PDA

View Full Version : 100% paint forum...please...does it need sugar on top...I'll do it...


JM_JM
10-12-2005, 02:33 AM
Please I beg of you who is in charge......
Create a forum for the following:
- 2d Work created 100% from digital paint without the aid of reference.
- 3d creations that are created 100% without the use of a photo.

Safe guard honesty in the community by doing the following:
- Tagging member avatars who violate The Honesty Act!

The Honesty Act:
1) Sight all referenced materials in you work!
2) State your creation method as
a) Paint over
b) Original with non computerized visual reference
c) Original. Pure imagination! No reference outside the mind!
3) Share your inspiration

I am not anti photo...just want the truth about creation.

Seeking 100% inspiration from works 100% honest about their creation!

JM_JM
10-12-2005, 02:35 AM
Please help in spreading the message for a forum dedicated to works created with
100% digital paint only...WITH OUT PHOTOS IN THE WORK AT ANY STAGE! :thumbsup:

Thank you..

JM_JM
01-21-2006, 01:15 AM
Please help in spreading the message for a forum dedicated to works created with
100% digital paint only...WITH OUT PHOTOS IN THE WORK AT ANY STAGE! :thumbsup:

Vote
Vote
Vote

Ian Jones
01-23-2006, 04:19 AM
"3d creations that are created 100% without the use of a photo."

That IMO is a completely pointless request, clearly you do not understand anything about 3D. Eg.. Textures and backgrounds!

On a completely unrelated note, you have a script on your website that resizes the browser window. When I'm multi-tab browsing this is just plain annoying as it resizes every other page / tab in my browser. I got so irritated I just refused to go into your actual website.

Sorry for the lack of friendliness, I guess I can't always be a nice guy on the internet. Hope you don't take offense.

JM_JM
03-03-2006, 02:16 AM
"3d creations that are created 100% without the use of a photo."

That IMO is a completely pointless request, clearly you do not understand anything about 3D. Eg.. Textures and backgrounds!

On a completely unrelated note, you have a script on your website that resizes the browser window. When I'm multi-tab browsing this is just plain annoying as it resizes every other page / tab in my browser. I got so irritated I just refused to go into your actual website.

Sorry for the lack of friendliness, I guess I can't always be a nice guy on the internet. Hope you don't take offense.

Are you afraid to create your own textures and backgrounds from scratch?
Do you lack the talent and vision to achieve realistic results?
Do you always look for easy shortcuts?
I have plenty of knowledge about the 3d environment, and I can say without hesitation that you are a boob! To imply that 3d backgrounds and textures can only be photos speaks volumes about you creativity and general understanding of any 3d/2d program. Do you actually think that all 3d backgrounds and textures are photos? If so you are limiting your understanding of a myriad of truly amazing programs. Not everybody thinks that mapping a geometric shape or an organic model with a photo is awe inspiring 3d work.

As far as my website goes...
(You are highly critical for someone with just a splash page. Clearly, the visions havent been unleashed!)
I'll amuse you with a brief answer though...
I am way to busy (Professionally) to post more works and maintain the site properly. I hope to make many changes and additions to it in the future. I do find it quite telling that your frustration level is so low that you actually abandoned your efforts to view the site. With a frustration level so low, and a mentality so ready to abandon an effort, I can realize how someone like yourself would want to take the shortcut of using photos in your work. Creating the illusion from scratch would be much to much effort for someone like you.
Anyhow, "Sorry for the lack of friendliness, I guess I can't always be a nice guy on the internet. Hope you don't take offense". And thank you for giving me the opportunity to call someone a "boob". I havent done that since the 3rd grade.
Later
-J

leigh
03-03-2006, 02:29 AM
Are you afraid to create your own textures and backgrounds from scratch?
Do you lack the talent and vision to achieve realistic results?
Do you always look for easy shortcuts?

Clearly you don't have very much experience working on tight-scheduled productions ;) I don't think that Ian Jones was implying that all textures and backgrounds are photos, but having a purist attitude that one should create everything from scratch is both impractical and unrealistic.

JM_JM
03-03-2006, 03:12 AM
Clearly you don't have very much experience working on tight-scheduled productions ;) I don't think that Ian Jones was implying that all textures and backgrounds are photos, but having a purist attitude that one should create everything from scratch is both impractical and unrealistic.

