tttia

I think you confused art with the force.... Constipation is art....passing gas..that is art....I know people who get pretty strong emotions when folks do that. Um, I think we are getting a bit cheesy here. Smiling is not art. The sun setting may be great inspiration for art, or you could say it is God's art, but it is not art either in the traditional sense. And while fly fishing or tying is AN art in the sense of a skill, trade, difficult nuanced activity, it is not ART in the traditional sense either. Some words have multiple definitions. This is an example.

Apparently not the ones I have been to. Big car shows are often in convention centers etc. If you intend a car show setting you might want a. more lighting b. more cars.

True, art doesn't have to be graphical, but trying to convey all of them in one definition is a bit difficult. And just as in poems etc. there is an interplay between artist and audience, where they want them to get it, but they want them to work for it. King of like volleying in tennis for fun, or playing catch with a frisbee or ball. You might throw it long, but you hope they run and make an amazing catch. Still, I don't think it is an emotion per se. I think it is the original INTENT of the author, which may as a result bring about emotion.

I understand car show lighting, but this is in the street. THe bottle, I actually like the bottle more with the rag on top. Name...hm, would have to think on that one

Now I am glad I tend to keep long posts on my word processor. This post is a modified version of my response to a similar topic in the DAG. I am limiting this to GRAPHICAL art as that seems to be the thrust. The most important element, to my thinking, is recognizable subject matter--you may doubt this, but most art was not little blobs of junk until recently. In fact, the whole point of art from ancient times was to record, to show , to give a representation of recognizable subject matter. Most were on functional items, such as pottery, caves, etc. They were decorations or story telling devices. It was not until the advent of the camera that we started to get abstract junk of any form. Look at all the OLD masters that sub (sub divi referenced some old masters) talks about. Emotion was NOT their goal. Realism was. They is why they figured out the ways to give depth through isometric perspective, overlapping, relative size, brilliancy of color, shading, etc. They had no other way to get at real, so they painted real. Was emotion left out? No, but they were going for realism. in the case of the Greeks they were going for a realistic IDEAL. The ideal man, ideal female form, etc. The advent of abstract was a direct result of real suddenly becoming easy through film. If someone could do a perfect representation with a camera, then realism is pointless. This was the dilemma that confronted the artist. So in order to not go broke they began to pioneer. But if you look at the masters who employed this form, they ALREADY KNEW how to do classical realism. They just couldn't make a living at it. Now we have a resurgence of realism through the avenues of sci fi and fantasy art. Creating a realistic but non-existent scene. One tutorial on FARP for instance shows someone who drew a dragon but used the musculature of a lion to make sure that some elements were realistic-seeming, though the creature itself was fantasy. cheeseballs who have no skill, but are rife with emotion, may please themselves but they won't make many others happy. Those with both CAN convey a message, an emotive one at that. But the best way to bring emotion is an emotional rendering of familiar subject matter. The point is that, while some works may a. spring from strong emotions b. be meant to convey strong emotions works usually fail to do this without relating to some kind of subject matter that the brain can recognize, process, and receive the desired effect from. Therefore, recognizable subject matter, in my estimation, is the hallmark of good art. Does it stand on its own? No, but it is the beginning point, and is present in nearly all art (except for crud that was consumer driven recently) throughout all cultures and ages. I should also note that what we call an abstract here is NOT abstract. A render that is shaded or a bunch of grunge brushing is NON-REPRESENTATIONAL art. True abstract is art that conveys something realistic, but in a surreal manner, in a different manner. Portraying a building from all perspaectives at once is abstract. You still see the building, but it is in a different way than reality would call for. One could argue that artists have been forced to adapt to popular, but rather cruddy works just to make a living. Look at the rise of abstract art. All of the memorable abstract masters came AFTER the invention of modern photography. Van GoghÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Ãâstarted art as his third career in 1880 after being inspired by drawing his mining parishoners as a pastor in his second career. MonetÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Ãâstarted around 1867 O'KeefeÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Ãâ1905, started art career as a high schooler. PicassoÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Ãâ1893, debut as an artist Escher--Not born until 1898 The advent of usable photographyÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Ãâ1830's It was not until the advent of the camera that we started to get abstract junk of any form. Once the camera came around realism was not really necessary. The phase out took a long time in some venues. The golden age of magazine illustration for instance was in the 1920's-30's. But today, the only place where realism is REALLY valued as a commercial asset is in Sci-fi and fantasy, etc. where you can't really get realism from photos, since the subject matter doesn't exist. Think about it. We all marvel at someone who spent 45 hours to render a super realistic black and portrait with pencils. It seems inhuman that they could even do it. But after about 5 minutes of being impressed it suddently dawns on you. Why not take a picture instead? Now sometimes the painting reveals things more than a picture. But for the commercial market, with deadlines, etc. a 20 minute photo beats a 40 hour portrait any day. Therefore, it is my contention that recognizable subject matter is the key element in art. So my definition would be "any intentional representation of recognizable subject matter through graphical means."

