- This topic has 117 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
@jason if you feel I have attacked you, I apologize. The purpose of a good debate shouldn’t be to try to change someone’s opinion, but rather to help them understand yours.
I feel that Herecles’ comment to Morri was provocative and hurtful, in contrast to an actual debate.
@hawkeye wow, that was a real dick comment. For a start, what's to say I haven't already been? I have an insatiable thirst for knowledge but it's not necessarily aimed at this subject.
I just see art as far more personal and for myself rather than for an audience. I don't render for other people generally speaking, I render for me first and foremost and to express myself. I don't do it for a job or to make money, so why should I be falling over myself to ensure that the "rules of art" are followed?
I'm not necessarily saying that I'm not aware of them. And sure, I've reviewed various ideas and concepts in the attempt to project my intent better; but there aren't enough hours in the day and I have competing priorities that don't allow for twisting myself in knots over a hobby intended to make me happy and have an outlet. Same reason why I quilt, same reason why I knit, same reason why I crochet, same reason why I cook. Not for anyone else, for myself to make me happy.
You seem to have quite a habit of throwing your opinion out there and attacking people. The bitching I see prompts this view: Put up or shut the fuck up. If you're so much better than the rest of us, prove it. Otherwise stop being a dick.
Right then...
I just want to clarify my position - I’m not suggesting people actually provide critique when voting, those of you who have pointed out that during a contest is not the time are quite right. What I am suggesting is that technique matters, and casting a critical eye beyond simply “do I like it” to “is it actually well made” is worth consideration.
To put that another way, if you vote for a bad render of a cat over an amazing render of a dog simply because you like cats, you’re doing a real disservice to the spirit of competition, and to the idea of art.
Repeat after me: Your fun is not wrong.
YOUR fun is not wrong.
Your fun is NOT wrong.As long as your fun does not:
Harm a human being
Harm a minor
Completely illegal in all 50 galaxies--Your fun. Is not. WRONG.
Yes! Study art! Study composition! Study color! Study it all! But at the end of the day if what you create is fun for you than IT IS NOT WRONG.
There will never be a right or wrong way to make art, period. There will, however, always be humans with opinions. The important opinion at the end of the day about your art is yours.
There is, however, in my opinion (see whut eye did thar) a right and wrong way to critique. Such as critiquing the ART not the artist. Example: "You suck." = Not helpful. Doesn't teach anything. Doesn't have anything constructive. "your art sucks," = the same. "Hey! I really like what you did with her expression, but something about the background feels odd to me. Would it be alright if I suggested maybe try a darker blue? Because the orange makes me feel like it's clashing with her eyes." = Constructive. Based on your thoughts and opinions but not worded in such a way that the artist feels like a crushed ant who has just been peed on. Nobody is holding the artists hand, but nobody is telling the artist that they suck and their art sucks and they should just give up and never try again. That is also an opinion.
In the very end, it is up to the ARTIST to decide. Not the critic. Not the critique giver. Not some random person on the internet. Not an art teacher.
If you look at a piece of art and feel something, then it worked. Even if you don't like it...Then the artist did their job.
Anyway, I've said my piece, I'm out. This conversation makes my hope for humanity feel bad.
Most of these probably fit your idea of mathematical perfection but I can only detect minor amounts in a few. Then again Im not a mathematician.
@hawkeye, you really do need to learn how to communicate effectively with others without throwing personal insults.
It is about time you put up your own competition with your rules instead of whinging and bitching like a sulky spoilt brat because other people don't do what you want when they plan their competitions.
@jason, you don't have the time to work out your own competition, again, not your competition, not your rules. And unless you take the time to organise a competition and put up points then you need to leave those who do take the time to do their own thing.Art is about creating, and if it is pleasing to the creator, then that is all that matters. Considering the amount of artwork commanding thousands of dollars that looks just like the artwork little children do should say a lot about the rules of artwork
I totally agree with you @silverboax (technique matters, and casting a critical eye beyond simply “do I like it” to “is it actually well made” is worth consideration.)and I think this is what @Jason is saying.