I love how the two of you (Ian Jones and Leigh) start off with ridiculous declarations and assumptions! You are on a thread that wants to promote a purist method of creation! If you arent up for it...dont do it. But to suggest that it is impractical and unrealistic is total non-sense! Its only impractical and unrealistic if you lack the talent to produce! Does your comment suggest that you are only an artist when you are at a place of employment? For me...I am an artist at work and at home. If this method doesnt apply to your deadlines at your job, then dont do it there. Thats understandable. But to assume that this method is without any meritt is absolutely false! It does however lack value for those who do not want to challenge themselves by limiting their reference and relying solely on imagination. You dont have to be at a paying gig to produce...you need only desire.

leigh
03-03-2006, 03:22 AM
I love how the two of you (Ian Jones and Leigh) start off with ridiculous declarations and assumptions! You are on a thread that wants to promote a purist method of creation! If you arent up for it...dont do it. But to suggest that it is impractical and unrealistic is total non-sense! Its only impractical and unrealistic if you lack the talent to produce. Does your comment suggest that you are only an artist when you are at a place of employment. For me...I am an artist at work and at home. If this method doesnt apply to your deadlines at your job (Assuming you make a living as an artist) than dont do it there. Thats understandable. But to assume that this method is without any meritt is absolutely false! It does however lack value for those who do not want to challenge themselves by limiting their reference and relying solely on imagination.

Excuse me, but please point out the assumptions in my post. You're insinuating that people who use photos lack talent and imagination, and that is rather silly.

But to assume that this method is without any meritt is absolutely false!

Where did I say this?

All that counts in the end is the final product. I do indeed make a living as an artist, and I've worked for the likes of Martin Scorcese, Peter Jackson, Robert Rodriguez, Guillermo Del Toro and others, and I am pretty sure I can safely say that they don't care what methods we use to create the work they want. At the end of the day, my priorities are to finish my work on time, and have it looking good, and I'll use whatever methods are the most practical to accomplish that. My satisfaction lies in creating good work, regardless of the techniques I used to get there. There is no room for artistic purists on productions like these in the real world, because sitting around spending ages painting everything from scratch, when you accomplish the look quicker using other methods, is impractical and unrealistic when you consider the kinds of deadlines we work with. My point: other people (clients, viewers, etc) generally don't care about artistic purity, and neither should you. It's the final product that counts. It takes just as much skill to take the resources at hand and make them work successfully as it does to create things from scratch. And this is coming from an artist who has extensive experience at both.

[edit] Please stop editing your posts after other people reply to them... it sometimes nullifies what they're saying.

JM_JM
03-03-2006, 03:24 AM
You caught me in the middle of a edit...give me a second to catch up...

JM_JM
03-03-2006, 04:02 AM
[QUOTE=Leigh]Excuse me, but please point out the assumptions in my post." ok...

Assumption 1: "Clearly you don't have very much experience working on tight-scheduled productions" Get over yourself. Anyone making a living as an artist (As I do) works hard and works often. And always works on ridiculous deadline. Your not the only one!

Assumption 2: "I don't think that Ian Jones was implying that all textures and backgrounds are photos". Unless you are Ian Jones, that is an assumption. Im sorry but so far your entire original reply was an assumption.

Assumption 3? " having a purist attitude that one should create everything from scratch is both impractical and unrealistic." I think that this is more of an opinion that an assumption. An opinion based on a limited understanding of the thread, but opinion nevertheless.

"You're insinuating that people who use photos lack talent and imagination, and that is rather silly." hmmmm. you dont assume...yet I insinuate...interesting...PLease read the thread from the begining. It starts as a plea for members being honest about their method of creation. I am not anti photo. I dont appreciate when people use photos in their work and arent honest about the use. So to those people I am saying you lack talent and imagination!

You did not say "But to assume that this method is without any meritt is absolutely false!" Instead you used a blanketed statement like "...create everything from scratch is both impractical and unrealistic". That statement doest actually suggest merit.

Name dropping is nothing more than a convenient and cheap way to try and intimidate someone with a different view. I encourage debate. Create another forum for name dropping as a way to share excitement over a collaboration and I'll join and share my names.

Per-Anders
03-03-2006, 04:35 AM
Sheesh, why so defensive over this? That's hardly backing up your argument as the attitude of a profesional, nor likely to condone others to your cause. Three people have taken the time to read and respond to you.

The point here is that your initial argument seems based on a twisted purity moral about artwork. To give you some pause for thought artists have always used any additional devices available in order to help them create their works. Degas who is judged to be one of the finest draughtsmen of his time almost exclusively rotoscoped photos!

