Sprite Girl, Bbzsy (2D)

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  01 January 2003
lil Dragon hi,

I would bet my ass that u didnt know it was copied and post appied when u handed over that choice award. I know its hard to take it back now.

have you tried comping the image one ontop another? Guess what... it fits snugly.. somehow even the face is the same.

Edit: nevermind... i still think it is nice.
__________________
Bah!

Last edited by derelict : 01 January 2003 at 02:23 AM.
 
  01 January 2003
Li'ldragon, the piece is perfectly ok and can be considered an original work of art, and a quite nice one too, it's just that he should have stated in the first post that she was a photomanip, and posted the photo as well.
As it is I bet most people assumed she was hand-painted, which IMHO could be construed as misleading.
 
  01 January 2003
Quote: Originally posted by Stahlberg

As it is I bet most people assumed she was hand-painted, which IMHO could be construed as misleading.


This is true... good point there

salud
 
  01 January 2003
Questioning Originality?

When ever originality is questioned I must quote Abe Simpson (Forgive me if I miss a few lines).

"Nothing is original now a days. The Fax machine is nothing more then a Telephone and waffle."

I don't deny that I use referances for my sketches. I don't think that makes it any less original. I think you can learn a lot from referances in other images. I learned so much from my first classes of Life drawing. I understood how how line wieght worked, how shadows shape an illustration and I understood how to make Black and white feel liek color. In fact I believe that made me a better artist, and it helped me understand how to light objects in 3D and Photography.
I believe that this man did something amazing, and I don't think we should put it down becuase we have seen the illustration off the internet. He's showing off amazing talent with his work, and it just makes me happy when I see great artwork from other artist.
 
  01 January 2003
IMHO he still deserves that award. The original picture's beauty is no where near his creation.

It was his creative mind that made the final picture.

And it was love and first sight

(can't say the same for the original gal )
 
  01 January 2003
Quote: Originally posted by darkdeathdreame
IMHO he still deserves that award. The original picture's beauty is no where near his creation.


Exactly the reason why he's still getting it but Steven made a very good point I think we all should start doing.

salud
 
  01 January 2003
you can call it "digital reproduction art"
 
  01 January 2003
i don't want to sound to heavy, of course it is still creative art. but say the model he used was instead mona lisa or some very famous pose like thinking man or david. then you put some tatoos on mona lisa or david then added a nice pair of wings. that wouldn't be very effective, everyone would laugh. he directly copied the girl, then he made a landscape. obviously when he first posted everyone said wow he can really paint good, that's a well painted girl, it was the hardest part of the picture, and he made everyone think he painted it. :shame:
 
  01 January 2003
Hmmm ... interesting discussion developing here. Is it art or just a paint over?

My first reaction to this was that it was an artful piece. I thought it was well executed and definately worthy of a front page plug. Which is why I pointed it out to lildragon (yeah, my fault - blame me).

After hearing about the photo, I was a little dissappointed that the artist didn't mention this up front. However, I still believe the picture is worthy of the mention (the award ... I'm not so sure).

Here are a few pieces of art that srich23 made me think of. Would these be considered paint overs and cheating the technique?

http://www.snap-dragon.com/_private..._de_la_Nuez.jpg
http://www.snap-dragon.com/_private/Fernando_Botero.jpg
http://www.snap-dragon.com/_private/mona_l7.jpg
http://www.snap-dragon.com/_private/mona_l8.gif
http://www.snap-dragon.com/_private/mona_lisa_1.jpg
http://www.snap-dragon.com/_private/mona_l1.jpg
http://www.snap-dragon.com/_private/mona_l2.jpg
http://www.snap-dragon.com/_private/mona_l14.jpg
http://www.snap-dragon.com/_private/mona_l17.jpg
http://www.snap-dragon.com/_private/mona_l20.jpg
 
  01 January 2003
Top notch work. I am impressed.
__________________

 
  01 January 2003
hmm

Just a little art history. The old masters would copy poses directly from other paintings all the time. It was viewed as an homage to those that came before them.
 
  01 January 2003
i know i came in too strong on my 1st post. So i will apolagize to lil and the mods.

Hmmm cant help but notice that if we take out the naked chic... the rest looks rather elementary... than again even bland can be called art this days if there is enough noise made on its behalf.

Cheers!
__________________
Bah!
 
  01 January 2003
did the old masters have a scanner, photoshop, and intuous?
 
  01 January 2003
I like this picture-if only you could see things like this at your local stream in the morning! Love the markings (tattoos?) on her body and I like the wings very much!
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.