Kandinsky used many mathematical concepts in his most abstract works. Concentric circles, lines open and closed, triangles…. Geometry has been a particular element of interest to the artist. This was not unexpected, considering that the Bauhaus tried precisely to be a school of art and architecture that enlarged the concept of art and showed its many possibilities, the curiosity Kandinsky has in mathematical elements thus makes total sense. The artist Piet Mondrian created some compositions around , which gave rise to Neoplasticism, an avant-garde movement which sought to present a new image of art.
Mondrian also used mathematical concepts in laying the foundations for neoplasticism to arrive at the conclusion. Swiss artists such as Gerstner created patterns that resonate with these mathematical descriptions of nature in terms of symmetry. Like the mathematicians, these artists established basic aesthetic building-blocks—units of color and form—and arranged them using rules that preserve proportion and balance.
In Gerstner devised a modular system—a movable palette with hues in 28 groups—for experimenting with progressions that link form with color. The most symmetrical geometric form is a sphere all points equidistant from a point in three-dimensional space.
In the late twentieth century, scientists concluded that the universe began in perfect symmetry as a point that exploded into a sphere of plasma.
As the infant universe expanded, the primordial sphere cooled, and matter condensed from the plasma to form the first particles, then atoms, gas clouds, and stars. At some point the original symmetry of the universe was broken; the resulting asymmetries appear to be the result of random shifts analogous to mutations during evolution.
Today physicists are recreating samples of this primordial spherical plasma to determine the degree to which the universe retains traces of its original symmetry.
Simon Thomas is a young British artist whose work, such as this sculpture, is a visualization of a mathematical formula. Art historians have pointed out, and mathematicians have echoed, the way that his works are forms of fractal geometry, seemingly random but having underlying symmetries.
However, there is also a dispute among mathematicians about whether Pollock's works are true expressions of fractals. Geometry in art by Salvador Dali. The absurdist painter Salvador Dali was obsessed with geometric shapes. Many of his works have cones, spheres, rectangles, triangles and various other shapes.
Dali is said to have begun every work of art with a geometric shape, and then built creatively based on his intuition of where to go next.
The British painter creates art that sometimes appears like optical illusions. Her art is said to challenge straightforward notions of meaning and perspective, but to do so using straightforward systems of lines and geographic space on the canvas. The artist was friends with and even worked on some of the concepts for his art with the Canadian mathematician and geometer Harold Scott MacDonald Coxeter.
We see from this introduction that Piero intends to concentrate on the mathematical principles. Perhaps it is most accurate to say that he is studying the geometry of vision which he later makes clearer:- First is sight, that is to say the eye; second is the form of the thing seen; third is the distance from the eye to the thing seen; fourth are the lines which leave the boundaries of the object and come to the eye; fifth is the intersection, which comes between the eye and the thing seen, and on which it is intended to record the object.
Piero begins by establishing geometric theorems in the style of Euclid but, unlike Euclid , he also gives numerical examples to illustrate them. He then goes on to give theorems which relate to the perspective of plane figures. In the second of the three volumes Piero examines how to draw prisms in perspective. Although less interesting mathematically than the first volume, the examples he chooses to examine in the volume are clearly important to him since they appear frequently in his own paintings.
The third volume deals with more complicated objects such as the human head, the decoration on the top of columns, and other "more difficult shapes". For this Piero uses a method which involves a very large amount of tedious calculation. He uses two rulers, one to determine width, the other to determine height.
In fact he is using a coordinate system and computing the correct perspective position of many points of the "difficult shape" from which the correct perspective of the whole can be filled in. Piero della Francesca 's works were heavily relied on by Luca Pacioli for his own publications. The illustrations in Pacioli 's work were by Leonardo da Vinci and include some fine perspective drawings of regular solids. Now in Leonardo 's early writings we find him echoing the precise theory of perspective as set out by Alberti and Piero.
He writes Perspective is a rational demonstration by which experience confirms that the images of all things are transmitted to the eye by pyramidal lines. Those bodies of equal size will make greater or lesser angles in their pyramids according to the different distances between the one and the other.
He developed mathematical formulas to compute the relationship between the distance from the eye to the object and its size on the intersecting plane, that is the canvas on which the picture will be painted:- If you place the intersection one metre from the eye, the first object, being four metres from the eye, will diminish by three-quarters of its height on the intersection; and if it is eight metres from the eye it will diminish by seven-eighths and if it is sixteen metres away it will diminish by fifteen-sixteenths, and so on.
As the distance doubles so the diminution will double. Not only did Leonardo study the geometry of perspective but he also studied the optical principles of the eye in his attempts to create reality as seen by the eye. By around Leonardo had moved forward in his thinking about perspective. He was one of the first people to study the converse problem of perspective: given a picture drawn in correct linear perspective compute where the eye must be placed to see this correct perspective.
Now he was led to realise that a picture painted in correct linear perspective only looked right if viewed from one exact location. Brunelleschi had been well aware of this when he arranged his demonstration of perspective through a hole. However for a painting on a wall, say, many people would not view it from the correct position, indeed for many paintings it would be impossible for someone viewing them to have their eye in this correct point, as it may have been well above their heads.
Leonardo distinguished two different types of perspective: artificial perspective which was the way that the painter projects onto a plane which itself may be seen foreshortened by an observer viewing at an angle; and natural perspective which reproduces faithfully the relative size of objects depending on their distance. In natural perspective, Leonardo correctly claims, objects will be the same size if they lie on a circle centred on the observer.
Then Leonardo looked at compound perspective where the natural perspective is combined with a perspective produced by viewing at an angle. Perhaps in Leonardo , more than any other person we mention in this article, mathematics and art were fused in a single concept.
The story we have told up to this point has been very much an understanding of perspective in Italy by artists and mathematicians learning personally from each other. He did so only after learning much from trips to Italy where he learned at first hand from mathematicians such as Pacioli. Geometrically his theory is similar to that of Piero but he made an important addition stressing the importance of light and shade in depicting correct perspective.
An excellent example of this is in the geometrical shape he sketched in Let us consider a number of other contributions to the study of perspective over the following years. In this work he gave an account of Ptolemy 's stereographic projection of the celestial sphere, but its importance for perspective is that he broadened the study of that topic which had up until then been concerned almost exclusively with painting. Commandino was more interested in the use of perspective in the making of stage scenery principally because his main interest was in classic texts and, unlike many earlier treatises he was writing for mathematicians rather than artists.
This is not a book designed to teach perspective drawing but, nevertheless, contains many illustrations superbly drawn in perspective. He is clear in his intention:- All superfluity will be avoided and, in contrast to the old fashioned way of teaching, no line or point will be drawn needlessly.
Taken at face value this is not true, but what he undoubtedly meant was that painters were not painting architectural scenes. Egnatio Danti , like so many of the others we have mentioned in this article, was both an excellent mathematician and artist. In his introduction to this work Danti wrote a brief history of perspective But in our own time, among those who have left something of note in this art, the earliest, and one who wrote with best method and form, was Messer Pietro della Francesca dal Borgo Sansepolcro, from whom we have today three books in manuscript, most excellently illustrated; and whoever wants to know how excellent they are should look to Daniele Barbaro, who has transcribed a great part of them in his book on Perspective.
Not only did Danti write an introduction to his edition of Vignola's treatise, but he also added considerably to its content by giving mathematical justification where Vignola simply states a rule to be applied. The next contributor we mention is Giovanni Battista Benedetti who was a pupil of Tartaglia. In his perspective treatise Benedetti was concerned not just with rules for artists working in two dimensions but with the underlying three-dimensional reasons for the rules.
0コメント