There is no additional merit to artwork that is created without any reference (in fact most frequently this particular form of artwork lacks coherance and is weaker than that which is not created in a bubble). Directly copying a photo is already frowned upon here, and if anyone is caught trying to pass off a paintover as anything other then the appropriate action is taken, however using photographic reference is perfectly acceptable, as is using any other form of reference, or using photographic textures in work (most artists on this site do so).

How much experience do you have of working on production with 3D? It's no mark of superiority to make textures without using photographs, the only thing that matters is getting the job done to the best of your abilities whilst taking the least ammount of time. If that involves using all procedurals and hand painted textures then so be it, if it means purely photographic textures then fine, if it means overlaying a photo onto a low res mesh then that's good too. You can't afford to be pretentious about this in that situation.

leigh
03-03-2006, 04:59 AM
Get over yourself. Anyone making a living as an artist (As I do) works hard and works often. And always works on ridiculous deadline. Your not the only one!

Okay, a little tip: when people put a winking smiley face after a comment, it's usually to demonstrate that the preceeding comment was a joke.

Unless you are Ian Jones, that is an assumption. Im sorry but so far your entire original reply was an assumption.

That's why I said "I think".

I think that this is more of an opinion that an assumption. An opinion based on a limited understanding of the thread, but opinion nevertheless.

No, it's a fact. It is impractical to create things from scratch if there are other resources at your disposal that can do the job just as well, if not better. And it is an unrealistic approach in the real world when you're working on a production with a deadline. I am not sure how you can dispute this.

you dont assume...yet I insinuate...interesting...PLease read the thread from the begining. It starts as a plea for members being honest about their method of creation. I am not anti photo. I dont appreciate when people use photos in their work and arent honest about the use. So to those people I am saying you lack talent and imagination!

How are the following remarks not anti-photo and anti such techniques?

Are you afraid to create your own textures and backgrounds from scratch?
Do you lack the talent and vision to achieve realistic results?
Do you always look for easy shortcuts?

With these comments, you are implying that people who do not "create their own textures and backgrounds from scratch" are "afraid", "lacking in talent and vision", and "looking for easy shortcuts".

Your attitude is further enforced by the following comments:

Its only impractical and unrealistic if you lack the talent to produce!

and

With a frustration level so low, and a mentality so ready to abandon an effort, I can realize how someone like yourself would want to take the shortcut of using photos in your work. Creating the illusion from scratch would be much to much effort for someone like you.

and yet another one right here following the very sentence where you're denying this attitude:

So to those people I am saying you lack talent and imagination!

I definitely detect not only some anti-photo sentiments here, but you're also insulting people simply for disagreeing with you, and making assumptions about their abilities. That's not a proper way to conduct any kind of debate.

You did not say "But to assume that this method is without any meritt is absolutely false!" Instead you used a blanketed statement like "...create everything from scratch is both impractical and unrealistic". That statement doest actually suggest merit.

I honestly have no idea what your point is here.

Name dropping is nothing more than a convenient and cheap way to try and intimidate someone with a different view. I encourage debate. Create another forum for name dropping as a way to share excitement over a collaboration and I'll join and share my names.

Actually, the names I mentioned are very relevant. Because of your continued efforts to undermine the skill levels of artists who do not create things from scratch, I felt it necessary to point out that highly talented individuals such as the directors that artists like myself are dealing with are absolutely satisfied with the work created by the very artists that you're implying are not skilled. And yes, you are implying that (see above). Film directors, especially highly esteemed directors, demand a very high level of talent, imagination, skill and dedication from their production crews, and considering that most texturing artists working in film VFX use photographs in many (if not most) of their textures, I think you're hardly in a position to make statements about lack of talent and imagination when they're clearly succeeding in their job, which is to produce high quality imagery. Films done by directors such as the ones I mentioned, as well as others, are constantly setting the standard to which others aspire in this industry, so don't say that the artists working on them are lacking in talent, just because their methods don't appeal to your own personal idea of artistic purity.

erilaz
03-03-2006, 05:09 AM
All insults and arguements aside for the moment, i'm not sure what you're driving at. I know you've been annoyed recently at claims of paintovers in the finished work section, but i'm not sure this honesty system is the best way to go about it.
People who do paintovers are only doing themselves a disservice in the end, so it doesn't really matter if they do it or not.
Secondly, i'm not sure I understand what you mean by being not anti-photo, when you say:
Create a forum for the following:
- 2d Work created 100% from digital paint without the aid of reference.
- 3d creations that are created 100% without the use of a photo.

