ZBrushCentral

do you think 3d is true art?

Community
#47

I have to disagree 100% with that statement because color mixing on a canvas or palette for instance is about understanding and working with relationships, it’s an additive thing and has a great flow. Using the color picker in a computer software is very different - it’s a sort of disconnected thing and doesn’t really have a flow… a messy palette really helps you understand and use that knowledge when working digitally.

I also have to disagree that there are creative barriers when you work with natural media. That’s not true… if you are a master of any particular media, why would there be any barriers?

Like I said in an earlier post, I think 3d is great, and it requires a lot of skill and it gives artists a tonne of control. But seriously, 3d is not the real world. Sitting at a computer fabricating things that are normally shown on a computer screen or perhaps printed, is not real, it’s from inside a computer.

Anyway, I’m saying they’re both great and honestly I don’t understand why anyone has to feel the need to say either is better.

#48

Cryptic but maybe that is art!
These type of questions always create a distinct irritation in me.
To be an artist? To be doing art? etc etc.
After fourty years of working as an “artist” which has become a term I really do not like to be called I can tell you that when I cook a really good rabbit stew a la Provincial that all the other “art” can get lost for that eating period.
It does not matter one bit what you use or in which medium you work.
The problem is that there are far too many talkers about art and far to few real doers and unfortunately there are far too many critics that have never ever experienced the workflow of any art form. Then there are far too many people doing art degress and becoming art lecturers who are totally useless to us art workers. The problem is that there is no answer to this rather stupid question and really any person who states that this is art and that is not is actually a total fruitcake.
Hard tones but that is the state of things.
If you really need to be concerned whether your work is art or not then all I can say is you are still pretty “young” etc - the only person that can actually answer this question is YOU for yourself! In other words you need to have the strength and arrogance of your own knowledge and conviction.

#49

I respect your opinion, but natural media just blatantly has many limitations that cause the creative process to be inefficient. Hence the slang “starving artist”. Artists have always struggled because it just takes too long, and time is money.

Digital media has changed that for me, and I know exactly why - it has alleviated the creative barriers of natural media. It’s not like art isn’t hard enough anyways, trust me I know, it’s how I eat and pay bills.

Mixing paint vs. a color picker IS a creative barrier for instance. No, I’m not talking about learning color relationships, I’m talking about efficiency and speed in selecting and laying down a very specific color.

Sure, you learn what colors look good together and how they blend by smearing them around, that doesn’t make it efficient for the workflow though. You waste time and you waste paint, both equal money, which not all artists are worried about. It’s not a hobby for me though.

If I spend 5 minutes mixing to achieve a specific color, that’s 5 minutes of painting that didn’t happen. Over time, that crap adds up.

That’s just the tip of a large iceberg of creative hold ups that don’t exist in a digital environment.

It’s no biggie, I just have spent a lot of hours with natural media and know it’s several weaknesses. Digital art is more free for the creative at heart, and is just as authentic. Any other perspective is simply outdated.

HOWEVER, I will say that, because of it’s limitations, you can learn a ton from natural media that you may not be forced to adapt to when working digitally. So see, we’re both right! :slight_smile:

#50

true, but I’ve spent more money on software and hardware upgrades than I ever spent on paints in my entire life.

so starving artists are still starving, we’re just spending our money on different types of ‘paint’

#51

:smiley: Yeah, but once you get it down, you’re MUCH more likely to create a career out of it. Soooo…when you add it all up…

#52

James,

Sounds like in your case you’re feeling liberated by digital… for me I am more liberated by real paint and brush - from just three primary colors I make any color I want in seconds.

Everyone should just do their thang, enjoy it and not give a damn whether anyone else thinks it’s authentic or true. lol This whole discussion we’re having makes me laugh.

Take care

#53

:lol: We must be bored…

…that or I’m just tired of looking at the piece I’m working on. Sometimes it’s good to step away from it, get into a pointless forum discussion, and get back to it with fresh eyes! Later, when I’m tired of it again, we’ll debate about what’s better - Microsoft Word, a type writer, or pen and paper!:rolleyes:

-cheers :smiley:

#54

That which creates emotion in the viewer is art. Or so I’ve always believed.

#55

You forgot one…

[[attach=148128]ClarisWorks.gif[/attach]]![ClarisWorks.gif|249x263](upload://rtm7DQnKhlqNfS7hAkUWP40wjBp.gif)
#56

If a can of **** can be considered art, anything can lol

#57

Ok for some reason I felt a need to add my 2 cents. Many interesting comments here and all are quite valid. I think making some differentiations would be useful when having this discussion. IMHO I think there is a difference between craft and art. Just because you make something from scratch does not automatically qualify it as art. Also a few people have mentioned the commercial value and relevence of CG work; a works monitary value will not determin wether or not it is art.

In the end I think only the artist him or herself can tell you if it is art, after that it’s up to the viewers to decide and if they argue about it that’s a good thing.

#58

Second that Kravit

#59

I am a Artist and a Poet, Do not need any one to tell me other wise.

#60

I think that something that sometimes is lacking in digital art is the message,the communication,simply doing some models/illustrations isn’t art,it’s creativity(which it’s good,but it’s more a personal thing,art is something that can be shared.)
Look here,into the forum
We have thousand of hulk models,wolverine,captain america.gollum,essentially the subjects are always the same,and depend on the general trend.

Computer graphics is a tool for making films,videogames,multimedia products,illustrations,these fields have to attract people,so even if technically can show great works,there is always a compromise,the goal is to sell,to make money. Computer graphics for me have to mature a bit,it's not fault of the medium itself,but how it's used. My 2 cents. P.S Sorry for my english.
#61

No the computer does it all… :smiley:

#62

which makes it less real because…? This is kind of a medieval line of thought if you think about it. Does something have to be tangible to be real? Is Van Gogh’s Starry Night less real because it’s not a painting of a real place? Is it the paint on the canvas that makes it real, or the idea inside his head (which- ironically enough is intangible). I can imagine painters at the turn of the 20th century chastizing the use of pre-made oil paints rather than mixing pigment and oil manually, because it wasn’t true to the artform. Honestly, it’s the idea that comes out of your head that is art. The human imagination and perception is art, not the paper it’s printed on, the type of canvas you use, or the monitor it’s displayed on.

#63

I know man, I love the new keyboards with the “make art” button. What a time saver. Who needs talent these days? I have ALL of my Wacom express keys buttons programmed to it. One touch strip is set between the “realism” and “abstract” buttons, and the other between the “contemporary” and “modern” buttons. It’s awesome. :wink:

#64

By real I did not mean true, valuable, important or anything like that. By real I meant part of the real, physical world. It is a fact that if something is inside the computer (whether entirely computer generated, somewhat computer assisted in rendering, or completely from scratch) it’s not part of the real world, to touch, smell, etc etc.

Computers do enable artists to produce work at a faster rate and as such most commercial studios use them for production art. In production, specifically with digital technology, you can (and are encouraged to) ‘cheat’ and cut corners wherever possible to save time/money. Whether that’s with masking tricks, projection master, or cutting and pasting photos. In this sense there is a huge difference between natural media and digital media.

If you’re producing art digitally for yourself (and enjoyment of your patrons) you can choose to work slower if you wish, and do everything from scratch. In this case the process wouldn’t be as different between natural media and digital media.

We have to remember that digital paint software, digital sculpting software and so forth was pioneered by industry pros who did things the old school way and found that computers could speed up production and literally do some of the work for us. Digital software is an emulation of natural media and the real, physical world that we interact in everyday.

I believe only the artist him/herself determines if their work is art or not.

Take care

#65

I completely agree,and I don’t think there is anythyng wrong in saying this.
Illustration work(2d classic works made with oils,aerography,and so on for cover books)is another field where you have/want to go fast,time is money.
I remember that I read more than ten years ago how Boris Vallejo(excellent illustration painter) did his commercial works,doing photographs,scaling these photos bigger with a machine(camera lucida)and using the tracing paper to transfer this drawing on the board(to be honest also the renaissance artists used some techniques to transfer the draws).
He is skilled and can work without these helps,but time is money.
I think in 3d is the same,if you do something for yourself how many time you put in it isn’t important and the work is more genuine(MHO).
Bye

#66

Ask your friend to try using Z-Brush, he might re-think his comments. It takes just as much skills to create, sculpt and paint as it does to be a tattoo artist. Let him watch you use Z-Brush, he might switch careers…:wink: