02a – digital grids (01, 02, 03, 05)

Enquiry: how does translating an image through different grid-based systems change the way its visual information is represented and perceived?

I started with digital systems because they were the closest to the cross-stitch: each one breaks the fence into repeated units, whether pixels, halftone dots, characters or spreadsheet cells. In a digital grid the translation follows rules, so I could change one variable at a time and see what survived. I began by reducing resolution, then changed the visual treatment, then changed the unit itself from a pixel to a character, and finally returned to a cell-based grid in a spreadsheet, where I could remove parts of the structure systematically. Throughout, I read these through Krauss (1979), who describes the grid as an ordered, flat surface standing in for the real world, and through Jacquard’s punched cards, where each unit is an instruction that builds the image.

01- Pixelated images [10 versions]

Click for PDF with enlarged images (created using https://pixelartvillage.com)

02- Abstract Tone Mapping [4 versions]

03- ASCII Art [8 versions]

Click for PDF with enlarged images (created using https://www.asciiart.eu/image-to-ascii)

05- Excel Spreadsheet [19 versions]

Click for full SPREADSHEET

What this section showed: The method decides what survives. Pixelation kept large shapes and contrast, ASCII kept density, and the spreadsheet showed that a grid can lose a lot of its structure before the pattern fails. The digital grids all degraded the image predictably, so I wanted to see what handwork would change.

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *