Pentimento
An algorithm that revises.
Pentimento is an algorithm that revises. Every output is ruled on a Fibonacci construction grid, painted in flat confident strokes, then reconsidered: marks are scraped back, blocked out, and overpainted, and the earlier decisions stay visible beneath the final surface. Hand-lettered working notes in the artist's own vocabulary are buried under and written over the paint. Rare variants cut excavation windows through the finished painting, survey the construction grid, write the token hash into the under-layer, or never paint at all. One in thirteen carries the artist's number. The still frame is the work; on first view it rebuilds itself once, layer by layer, then settles.
the layered build
On first view a piece performs its own construction once, about 13 to 15 seconds: the name, the grid, the tonal wash stroke by stroke, the pencil notes one at a time, three paint movements (the first marks, the reconsideration where marks are scraped and blocked, the confident finals) with working notes jotted between them, the notes on top, then the settled frame. On an Excavated piece the windows are cut as the confident marks arrive, so you watch the painting withhold itself and keep its buried layer visible. The reveal is a deterministic replay of the true construction order, not a simulation. Every subsequent look replays it identically, the same choices in the same order, forever.
artist statement
I made this because I am not done either, and I have spent the last few years wrestling with whether I should be.
My days are split between two pulls. There is the work I do for a living, the agents I am building, the things I am driven to make because I can. There is also a life happening in front of me. My daughters at the age where everything is a question and every question is the start of a conversation, my time with them shrinking the way time does. I love both. I cannot have all of both. Most of what I think about, lately, is what it costs to keep choosing the first one when the second one is right there.
So I built the conflict into the machine. A pentimento is the mark a painter changed but could not fully hide, the ghost of an earlier choice showing through the confident one on top. Pentimento does not paint. It revises. Each piece lays down a composition, works it and works against it, scrapes and blocks out and paints over parts of it, and refuses to clean up after itself. The earlier marks stay visible under the final strokes. The correction is the subject. The flaw, kept on purpose, is the beauty. It looks computer-made. That is the point, not an apology.
What you are holding is one finished frame, and it knows how it got here. Open it and it rebuilds itself once, the grid, the notes, the marks laid and scraped back and painted over, then settles. It is deterministic, so it will retrace the same choices in the same order every time you look, forever. The process is not still running. It is kept.
The piece is ruled on a Fibonacci grid and carries hand-lettered notes buried under and written over the paint, mostly in my own words, the things I actually mutter at the easel and the keyboard. Some pieces cut windows to show the drawing underneath. A painted First Try still hides a single regret. One in eighty never paints at all, all intention, no execution. Thirteen runs through all of it. I built it in long working sessions with an AI, the way a painter works with a studio. A work about visible process should not bury its largest process under the paint.
The hardest part of any work is knowing when to stop. To leave the correction showing and call it done. That is the lesson I keep trying to learn, that the striving is the beauty, that the unfinished is not a failure, that what is in front of me is enough even while I keep reaching.
This piece is for my daughters, my wife, and for me. Part apology for the hours I spent making it, hours of the shrinking kind, part gift, a thing that says I see you, I am trying, I want you to strive and I want you to stay.
The frame is finished. The work is not. Neither am I.
Michael Higgins (michael.art)
gallery
traits and rarity
Every piece lays exactly a Fibonacci number of strokes: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233, 377, or 610. The weighted average piece is ~142 strokes; the dense body (89+) is ~65% of the edition, the thinned middle (13-55) ~29%, and the minimal pole (1-8) ~5.6% is kept deliberately present as air.
| Trait | Values | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Fate | Worked (~82%), First Try (~4%), Restless, Abandoned | First Try still buries one ghost: even the no-doubt pieces carry a regret |
| Palette | 13 named palettes | each with per-color dominance weighting so one or two colors lead |
| Placement | Grid, Bands, Packed, Stack, Field | how the composition derives from the construction grid |
| Grain | Warp, Weft, Bias | one direction per piece; every stroke follows or crosses it at 90 degrees |
| Grid | Ruled, Surveyed (~2%) | Surveyed writes tiny position data on the construction sheet |
| Structure | Coarse, Medium, Fine | grid fineness |
| Density | Gesture, Sparse, Balanced, Dense, Saturated, Teeming, Swarm, Cartoon | from the stroke count; Gesture (1-2 strokes, ~0.5%) and Swarm (377/610) are the poles |
| Cartoon | ~1.25% of the edition | the unpainted piece: all intention, no execution; grid, notes, symbols, measurements only |
| Coverage | Exposed, Light, Worked, Heavy, Buried | the measured painted fraction; Exposed is ~1 in 300 |
| Excavation | Sealed, Excavated (~21%) | windows cut through the finished paint exposing that piece's real buried layer |
| Signature | Buried (~10%), None | the piece's own token hash written in pencil in the under-layer, painted over |
| Scale | Intimate, Standard, Monumental, Colossal | fewer strokes force larger strokes |
| Surface | Lit, Flat | faint light pools, or none |
Note events (not traits, but hunted)
- The thirteen (~1 in 13): exactly one thirteen-note written over the paint (13, THIRTEEN, XIII, 0X0D, the tally marks %%|||, and kin).
