Ask HN: Is there any market for creative coders? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Is there any market for creative coders?

49 pointsBanekin38 comments

I'm a sophomore in high school at the moment, and have been thinking about the future quite a bit. I decided to take up Processing, because I find visual feedback is helpful in being motivated to learn programming. It can produce beautiful images and interactions with very little code, and it's a lot of fun to work with. In your experience, do you think there is any market for creative coders? What would art buyers think about art that is created with a computer? Is it a gimmick, or an evolving medium with lots of potential? I would love to hear your thoughts, and thanks in advance.

View on HN

There is a market for creative coders -- I am one, and I make a living making art through code.

I'd recommend you check out media art festivals to get a feeling for the intersection of art and technology -- the biggest ones are in europe and asia. See for example, ars electronica, Dutch Electronic Arts Festival, FutureEverything, Sonar, OFFF, Transmediale, etc. You can get a feeling for the current state of media art. In the US, see Zero One, Eyebeam, Rhizome.

I have a background as an artist, got into writing code, and now teach programming to artists / designers at a design university, Parsons School of Design. The media arts field is getting bigger and more accepted, and although it's much harder to collect then say a painting, there's definitely a way to make a living doing this kind of work -- I do, and many of my friends do also. We typically do a few commercial projects a year and make more experimental work as well. Between that, commissions, teaching, workshops, talks, etc you can certainly make a living doing this kind of work.

petervandijck is right - make some interesting work and make a name for yourself. especially within communities like processing, it's not hard to get involved and get a good reputation, find collaborators and get feedback.

you can see some of the work I do in my profile. happy to answer any more specifics about the marketplace.

How does the market break down? How much of your commercial projects are performance based? installations? producing video to be streamed/aired later?

I'm working on Blender and looking to get more into the 3D and AR space. It would be good to know whats in demand now, and what kind of demand new tech is going to create.

btw I'm learning OpenCL and a while back I saw that OF was experimenting with it, is that still happening?

I do a few freelance jobs -- things like:

http://www.vimeo.com/5233789 http://www.vimeo.com/8525186

they are either events (outdoor projection) or for performances / online videos. Usually are 1-3 weeks of coding solo or in a group, and tons of organization / planning time.

in terms of opencl, I think Memo is pushing that pretty far -- see for example:

http://www.memo.tv/opencl_particles_at_okgos_design_miami_20...

I think markerless AR is going to be big soon -- the work from EPFL come to mind, such as:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZOeRhQdew8

the other thing which is huge is kinect -- this pretty much changes the game for interaction, and you can see some great work being done by artists and hackers within the community with it:

http://www.creativeapplications.net/kinect/

Storage has become cheap, CPU speeds fast. People are acquire larger and larger data sets, but the increase in size and greater diversity in what can be stored makes it harder to get a grip on what, exactly, is there, and what does it (possibly) mean.

Data visualization can make the difference. Using R and Processing, for example, you can turn a bazillion spreadsheet numbers into a compelling visual (or audio) experience that provides insight and discoveries.

There's real commercial value in that. Is it art? Well, if not, it's damn close, and what you learn providing a commercial service can be applied to creating purely aesthetic work.

As for what art buyer might think of computer art?

http://artport.whitney.org/

It's real and it's big time.

Go for it.

> As for what art buyer might think of computer art?

Paul Smith already stole someone's Processing output for a rather successful scarf print.

When I was a sophomore in high school, I was so focused on making money that I let several passions slip through my fingers. I could have learned to speak French fluently. Or, I could have spent my time studying physics simply for the love of it. Rather, I devoted myself to becoming the best young accountant I could because at that point, I thought getting my CA/MBA was a sure fire path to the corner office and the mythical big bonuses.

Nearly 20 years later and I am not an accountant. I didn't have any passion for the field, so my career fizzled out during University. Looking back, I wish I would have focused on what I was passionate about because I would have gained solid skills doing something I thought was fun.

Sorry this doesn't really answer your question, but if I could be in your shoes again, I would blindly follow my passion. Making money often flows naturally from passion. But even if it doesn't, you won't be sitting in your mid-30s asking, "what if?"

