If you are onto something like this, you should also try Context Free [1] which allows for the wide variety of recursive arts in a programmatic manner (well, it literally has its own versatile scripting language).

[1] https://www.contextfreeart.org/

The key addition of ContextFree is the multiple definitions of the same chosen by probability.

So a Blurp could be defined as a) a circle and a Blurp b) a circle c) a Blurp and a Blurp

And when rendering a Blurp it picks one of a,b, or c randomly (with weighted probabilities)

That single addition opens up a huge world of variety.

Written instructions from when this was last posted (in 2012)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3951499

Years ago, Flash (I thinks it's "Adobe Animate" now) had a similar feature in that you could create symbols and Symbols and edit them after the fact, so this part, while cool didn't impress me much.

I'm glad I continued watching up to the point where the presenter puts symbols within themselves because that part blew my mind! I'd really love to see a feature like this incorporated into Inkscape and/or Kitra.

See also: Alan's layer language, which has a blogpost referencing Toby's 'recursive drawing - https://layerlanguage.blogspot.com/2012/05/more-computationa...

There's a bunch of examples and links to interesting work in Kate Compton's GDC talk "Practical Procedural Generation for Everyone" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WumyfLEa6bU

I've often thought that this sort of thing would be great for user interface design. "Recursive drawing" in combination with a CAD style constraint system would be really cool to see. My preferred name for such a system would be "inductive constraint layout".

A later project with excellent videos, "Shadershop", is definitely also something to marvel at: http://tobyschachman.com/Shadershop and http://www.cdglabs.org/Shadershop

This is so cool, I really love this! Thank you for sharing. Also what a easy and friendly way to teach recursion to those still grasping the concept, definitely a resource I'll be sharing

I didn't understand the Fibonacci part. What was he counting?

I had to go back over it a few times to understand. I believe its the number of branches at each depth level.

The number of nodes at each depth level.

This is awesome!