>Can web design generated algorithmically still be considered creative and artistic?
what I think you really mean is:
>Could algorithmically generated web design possibly maintain an acceptable level of usability?
Because 'creative' and especially 'artistic' imply websites which are medium of artistic expression, which I doubt is ever subject of our discussion here at HN. (ex. Olia Lialinas http://rhizome.org/artbase/artwork/1729/)
To which I think the answer is yes; but right now would require a human to assign importance/context of elements of a websites, before generating specific styling to particular element groups (as in: body, footer, menu, etc.). There is some subtle evidence in the generative art field, that there can exists aesthetic results to 'just' an algorithm. The next question you want to ask is - how narrow do we need to define the algorithms to make it a workable approach? With genetic algorithms on the run, thinks seem to be improving.
Comments
>Can web design generated algorithmically still be considered creative and artistic?
what I think you really mean is:
>Could algorithmically generated web design possibly maintain an acceptable level of usability?
Because 'creative' and especially 'artistic' imply websites which are medium of artistic expression, which I doubt is ever subject of our discussion here at HN. (ex. Olia Lialinas http://rhizome.org/artbase/artwork/1729/)
To which I think the answer is yes; but right now would require a human to assign importance/context of elements of a websites, before generating specific styling to particular element groups (as in: body, footer, menu, etc.). There is some subtle evidence in the generative art field, that there can exists aesthetic results to 'just' an algorithm. The next question you want to ask is - how narrow do we need to define the algorithms to make it a workable approach? With genetic algorithms on the run, thinks seem to be improving.