I work for a nearly 15 yr old art + technology organization based in an nyc contemporary art museum, and I assure you this type of work is far from a gimmick. There's an extremely rich history here and the art market is taking notice, though it's been a slow process. Many young artists working nowadays make artworks with presumptions born from digital technologies built-in, so by the time you reach your early twenties I hope/imagine the art world in general will have a different material and cultural landscape where art that incorporates digital technology isn't considered niche or a fetish or all lumped together into one category, but considered simply a reflection of the state of the world in which we live.

Honestly, if you're an artist working in ANY medium nowadays you're probably not living solely off the income generated by your artwork. But these skills can certainly contribute to a day job.;)

We have, however, successfully sold or helped sell non-material/purely code-based artworks many times.

Check out this wonderful new book by Casey Reas and Chandler McWilliams for more on the historical context:

http://formandcode.com/

http://www.amazon.com/Form-Code-Design-Architecture-Briefs/d...

And check out Rhizome for a perspective on contemporary digital/new media/internet art.

http://rhizome.org/

Good luck!

It’s still a niche market. There’s been some success for Algorithmic art, but it’s not as if Jared Tarbell will be in MoMA tomorrow. It still needs to prove itself. The best place if you want to sell out and make money would be to do something dumb and fun for an iPhone. Brian Eno’s Bloom and Justin Oulette’s Sharps are good examples of what you can do with a touchscreen and a basketful of APIs.

More importantly I would suggest the Arduino, it can interact with Processing and allows you to control physical objects with your code. Carlos Amorales, the mexican artist, works primarily in digital forms, but only sells his work printed intaglio; the art world still prizes physical originals. Hopefully this isn’t a disappointment to you.

If you’re willing to use your code as part of an installation, you’ll have much more success than just trying to sell the digital files. I’m an experienced lithographer, and can give some advice if you’re interested in printing your creations. (Remember, physical originals.)

But, remember. You’re a sophomore and thinking of your future, that’s amazingly precocious (in the best way). Don’t get too worried yet!

Arduino seems really interesting, I'll have to check that out, thanks a ton.

It seems backwards that an artist has to produce something physical for it to be valuable, but I have no problem doing that if it's necessary. If I were to make prints like you said, do you think slight differences in the same idea would be justification for a higher price? For instance, put some random properties into a visualization, and churn out 1000 copies of that, so each one is relatively unique. Do you think that would be viable?

Well, that’s the art world for you. Ideas and execution are equally intertwined, executing good ideas means you’re not just some bum. But, an edition is especially infuriating for anyone who knows what github is.

Since artist originality is prized, anything “churned” out would be considered bad taste at best, and an exercise in money grubbing at worst. I’m not exactly sure how well a giclée monoprint would sell, especially in a very large edition. Better yet would be to set up two plates: one that is common between the prints, and then another where you add the random visualization. That’s a monotype (commonality), rather than a monoprint.

As you’re just getting into producing art, I’d say keep your editions low, around 10-30 to start. You’ve heard the parable of grading the ceramics class, right? The professor divided the students into two groups. [a] was graded on the raw volume of pots produced, 50 was a C, 100 was an A. [b] was graded on the quality of their final pot. A perfect pot was an A+. On the final day, the [a] students actually had all of the best pots, as [b] students wasted their time dreaming up the “perfect” pot instead of practicing.

Not Tarbell specifically but: http://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2008/elasticmin...

Just do a find on this PDF for the word Processing: http://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2008/elasticmin...

It's also worth noting that the New Museum has an entire organization devoted to new media work (rhizome.org)

Potential. Here's a typical path:

1. Make some awesome visualisations. Put them online. Get known.

2. Get job offers or add these things to your resume.

3. Land jobs where you can (somewhat) use these (quite unique) skills.

I wouldn't worry too much about making money directly from this. That's a whole other ballgame.

That's ideally what I'd like to do. Thanks, I'll be working towards that.

I'm now finishing my masters degree in architecture (undergrad was physics of the liberal arts variety) and spend nearly every day coding. Processing is a great environment, although architects increasingly prefer the Grasshopper add-on to Rhino (http://www.grasshopper3d.com/). I'm also working on my own Grasshopper/Processing/CAD library in Ruby.

If you're looking to improve your design skills, try breaking out of an exclusively digital environment and code something that you can lasercut or physically build in some way. Setup a feedback loop between the two mediums -- let your coding inform your physical product, and vice-versa. Use code to solve problems (or create art) in a variety of fields and mediums.

Creative coding is most definitely not a gimmick. But it must have direction. Art that is, or is influenced by, programming is not inherently better or worse than a painting that uses paint. It is your job to have a design philosophy and explore the limitations and capacities of creative coding. Only then will you stop thinking of creative coding as a gimmick.

Artsy programmers? Computer-generated art? Only a sophomore? That sounds familiar.

I am and was in a similar situation, but my focus was in music. I was an avid musician in high school and I wanted to dual-major in Computer Science and some kind of music technology. My dream was to go write music software for Propellerheads in Stockholm.

What happened, I found, was that I was a much better programmer than artist. And what's worse was, because I focused a lot my non-computer interests in college, I missed learning a lot of background that I really, really wish I had now — (e.g., advanced operating systems, advanced algorithms, and electrical engineering).

My point is this: You're on this forum and you're already a coder, so focus on getting that Computer Science degree. Since you're interested in visual stuff, a minor concentration in computer graphics or human-computer interaction is applicable. But make sure you learn the hard stuff because, once you do, you'll have strong fundamentals which will let you work on anything and for anyone you want. You won't have to struggle with being an in-betweener like me.

Cannot agree more. Learning the tools is the only real challenge. Once you have sufficient background knowledge in CS, you understand more of the possibilities that your creative juices can draw from.

I'm currently a joint CS/Fine Art major at Concordia University in Montreal (http://computationarts.concordia.ca/). Even though I could have went to a more "prestigious" university, they didn't have a program in creative computation. Don't get stuck in a boring typical CS curriculum. Every professor I meet in the program has been incredibly enthusiastic about what they do, and best of all, since it is a niche program compared to the size of the university, getting time to talk and know your professors is considerably easy.

As far as user-centric design goes: Most of the HCI design stuff can be picked up by just reading books on it. The more you know about human psychology/sociology and its applications to computer interaction the better.

I did it for fun for many years - had my work exhibited and in books, got to travel around the world, and met interesting people. Then it turned out I was doing it because my day job was so unsatisfying - as soon as I got a job at Google, my 'artistic' output dropped to zero.

However, the stuff I learned while doing it was invaluable - I maintain that the best designers can code, and the best type of code they can write is visual interface code - being able to clearly describe animated sequences in code (motion curves, costs of different effects) makes communicating your design that much easier, and helps you polish the working product to your exacting specifications.

Stop thinking of it as a career path, and more as a highly-useful method of expressing yourself, then let it take you where it takes you - the market for visual effects programming might be unpredictable, but the market for coders who have the drive to learn how to do anything in order to achieve a specific and detailed aim is huge.

Art and code are definitely compatible, and there is certainly a market for digitally curated / created art.

If you want to create art, spend time exploring and educating yourself. Learn what you like, what you find interesting and what you feel is worth exploring.

There are quite a few people who seem to be making money in these fields, via commissioned works - one that spring to mind is Robert Hodgin [1]/[2].

There are also galleries which specialise in 'digital art'. I know of one in particular in Berlin [3].

There are blogs which cover digital and emerging forms of art. [4] [5]

I've only just scratched the surface .. there's a LOT that's definitely worth exploring.

[1] http://www.flight404.com/

[2] http://roberthodgin.com/

[3] http://dam-berlin.de/

[4] http://www.vvork.com/

[5] http://we-make-money-not-art.com/

Creative coders belong in the startup world. No two ways about it. Corporate culture can't gain maximum efficiency by leaving people with space to let their minds wander. Startups, however, as based entirely on how good a product is so minds wandering is essential, especially if they wander in herds.