- The outburst (~1 in 89): one of the two realest words at the easel, written over the paint.
- Every piece also writes its true stroke count ("89 STROKES"), a fragment of its own hash, and one of its palette's hex values. No note repeats on a canvas.
the lexicon
The most personal element of the work. Every piece hand-letters notes onto its canvas, dealt from the artist's own working vocabulary: the things he actually mutters at the easel and the keyboard. Notes are written in pencil under the paint (and buried by it), jotted between the paint movements (and painted over), and written on top at the end. No word repeats on one canvas. Three languages, one person.
Revision, the act
SCRAPE THISBURY ITSTART AGAINLET IT SHOWWAS HERE FIRSTUNDER THISI WAS WRONGNOT YETTHIS STAYS
The internalized critic
STILL WRONGTOO SAFENOT ITALMOSTPROBABLY NOTHINGDOES IT WORK?IS IT ART?SO WHAT?SEEN ITTOO CLEVERDERIVATIVE?FALSE POSITIVESIGNAL/NOISE?MAYBEWHICH VERSION?WHOSE VOICE?SQUINT HARDER
The engineer's regret
REVERTFORCE PUSHEDSHIPPED BROKENKNOWN ISSUEWONTFIXDEPRECATEDTECH DEBTSUNK COSTOVERFITMEMORY LEAKREGRESSIONPAST SAVINGPEAKED EARLYWHILE(TRUE)
The maker's moves
REFACTORDELETELOSE AN EDGEVALUES FIRSTBREAK THE GRIDNEGATIVE SPACEZOOM OUTCOMMITDIFFNO UNDO
The rare yes
IT COMPILESGOOD ENOUGHCONVERGEDMERGEDDONE(ISH)SHIP ITLGTMSTETPATINA
The dark notes
SAFE IS DEATHBORINGCOWARDQUITGARBAGEHATE IT
A second register speaks the work's code voice (FLOW FIELD, SEED, DETERMINISTIC, ENTROPY, FULLY ON CHAIN, EMERGENCE, and kin). The thirteen register and the outburst are rare events, listed under traits.
the process
A work about visible revision should keep its own revision history visible. This is how Pentimento was actually made, and the records behind it are public.
The collaboration
Pentimento was built by a human artist directing an AI in long working sessions, the way a painter works with a studio. The artist decides: palettes in and out, rarity rates, trait names, the vocabulary, the animation choreography, what ships. The studio implements and verifies: every change runs behind a fixed battery before it lands. Every decision is written into a dated decision ledger, including the ones that reversed earlier decisions, which are kept in place with banners rather than deleted. The documentation practice is the thesis practiced: scraped decisions left showing.
The AI collaboration is not buried in a footnote because the work's own principle forbids it: a work about visible process should not bury its largest process under the paint.
The instruments
- The decision ledger. Every consequential call, dated, with the reasoning and the verification results attached. Superseded decisions stay visible.
- The curatorial board. A disclosed fiction: AI critic personas with distinct lenses that review rendered work at milestones and return structured findings. Advisory, not sovereign: its strongest findings shipped; its weakest were declined by the artist, on the record. See the board section for the seats, the reviews, and what changed because of them.
- The verification battery. No change merges without passing: same-hash renders byte-identical; the animation hooks add zero randomness (verified against the static render); traits identical across render sizes (proven 300px to 7200px); the on-chain build pixel-identical to source; the features script's traits match the browser's; glyph coverage for every word in the vocabulary; rarity rates measured against nominal by headless scans of hundreds of renders.
Highlights of the revision history
- The engine's randomness was hardened early: canvas pixel-reading was removed entirely (a cross-browser determinism hazard) in favor of a JS-side surface memory. It also made rendering three times faster.
- A crypto-slang note register shipped for weeks, then was retired after the board argued it timestamped the work to a market moment. Three words survive on purpose, kept in the artist's own mouth (GM, VIBE, GRAIL, his favorites). The painter's voice led afterward, and later the whole lexicon was rewritten in the artist's own words.
- An on-top "ledger" stamp of the token hash was nearly cut by the board as provenance cosplay; the artist kept the idea and buried it instead: the hash is now written in pencil in the under-layer and painted over, a pentimento of identity. The trait is called Signature.