Certainly some people do this, but I don't think it warrants an entire forum, since most people do not work this way. You may not mind if other people do this, but you yourself seem to not like using photos in relation to your art, is this correct?

The idea of tagging members is not productive. It just creates an air of distrust. People who are caught doing something they claim they have not soon get their reputation tarnished by the community, and they have the right to repair that reputation. Tagging them makes it like a criminal record, which it should not be.

As for not using reference at all, I'm not sure that is entirely practical. Certainly some people can create stunning art without reference (Marko Djurdjevic for example), but most choose not to out of practicality. Most of the great masters (either modern or ancient) used reference of a kind in their work.

superhooman
03-03-2006, 05:37 AM
Saying that people have no talent or imagination just because you personally don't like their methods is not only asinine, but also narrow-minded, and is not likely to endear others to your cause.

Even Michaelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci created work from references, I am sure. Were they lacking in imagination or talent? I think not.

This forum does not allow paintovers in its 2D gallery, and if you actually read the gallery submission rules, you'll see it stated that all references, when painting from photographic references, are to accompany the submitted artwork. When it comes to 3D artwork, I've noticed that people already tend to say whether they're using hand-painted or photographic textures. Creating works of art always requires skill, regardless of the methods used.

I don't see the point in creating forums for work that hasn't been done using photos and such, since I think hardly any even exists.

warpy
03-03-2006, 06:30 AM
without repeating anyone here, i think its a silly idea. art is definitely better with some reference, no one said you have to invent the wheel all over again.

Agamemnwn
03-03-2006, 12:02 PM
even if you dont have pictures while u are creating a 2d or 3d piece that doesnt mean that u dont use references. when u are looking att everyday things or animals, plants, landscapes whatever u are inspired and u implimet that inspiration into your works. so basically u always use references even its something u think its insignificant it triggers ur imagination for your experiences. so to say make something without references means to me stop looking att the world. put and empty page and u are done .

ralphmanning
03-03-2006, 12:12 PM
without repeating anyone here, i think its a silly idea. art is definitely better with some reference, no one said you have to invent the wheel all over again.Agreed.

However, I think JM_JM's idea of 'tagging' members avatar isn't so bad. If caught out once before for paintovers, copying, plagiarism etc. and not permanently banned, then I think they should be 'branded' somehow, so other members are aware and will be wary in the future. This may lead to the member leaving and re-signing up, but either way; it's the principle of the matter.

JM_JM
03-03-2006, 01:45 PM
I dont have the time to answer back the way I would like...I apologise. So let me just address a few things...
1) Here is my original post...

"Safe guard honesty in the community by doing the following:
- Tagging member avatars who violate The Honesty Act!

The Honesty Act:
1) Sight all referenced materials in you work!
2) State your creation method as
a) Paint over
b) Original with non computerized visual reference
c) Original. Pure imagination! No reference outside the mind!
3) Share your inspiration

I am not anti photo...just want the truth about creation.

Seeking 100% inspiration from works 100% honest about their creation!"

Some of you call this purist. I think that it is more of a guideline for honest artist at any level. There is nothing in "The honesty act" that eludes to one artists superiority over another. It just emphasizes honesty about their creation method. I see nothing wrong with this. Mabe it is just me. I just think the more honest the artist, the more inspiration they can spread. That is what this site is all about. sharing work getting better through critique and gaining desire from inspiration via other artists work. I can relate to someones art work more if I know the method in which they created it. I find it hard to believe that I am the only one. I relate to an Ansel Adams photo differently then I relate to a Norman Rockwell painting.
Both inspire. But I am not a photograher. I am a painter. Some would argue but your still an artist...that is true...But the method of creation in a Rockwell painting is what interests me more because it is a quality I seek for my own work as a painter. And he uses huge amounts of photo reference. But he is honest about it. I appreciate the honesty in the man. It allows me to appreciate the art, draw inspiration and even become educated int hat school of creation. Andy Warhol...I respect what he has done. I dont really relate to his work in the same way as the other artists that I 've mentioned, but he is honest about his method of creation. He has a clear reason for his approach. I can appreciate the artists honesty.

2) Leigh: I dont think I have the energy to go through all your points. I have a feeling that we could go back and fourth for some time. I dont have that killer instinct this morning nor the desire to muster it up. Lets bring it back to a more simplified debate. Same concept, minus all the quotes of you from me to you from me blah blah blah...It seems that your take on the methods mentioned in this thread are from a professional application only. If you revisit the begining of this thread you will see that I made (Intentionally) no reference to professional, personal or student application of this method. I simply stated that the method had merit, and that it could be applied. Where you choose to apply it is up to the discretion of the artist. I can not assume that I know that all professional work environment can or can not make a deadline nor meet the quality control of the project using this method. Artist discretion on application was assumed. I simply state it has merit.