Try starting a company. You'll love the experience of no one telling you what to do.

I do a lot of what you seem to describe as Creative programming.

1) Film Special Effects - Someone has to animate 10K orcs in battle

2) Video Titling / Sweep FX - Someone has to write cool fade in effects

3) Straight up hacker style art:

See the inspirational Jürg Lehni:

. http://www.scratchdisk.com/Work/Hektor/Will-Morris.jpg/ - a motorized realtime graffiti plotter, based on robotics and his scriptographer coding

. http://www.scratchdisk.com/Work/ - awesome examples

. http://scriptographer.org/gallery/ - more awesome examples with Jürg's scriptographer plugin

There are many more avenues to code with graphics and get paid

I saw Brian Eno talk years ago and he said he thinks we've used computers for the wrong things. He argued that instead of using computers to plow through piles of data to arrive at uninteresting results we should emphasize the ability of computers to generate surprising results from very small seeds of data. Examples of this would be fractals, algorithmic music etc.

There are a fair number of people working on algorithmic & procedural art but a lot of it is pretty dry. If you can find a way to use a computer to create something that really moves people you can probably find a market.

Brian Eno is amazing, and I completely agree with him on all of those points. Maybe programming or math in general scares away artists, but I think there's a lot of untapped value in computers artistically speaking.

I have had some success in the field, but honestly mostly as a lever to "professional" projects. I started with mathematical imagery and became more conceptual. Very little of my work is public but mostly because it is commission.

It is most certainly not a gimmick if done properly. Fractals and other things are gimmicky but I have moved away from that.

The best way honestly, is find something interesting and profound. Something that blows your mind. Use the maximum resources you have. Do something huge. If it's good you'll get noticed by the right people.

You should check out this program at NYU. I have a friend there, its probably a good fit for you: http://itp.nyu.edu/itp/

Not exactly what you are looking for, but it's still a rare and very valuable person who sits between front end designer and developer, equally at home in Photoshop and an IDE.

This is going to be massive over the next few years with web, mobile, tablets, internet TV, paid content etc. Interactive consumer and media experiences.

It's not art as you described, but imagine it would scratch the creative itch and keep you gainfully employed!

Joshua Davis indirectly pioneered this "design by code" mentality in my opinion. http://www.joshuadavis.com/

Cool guy, cool work, you should check him out. He's done work for BMW, Kanye West, Motorola, Nike, Volkswagen, HBO, etc.

There's certainly a place in the world for people who design by code. Just don't go too deep before gaining a core, functional skillet.

Is "fine arts" or "live coding" necessarily implied? Millions of people have bought computer art, once you include games and related interactive media. Although the audiovisual elements are very strong today, interactivity remains one of the best and earliest creative uses of the computer.

It's really a matter of whether you've made something awesome or not, and then how you choose to position it.

If you're good at data and visualization, and you've got a creative streak, the world is yours. The entire future information economy sits right at the intersection of art, design and heavyweight statistics.

(Don't drop your stats and English literature classes – they'll be more useful than you think.)

Go for it. And in a few years, when you're looking for an internship in the UK, drop me a line...

When you say "market" I assume you want to make a living out of doing this. If this is the case then this is the strategy I would advice:

You're currently a sophomore in high school with probably zero work experience. This means that for the next 5 to 10 years you need to start making a name for yourself. You need to become that guy who creates awesome stuff. Few examples of these sorts of people are Dr Doob (mrdoob.com), Andre Michelle (lab.andre-michelle.com) & Grant Skinner (incomplet.gskinner.com). These are guys who made their name in the Flash platform scene over the past 5 to 10 years. They do visual experimentation but they way they make their money is but working for digital advertising agencies.

Now depending on where you live, get your self a junior role at a "large" digital adverting agency and work there for the next 2 or 3 years. I emphasis large because it's important and will come back on this later. Focus on things such as HTML5, Javascript and mobile, or anything front-end that is in fashion, because those are the technologies these guys will be using for their clients. They will tell you that Processing is cool and all that but no client will pay for that. At least not in your current position. Now, work your ass off for say 3 years and learn as much as you can. Next to that get to know as many people as you can. Getting to know people is key! And also the reason you need to work in a large agency, there are simply more people there to get to know. Build your network. This means you need to hang out with them in the pub etc. Be really social. Become part of the in-crowed. While you work there other people will leave the agency, stay in touch with them! You might need them later on in live. Though, be genuine about your relationship with others!

After three 2 or 3 years you might want to swap agencies, go work for another big one. Do good work, do work that's respected by others and be humble, honest and sincere. Because you work in another big agency you expand your network even further. Try to get to know people who work in "events" agencies. Events agencies usually do not have a strong tech element in-house but they often work with freelancers and contractors. Event agencies usually put up large shows and stands for big companies at, guess what, events. This is where your visualization passion comes in. Let them know what you do and show 'm your passion.

After 5 years of working your ass off you can start venturing out on your own. You have a massive network of people who respect you, want to work with you, know how awesome, humble and honest you are. Start by doing small things on the side and if it works out plan to make a big jump. The key is in your network. If you're just some starving artist sitting lonely in a room without knowing anyone you can forget about it. You'll be spending your days/nights in the bread factory. Don't let it come to that.

Good luck!

I'm going to graduate next year, so maybe I'll take a year off and try to find something to do in NYC. Do you recommend college before working so I have an easier time finding relevant jobs? I imagine it would be difficult to get a job at a digital advertising agency without any credentials. Realistically I can't work during High School, so I guess I should just study up in the meantime.

I would definitely recommend college and I would even go as far as to advice you to get a university degree. The thing is, say you're 25 years old and you have 5 years of work experience but no degree, employers will be very eager to hire you since your friends who did study for a degree (same age) will have zero work experience. The amount of work experience definitely makes up for the lack of a degree when you're 25 years old (and also because you'll be relatively cheap as a 25 year old, something that employers like very much).

Now fast forward 10 years into the future. By that time you have 15 years of work experience and still no degree. However, your friends will now have 10 years of work experience AND a degree. Suddenly those extra 5 years of work experience you have don't mean an awful lot anymore. Someone with 15 or 10 years are basically equally experienced. It's similar to when you where 7 years old. The 9 year old kid down the road was someone you didn't communicate with because of the massive age gap. However, when you're 27 you'll have no problem hanging out with a 29 year old.

So, yes. Get a much education as you can get your hands on. While you study, spend as much spare time on your passion as you possible can. Take advantage of the fact that you can stay up all night (because by the time you're in your late twenties that will have disappeared :).

Most digital agencies have no problem hiring people without credentials. Just be aware that you'll be at the bottom of the food chain. Don't expect to be at par with the big guys there. If you go for that, just do what you're told (within reason of course) and try to do the best job you can. Again, be honest, humble and sincere. Agencies are always looking for that "awesome junior" which basically means someone who can do great work but they don't have to pay 'm much because of the lack of professional experience.

Again, good luck!

There are lots of folks at Eyebeam, Fat Lab, and NycResistor who produce art for a living. Some are artists for hire, constantly living from project to project, others work for agencies. I'd definitely look into those labs and possibly collaborate on projects to get a handle on the lifestyle that comes with being a creative programmer.

I interned for Eyebeam - it's an awesome place and can highly recommend it.

A friend of mine markets himself as an internet poet. He writes Firefox extensions, javascript hacks, utf-8 weirdnesses, all in the name of art.

Last month his exhibition was in one of the biggest galleries in the country.

Hope that answers your question :)

i'm interested in your friend's work. can you provide a link or reference, please?

His homepage http://www.jaka.org/

Sorry I didn't notice your comment earlier.

> an evolving medium with lots of potential

That one. Don't worry about commercializing for now; in the worst case you can always make money by applying the same skills to program webapps and other things people will pay for.

Heh I have been thinking about this too lately, since enterprise software tends to be deadly boring..

Reply on news.ycombinator.com