Reply to Comment on "Drip Paintings and Fractal Analysis" by Micolich et al (arXiv:0712.165v1 [cond-mat.stat-mech])
Katherine Jones-Smith, Harsh Mathur, Lawrence M. Krauss

TL;DR
This paper defends the original fractal analysis of drip paintings against criticisms, emphasizing the lack of empirical support and clarifying the box-counting method used.
Contribution
It provides a detailed rebuttal to criticisms of fractal analysis in drip paintings and clarifies methodological issues.
Findings
Criticisms are unfounded.
The box-counting algorithm is clarified.
Critiques lack empirical support.
Abstract
We reply to the comment of Micolich et al and demonstrate that their criticisms are unfounded. In particular we provide a detailed discussion of our box-counting algorithm and of the interpretation of multi-layered paintings. We point out that in their entire body of work, Taylor et al have not provided the scientific community with sufficient empirical support of their claims, nor have they adequately addressed any of the problems we have identified with the application of fractal analysis to drip paintings.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAesthetic Perception and Analysis · Art History and Market Analysis · Archaeology and Rock Art Studies