3) Milkman Dan: "Saying that people have no talent or imagination just because you personally don't like their methods is not only asinine, but also narrow-minded, and is not likely to endear others to your cause. Even Michaelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci created work from references, I am sure. Were they lacking in imagination or talent? I think not." If people dont site their source and arent honest about their method of creation...I firmly stand by my statement. I dont want to get into another quote battle, because I am sure like leigh an myself , you could go on and on and on...So let me try and rephrase my thoughts into a couple of sentences. Use what ever frickin' reference you want, just be honest about it. Also, creating something from nothing has merit. Where/when you choose to apply it, is up to the discretion of the artist (professional, personal etc...).

Continue the debate please. Read the history of the thread and make contributions. I dont claim to know it all. I simply claim that creating something from nothing has merit.

I apologise for not responding to everyone. I wanted to, but I really need to go to work now.

Thank you,
Joseph

leigh
03-03-2006, 04:32 PM
2) Leigh: I dont think I have the energy to go through all your points. I have a feeling that we could go back and fourth for some time. I dont have that killer instinct this morning nor the desire to muster it up. Lets bring it back to a more simplified debate. Same concept, minus all the quotes of you from me to you from me blah blah blah...It seems that your take on the methods mentioned in this thread are from a professional application only. If you revisit the begining of this thread you will see that I made (Intentionally) no reference to professional, personal or student application of this method. I simply stated that the method had merit, and that it could be applied. Where you choose to apply it is up to the discretion of the artist. I can not assume that I know that all professional work environment can or can not make a deadline nor meet the quality control of the project using this method. Artist discretion on application was assumed. I simply state it has merit.

My comments were not in any way related to your wanting a forum for this here. I was responding directly to your statements that people who use photos or references are "less talented", "less imaginative" and "afraid", which, as I have demonstrated, is utter tosh, because by making that statement, you're basically saying that just about every professional texturing artist working in the industry today, not to mention many painters are not very skilled.

But if you want a response regarding the forum, I am sorry but the answer is no. It's already been stated above that there is hardly any work out there done without references. And even so, I don't think there is anything special about work created without references or photos anyway that would even merit a dedicated forum, because all that counts in the end is the final product, regardless of methods used. As I stated before, it takes just as much skill to successfully use the resources at hand to create work, than it does to create things from scratch. Having had years of experience at both, I think I am adequately qualified to make this statement.

JM_JM
03-03-2006, 06:10 PM
My question to to Ian Jones...

"Are YOU afraid to create your own textures and backgrounds from scratch?
Do YOU lack the talent and vision to achieve realistic results?..."

Your interpretation of those questions...

"I was responding directly to your statements that people who use photos or references are "less talented", "less imaginative" and "afraid", ...you're basically saying that just about every professional texturing artist working in the industry today, not to mention many painters are not very skilled."

My comment was made to an individual, not a group and certainly not an industry. I have no problem being corrected, but be accurate if you attempt to do it! Do not extract segments of a sentence from my statement so that you can pretend to have a strong argument. You have intentionally taken those comments out of their original context.

leigh
03-03-2006, 06:29 PM
My question to to Ian Jones...

"Are YOU afraid to create your own textures and backgrounds from scratch?
Do YOU lack the talent and vision to achieve realistic results?..."

Your interpretation of those questions...

"I was responding directly to your statements that people who use photos or references are "less talented", "less imaginative" and "afraid", ...you're basically saying that just about every professional texturing artist working in the industry today, not to mention many painters are not very skilled."

My comment was made to an individual, not a group and certainly not an industry. I have no problem being corrected, but be accurate if you attempt to do it! Do not extract segments of a sentence from my statement so that you can pretend to have a strong argument. You have intentionally taken those comments out of their original context.

No, I haven't. You specifically said here:

So to those people I am saying you lack talent and imagination!

About ALL people who use photographs as textures or painting references.

I am closing this thread because it is utterly pointless. Stop trying to run circles around me and pretend you're saying something else when your attitude is abudantly clear. And, despite the fact that you focused the questions you're now mentioning to a specific person, it nevertheless clearly betrays your feelings about the methods in general. Arguing semantics isn't going to change that.