," and then, a work of art.

It's amazing how this can affect your perspective. I remember looking at a picture (actually, I think it might have been in a National Geographic) taken from inside a canoe, so the front tip of the canoe was in the middle of the bottom of the page. I was looking at it upside down, though, and the tip of the canoe looked like a zipper coming down, unzipping the scene. It made my brain hurt for a few seconds. :)

[kuranes]

I can imagine!

[ne plus ultra]

Pareidolia, I do see something in the way the tree moves, or in the way the light on the branches makes me think of something else.
I share similar experiences most are quick to label this as ADD or randomness.


When we made collages during the semester, we were required to cut pictures from National Geographic, but the catch was that we could not look at the magazines rightside up. We had to turn them upsidedown so we weren't seeing the pictures as they were actually presented. The natural outgrowth of that positional change was to see patterns and connecting points rather than objects in themselves.
Interestingly, if I've seen a picture right side up it comes more naturally for me to see the same picture just turned up side down.
To deviate from this mentality requires effort. I usually have to forget being able to see the image, which is not hard but does come as naturally.

[Elizabeth B]

I think patterns are very important, and the same kinds of patterns are found in language, math, and music.

I have a page describing this relationship on my website that I linked to before, here it is again (you have to wade through some thoughts about language and Chomsky before you get to the music stuff):

http://www.thephonicspage.org/Other/onlearning.html

[Justin05]

Synchronicity happens to be a huge part of my life. Everywhere I go I see the connections and especially If I draw that day I will see those shapes out in reality.

I think I read somewhere that INTP's are not very aware of the external surrounding unless they are interested in the subject matter. Therefore, I think I see the connections b/c of the way I filter things.

[coffeezombie]

Making up patterns where there are none is a sign of madness, though.

[kuranes]

http://www.galeria.sonic.pl/DaliGal/Gal15/1937_03.htm

An example of "seeing patterns" - where there are none ?

[Stillwater]

Hmmm...I'm always seeing patterns, especially visual ones. When I was little I would stare at the wood paneling in my bedroom for hours. The whirling grain and knots held many secrets. As I grew older, there seemed to be more images of naked women in the wood.


http://www.intpcentral.com/uploads/moonrise_small.jpg

What is this?

[Dr. Haight]

That's the hole in my head where all the information keeps leaking out.

[mr. treat]

What is this?

the sun reflecting off a body of water?

[Stillwater]

There are no right or wrong answers. Well, not yet any way.

Dr. Haight: perhaps
Mr. Treat: perhaps

[eyebyte_atWork]

That's the hole in my head where all the information keeps leaking out.


Beatles reference (fixing a hole)?

[eyebyte_atWork]

Seeing patterns is one of the elements that Keirsey's work points out as a NT trait... meaning that NT's tend to do it more often than other types... I guess I can see that in myself. In every IQ test I have ever taken - I have never missed the question "what comes next" - I was also a wizard at extracting series and sequences in Calculus and physics.

[Dr. Haight]

Beatles reference (fixing a hole)?
You definitely need to refrain from listening to the Beatles from now on; it seems to be interfering with you N.

[Elizabeth B]

Making up patterns where there are none is a sign of madness, though.

Maybe we're all mad here...

[Mr. Beef]

Maybe we're all mad here...

funny you should mention this. This is probably a reason creativity and madness are linked. I would guess that if there is a large enough deficit between one's critical thinking and one's pattern detection abilities (assuming that one's pattern detection abilities were developed enough and were greater than one's critical thinking abilities) this would be a perfect formula for madness....seeing patterns everywhere but not being able to sort them out and discard those that are false.

[htb]

funny you should mention this. This is probably a reason creativity and madness are linked. I would guess that if there is a large enough deficit between one's critical thinking and one's pattern detection abilities (assuming that one's pattern detection abilities were developed enough and were greater than one's critical thinking abilities) this would be a perfect formula for madness....seeing patterns everywhere but not being able to sort them out and discard those patterns that are false..

[azurwarrior]

There are some who distinguish between madness and creativity like this:
The actual proof (or criteria) one is creative (an artist) and not mad is if a work of art is produced.

[Ghost-Girl]

When we made collages during the semester, we were required to cut pictures from National Geographic, but the catch was that we could not look at the magazines rightside up. We had to turn them upsidedown so we weren't seeing the pictures as they were actually presented. The natural outgrowth of that positional change was to see patterns and connecting points rather than objects in themselves.


I once had an art book that recommended turning pictures upside-down when trying to draw them, and supposedly that allowed a lot of people to draw things that they couldn't have drawn before because they saw the patterns and shading rather than the object itself.

My pictures always looked a lot worse when I did that. I have to relate to an image as a whole if i'm going to draw it.