It comes down to why you are doing something.
If it gives you pleasure that is fine.
If you want to improve technique that is up to you.
There is plenty of guidance on technique, some solid stuff in this thread even.What is ruffling folks feathers is the 'I'm right you are wrong! You have to do it this way' stance.
:0/
I don't think many people are taking a hardline stance, I think the real point of contention is some people want contests where artistic merit matters, and some people want contests that are entirely subjective.
Again for me, as long as the person running the contest is clear what THEY want, I don't mind how they run it. For me personally, I quickly stopped spending time doing decent renders for contests because it seems pointless, so I generally don't enter them at all because I personally don't want to put out what I consider substandard work. If people were clearer in the way they intended to run contests it'd be easier to decide if it was worth putting in the time & effort (which I think we can all agree are premiums when it comes to hobby time)
The biggest thing is that it ALWAYS SHOULD come down to the eye of the beholder, one persons taste differs to another that is what makes us individuals and I thank god for that or we would live in one hell of a boring world. If we all had the same train of thought and taste and we went buy a certain rule or code we would all be sheep witch 3/4 of people are already.
Only reason I would put out low quality wprk is because ATM that's what im capable of. Guarantee you once I improve, I wont post crap. If its worth doing, do it right.
Unfortunately, some or most of us are not there. And may never be. We alm cant function at the same level. Thats why we have Billonaires and beggers.I wonder why there is this window in GIMP and there is a similar one in PAINTER
What follows is for those who don't have a fat stomach in their thin brains
>>>>A Reminder
Photographic technique can only get you so far. Technique by itself—without passion or vision—is shallow and meaningless.
Cameras don’t take photos; people do.What it means to KIS
Simplify, simplify
Composition is the mental editing process a photographer applies as they work on an image to make its message easier for the viewer to read. A common mistake is to think about what to ‘put into’ a picture. For the beginner to photography it is tempting to lend an image import by filling it with as much detail as possible. Instead, thinking about ‘what can be left out’ of a picture will strengthen it. Look for the simplest theme. Simplification is an essential part of composition; getting rid of unwanted visual clutter will leave only the important elements that can then be arranged to create a well- composed image.1- The Golden Section
Leonardo Pisano (Leonardo of Pisa) - also called Fibonacci- was a twelfth-century Italian mathematician, best known for his discovery of a remarkable sequence of numbers. This simple numerical series starts with 0 and 1. Adding the two previous numbers in the sequence together produces the next number in the series, hence the Fibonacci numbers: 0,1,1, 2,3, 5, 8,13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, etc.
The ratio of each successive pair of numbers In the series (5 divided by 3, for example, is 1.666, and 8 divided by 5 is 1.6 approximates to the ’Golden Number' (1.618034), identified by the Greek letter Phi. Phi was considered the key to the secrets of heavenly mathematics. It relates to proportion, too.
The Golden Section is a division based on the Golden Number proportion and can be used as a method for placing the subject In an Image or of dividing a composition Into pleasing proportions.2- The Rule of Thirds
With the Rule of Thirds, the focus of interest must be placed at the intersection of lines that divide the frame into thirds from top to bottom and from left to right. The Rule of Thirds is a useful aid for establishing compositional structure in an image, but is too regular in its proportions to produce very exciting results.3- Dynamic symmetry
An alternative way of organising the focus interest in a composition is to use dynamic symmetry. This is based on the proportions of the Golden Section, but determines the best place for the point of interest using diagonals rather than a grid, which some photographers find easier to visualise. Whatever the aspect ratio of the format used, draw a diagonal from one corner of the frame to the other, then picture a line that runs at right angles to the first. With some trial and error, it becomes second nature to place subjects close to these points in the camera frame.Here is an image from a book on photography. Try to find out which geometric rule or rules has or have been used in the MAKING of this image
Here are the lines limiting the elements in the image
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
