With illustration training, I found it was easy to rationalize the steps to achieve the image and choose colors. The process of layering shapes was similar to the digital drawing programs that I have used in the past. The key difference being the process, which felt like frankenstein-ing different functions that I searched on the p5 reference page. I've realized that searching and combining different functions using the tools that other people have made is just an integral part of coding in general.
The hassle of thinking about building basic shapes in the form of numbers and their (x, y) positions was unnecessary to achieve this image. I understand that the application of this code will be different moving forward as the strengths of code lies interactive functions. My biggest struggle was learning how to make organic shapes. I don't want to have to place the (x, y) positions of each point and their curves. I circumnavigated this problem by combining multiple quad() functions.
I'm interested in coding, because I want my work to come to life. In the past, code has been a gateway and roadblock in projects that I wanted to make. A part of my mission at ITP connecting traditional cultural aesthetics with the interactivity of modern day tech.
Wow, Kevin! Your illustration background is really evident in your p5 sketches this week. There are so many wonderful details in the lines and in the layering of shapes to create a sense of volume in your Mama Bird sketch. It truly looks like you created this with a professional illustration tool and not p5. Well done! Thank you for your questions in class yesterday and for sharing your strategy to position shapes on the canvas to create your composition.