[kuranes]

Ghost-girl - You might want to take a shot at this kind of "balanced composition" while you're still in the sketching and composing phase, before you start to get involved with much detail or color. If you wish to do it. I've found ( from my personal experience ) that it does add greatly to a piece, but sometimes I want to get started without much preamble or planning, and preserve whatever small momentum I have going. In those cases, I don't bother with it. I think maybe that is what you were getting at ? Spontaneity ? Because looking at the overall design aspects IS focusing more on the "whole", IMO.

[Ghost-Girl]

I was talking more about drawing from an already-existing image.

Generally when im creating art not from a prior exemple (which most of my art is) I consider composition, color, etc. beforehand and then just go for whatever i'm trying to accomplish. I guess, for me, that's where spontaneity comes into the equation.

edit: I'm not sure if i've answered what you were trying to ask.

[kuranes]

Even if I was drawing from an existing image, I would still have the option of planning the composition out, or just doing a detailed sketch which has no background or design element to it, such as leading the eye around in a circle. If I decided that I wanted to plan it out, I would decide how large I wanted to make the object which was the focus of the piece, and then I would decide on its placement in the overall blankness there at stage one. Once I started sketching ( in very light pencil ) these shapes, I could do things like invert the canvas to see how it looked. I might want to re-invert it many times as I added detail, since I'm not capable of simply imagining what it would look like inverted. ( Turning it on its side can be interesting, too. )

For example, if I was doing a "Head of Medusa" pic, I might draw a crude pineapple shape with a small squashed circle ( halo-shape ) on top of it to represent Medusa's head. Then draw some lines converging that would represent a background. I might erase these lightly drawn lines several times as I adjust to fit this "balanced piece" that looks good both right side up and upside down. Once I thought that i had the basics done, I would concentrate on changing that pineapple shape into a face, and changing the halo into the snakes writhing. I would shade the background. Later, i would turn the canvas or board upside down again, and contemplate how I wanted the snakes to contribute to the design. Perhaps they are rising up in an arc because ( upside down ) this arc flows well with some of the details or lines in the background. You could do this with a real person's face too, if they were patient, or you had a model hired to be still for a while. You wouldn't have something as dramatic as snakes to work with, but you could show windblown hair or bring out something by the use of how light hits one side much more than the other etc.

Still, I can understand that going through these extra steps ( or feeling obliged to ) can shut down your spontaneous motivation to "start creating", too, and this shouldn't be forced. I could understand someone not going through all the "balanced composition" extra steps for the reason of "lack of spontaneity" but it's hard for me to understand what you mean by the use of the words "image as a whole". Evaluating the parameters of a balanced composition IS looking more at the image as a "whole", is it not ?

[Ghost-Girl]

I could understand someone not going through all the "balanced composition" extra steps for the reason of "lack of spontaneity" but it's hard for me to understand what you mean by the use of the words "image as a whole". Evaluating the parameters of a balanced composition IS looking more at the image as a "whole", is it not ?


By viewing an image "as a whole", I meant viewing an image as how it is intended to look completed (right-side up) along with all the compositional elements how they would be viewed. Our process is much the same, except I don't feel the need to invert an image (or imagine it inverted) because it is possible to achieve a balanced composition without knowing how it looks upside-down (or sideways.)

[kuranes]

OK. I thought you were saying something else. Certainly inverting a picture is not essential. To me, it can add something extra to the "balanced composition" phase, though, and to you it doesn't. In fact, you said attempting it actually hurt your pics(?), and maybe that's where I got started off on my tangent. It's a hard subject to communicate about.

[Ghost-Girl]

In fact, you said attempting it actually hurt your pics(?), and maybe that's where I got started off on my tangent. It's a hard subject to communicate about.

Sorry if I got a little confusing/confused back there.

Yeah, if i try to invert something while i'm drawing it, the image ends up skewed or off in some way. I don't know why.

[Justin05]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia

[Toonia]

This subject has been discussed before - though maybe not in Creative Theory. Using Pareidolia as a "muse".This presents an interesting angle on pattern recognition, because it involves the projection of an imagined pattern onto an external object. This is different than discovering patterns inherent within an object. We can look at a tree and discover the fractal pattern of the branches and leaves and be enlightened and transformed by the information we take in. Seeing an image in the random discolorations in a burrito, seeing the face of Jesus in an object, requires an internal expectation that projects onto the external image. The discolorations within such an object may not have a design relationship within themselves, but require an imagined pattern to complete the design.

This discussion enters the realm of human perception, which is of tremendous fascination to me. People perceive what they expect to, often not what is objectively there. This can easily distort the ability to see true patterns and relationships that are inherent to the object in question.

[kuranes]

I found the post I was looking for, mentioned earlier in this thread. It led me to this fascinating link.

http://www.prosopagnosia.com/

[Lee]

Recognising patterns eh? Have you eve tried recognizing anything else?

[kuranes]

Recognising patterns eh? Have you eve tried recognizing anything else?

Neve :)