- Excavation windows were briefly 39% of the edition; the board called it a house style, the artist set a 15% floor, and the windows read as events again.
- Every painted piece is guaranteed at least one visible act of revision; outputs that shipped "empty of the thesis" were treated as defects and eliminated.
- The build animation went through three generations in two days and settled as the layered reveal: the true construction order, replayed deterministically, settling byte-exact on the still frame. The still frame remains the work.
technical notes
- Deterministic: all randomness derives from the token hash through a hand-built PRNG chain. Same hash, same painting, byte for byte, forever.
- Zero dependencies: one vanilla JavaScript file, ~40KB minified, no libraries, no network, no fonts. The lettering is a hand-built single-stroke vector alphabet.
- Size-agnostic: the same piece renders identically from a phone screen to large-format walls (verified 300px through 7200px; traits identical at every size).
- The render never reads pixels: a JS-side surface memory stands in for canvas sampling, so output is identical across browsers and GPUs.
- Every trait decision and revision of the project itself is logged in a public decision ledger; the work about visible revision keeps its own revision history visible.
the curatorial board
The instrument
At milestones, the work is put in front of a panel of AI critics, each holding one lens, each prompted to be hard to please. Reviews run as parallel structured critiques; findings are verified against the actual engine before being acted on. The board is advisory, not sovereign: its strongest findings shipped, and its weakest were declined by the artist, on the record in the decision ledger. The theater is the point: an algorithm that revises, revised under critique.
The nine seats
| Seat | The question it asks |
|---|---|
| The technical seat | is the algorithm itself doing anything new |
| The minimalism seat | could this do more with less; does the concept survive reduction to one line |
| The collector seat | would I want to own this, and still want it in two years |
| The typography seat | does the lettering earn its place as art, not caption |
| The community seat | does this serve the long tail of a movement, not just the top of a market |
| The gallery seat | how does it sit in a room, a community, a longer arc of minimalism |
| The platform seat | what makes a generative drop hold up over years, not weeks |
| The AI seat | where does the artist end and the agent begin |
| The art-historical seat | what does this add to seventy years of algorithmic art |
The reviews
June 13: the nine-seat review
The visual engine passed all nine seats unanimously; the gating finding was honesty, not craft: the artist statement was still selling a time-evolving work while the engine shipped an honest static frame. The statement was rebuilt from that finding. Full findings
June 25: the excavation review
The board ratified shipping excavation, the tonal wash, and the hash inscription. The adversarial skeptic's objection (the windows revealed a generic drawing, not this piece's own archaeology) drove the honest-reveal default that shipped. Full findings
June 30: the critical board
Four seats, prompted for hard critique, scored the work 6-7: refine-then-ship.
"You have built an algorithm that revises, and then annotated it in the language of the auction. Molnar cut her squares to show the rule; do not let the market's slang be the thing that shows through your paint." - the art-historical seat, 6/10
"The margins are written in a painter's hand; the CARTOON is written in a group chat." - the typography seat, 7/10
"One clean rule is a signature; seven ways of saying 'this is honest' is a disclaimer. Trust the paint. It is already telling the truth without the survey crew standing in front of it." - the technical seat, 7/10
"The best painting robots don't add a critic. They leave the scraped mark showing. You already do that in pigment. Don't move the confession into metadata." - the AI seat, 7/10, answering "should this add more AI" with no
What the board changed, and what the artist kept anyway
| Finding | Outcome |
|---|---|
| The crypto-slang register timestamps the work to a market moment | Retired. Three words survive on purpose in the artist's own mouth (GM, VIBE, GRAIL, his favorites); the painter's voice leads, and the lexicon was later rewritten in the artist's own words |
| Excavation at 39% is a house style, not an event | Pulled to ~15%, later raised to ~21% by the artist (the board asked for less; the overrides are on the record) |
| Some outputs shipped with no visible revision at all | Guaranteed: every painted piece now carries at least one legible act of revision |
| The unpainted Cartoon was the weakest piece typographically | Rebuilt as a composed page with lead marks and a reading order |
| Kill the on-top token-hash "ledger" (provenance cosplay) | Declined, re-themed instead: the hash is now buried in the under-layer in pencil, painted over. The trait is Signature |
| Demote the Density trait behind Coverage | Declined. Gesture, Cartoon, and Swarm are named pulls the artist built deliberately |
| Add another AI dimension? | No, per the AI seat itself. The reflection already exists as pigment in the excavation windows. The one honest lever, staging the reconsideration visibly, became the layered build every piece now performs |
Edition details forthcoming.
← all work