I liked Swifty and drunken's second better, but I don't think Slydes was THAT bad.

That all depends on how good you are! My wife looks at it, draws it, done, clean lines and all. Of course...she looks at it for a long time... I don't work that way. .I just dive right in. I draw it..change that line, change this line, restate (redraw) that line, till I finally get it right. Then half the time I have to scan it and fix it there because it still isn't right. Of course, I can do three things at once she can't , so I guess we're even! Whichever it takes to get it right in the end is fine. Most people wind up doinig smaller lines, etc. to get it right.

k, oh and that heart was not the wifey's project I mentioned, but nice none the less! K witty, we will be expecting it :) I hope to get this bird done soon, but it is a complex one. I am not sure how it will come out. As for flowers, I just recently did that rose, but will try to do another too. Here is the rose. About 45 minutes in Corel Photopaint. Thanks to ImageShack for Free Image Hosting It was part of this flower related project: http://forum.tip.it/viewtopic.php?t=185721 If I get time after bball tonight I will do another.

I have a birdy I am working on too! Nice job there Keiphus. The wifey is still working on something small....it is looking great too. maybe I will just keep the thing going and lower my expectations.... by the way dyro, just paint it in a program then!

haha, that is my point. A nose that you have to zoom in to see is not a nose!

I like the look of it, the lighting is great ....but ...stock clouds? man...

three trouble spots for me in this image so far. 1. The guy is in desperate need of a nose 2. The lights under the car aren't working. Would be hard to do it with vector though. 3. The tops of the seats look a bit wierd. Not as refined of curves etc. as the rest of the car. Otherwise, pretty good image. Ah one more thing. The shadow on the guy is from straight above. I assume since it is a night scene, or maybe at dusk, that this is a streetlight, etc. But the lighting on the car seems to be more from the right, which would make sense if it is a streetlight just out of our view to the right, in the other lane there. I would think the guys shadow should be slightly indicative of light from the right corner as well, sliding his shadow left, etc.

Well the thread had a good run, but looks like it is over. The interest is just not there that would be needed. Hopefully we can still keep posting sketches of some type, and thanks all for participating :)

I decided not to put the leaders. Leaders change anyway in clans, and you don't want to be changing your banner all the time. Besides, it didn't look great.

Hey there! good to see you back. I started being active again. I made up a banner last night but wanted to tweak a few things.

or go to our daily sketch thread and we will tell you what to do!

I won't flame you, but I will say that a. you have some valid points, in that people should not be flamed, and there is nothing intrinsically wrong with selling. I try to encourage all the artists here, no matter what I may think of their art. And I have sold my own work at times. I fully agree that art need not be complex. What is good is good. However, on a board dedicated to building art skill, what is good may still be ridiculed if it is ridiculously easy (non-customized terragen renders, etc.). Photography btw, if you do it yourself, is fantastic. b. I think you have misunderstood the point of this to some degree. The ultimate goal of this is not to kill the shops or this board at all, but to give a seperate space for this more concerted effort at art. It gets old when some come here for that type of work ,but it always gets bumped to page three in no time because someone sticks up contests throwing millions of gp out there--even if a third of those never even pay out. The introduction of treasure trails , etc has not helped this, as there is a huge glut of rs cash out there these days. However, the only way to get to the point where we have our own space is to show more of this kind of work so that the admins can see that there is demand for it. I developed a lot doing sigs. I still do some myself for those who like them, creating them from my larger works. All but about 6 of my sigs total have been for free however. I don't have a problem with capitolism in general, but I do find that the higher prices of sigs these days bring more people who have no interest in art, and a lot of interest in rs cash. And therefore they post absolutely atrocious stuff, often in paint, often without even thinking it looks good to them, and then ask how much they can get for it. That is just not what this board should be.

Thanks to ImageShack for Free Image Hosting No problem :) Alternate with no red outline on the lettering.

Thanks to ImageShack for Free Image Hosting

Great! will do.

Looks pretty decent. I am not sure about the moss/grass. Otherwise I like the general texture etc. Perhaps if you could adjust the lvls a bit to see a little more of what it will actually look like...

I like the concept The periodic challenges though could be done through individual threads at first to see how it works. .

New topic: anthropomorphic work (animal-human fusions)

Looks nice! too bad this thing hit page two in no time :( I will bump it up for ya! I almost didn't look on page two, but thought there could be a few gems like this one down there on a weekend. The head is the weak spot of course, but you knew that. The only real issue I see besides the facial features though is that it appears to have dog ears or something. If it is supposed to be an anthropomorphic work, then no problem :)

Nice project here! Good to have more people practicing their brushing!