Realism: bolts

#181

I am SO surprised that this post can still raise the interests of judging this is art or not…and those appreciation POV.

I like this sentence “We are here to enjoy 3D (in this forum) art for art’s sake” It reminds me that somebody told me, I’ve joined a freaker’s society.

I don’t want to hassle with that… What I know is when Leonardo da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa, the camera wasn’t invented yet. I think if the camera invented at his time. I believe Vinci will become Picasso because painting Mona Lisa is just an easy task…make a snap shot of her. Of course he can break though the limitation of painting and may be create another -isms of painting.

I would like to take a point that why we appreciate the art by the masters because from the history, we are making some comparisons from the ancient time to modern. We will appreciate those paintings and drawings are created due to the limitation of techniques and technology.

At last. I would like to remind myself that I am searching for creativity.

#182

HAHAHA :slight_smile: You guys are crazy :slight_smile: I think it should be the most viewed thread novadays. What a good marketing for the creator :slight_smile:

Congratulations, it’s a very cool image. This is where the simple idea meets the good technical knowledge…most of people working hard on modeling difficult stuffs (like me), but almost nonoe of them can achive this level of realism :slight_smile:

Greetings, neu

#183

Very nice job u made there Arsenic! i very realistic 3d work :thumbsup: ,also other 3d works on ur website are great!!

for the others:

Hi, im a registered user of this forums recently, this is the first thread i really got deep, and i am a bit dissapointed about some replies of certain people…asking for wires to proof thats not a lie, telling hes a photographer and IT must be a photo coz he dont have more skills… half of the replys some people maked are just pointless…is ok to make critics of the works, thats they way artist get better doing their works, but what about make critics to the artist and not the work, thats just lame… the guy have a site and HAVE the WIRE on it SO DONT MAKE 30 REPLYS ASKING FOR IT!! use ur BRAINS and try to search for ur OWN and stop spamming!!!
[sorry for my bad english]

#184

fantastic photorealism. congrats, i am very impressed :slight_smile:

Lem

#185

Though i found it relatively easy to spot that’s it’s cg( the lightning is ALWAYs what ****s up the difference between real and non-real) i don’t find it realy easy to see why you people like this piece so much. True, technologically speaking, it’s very very good. And though he is using standard and advanced rendering methods to create an image he also has to use his mind to let those lights and rendering methods work together. On that level, i must say you did quite a good job… but still. it’s nothing more then a technologically piece of work which could easiliy be defined as a simple try-out. It does deserve the front-page, not because of the image, but because it’s easy to see that it would start a discussion and we can’t have those enough. The composition is one of a simple 5 year old who trows a coupe of bolts on the floor, the textures are not that good and the rest can’t be discussed about cause it’s part in this piece is to small to be of any value. The only thing is the lightning and even that one is realized wih brazil and hdri… yet the image stand out and even makes people think it’s non-cg when almost warning him to not post photographs on a professional cg forum… :hmm:

I don’t think this is real art, then again, i think that 90 % of the pieces that are posted here are non-art. Only a few can realy try to understand art, yet no one can realy comprehend it. Art is notas open minded as most of you people think.

Max4d

#186

Just because you disagree with someone’s interpretation of an issue doesn’t mean there is no merit to it. My opinion is that the image has artistic merit. I also agree that it appeals to me from a technical aspect more so than an esthetic, but does that make it any less of an artistic work? When a digital artist recreates the Roman Colliseum in all its splendor, does that make it any less a work of art? I don’t think so! It’s called Realism.

However, on the flip side, I don’t really appreciate the Picasso style and other modernists such as cubists, etc. Jackson Pollack looks like he just painted his livingroom and then nailed the drop cloth to a canvas and called it “art”. To me, most of it looks like something I did when I was 4 years old. I don’t like it, but I don’t deny that it is a creative work of art. It’s just not in my taste.

This piece isn’t trying to change the world or expand our minds. But I believe that it did what any piece of art tries to do…evoke some sort of emotional response and capture our imaginations. Often times the setting for a piece or where it is displayed can have a big impact, such as a color photo of a daisy against a black and white prison yard, or a photo-realistic pile of screws on a 3d digital forum.

I come to this site to view 3D images, sometimes 2D as well. If I don’t like something, I’ll click away. If I think something could use some tinkering, I’ll offer a critique to try and help enhance the results (more to my liking, which may not be for others). I will never presume to force my point of view and deny someone’s expression as being somehow “wrong” just because I don’t see the point to it.

Let’s stick with encouraging others and make us all better artists or technicians. Let’s keep away from forcing everything into little boxes and stomping on that lone daisy standing in the prison yard.

Is there in truth, no beauty?

#187

:thumbsup: oh my, that is pretty freking realistic! I love the texture!

#188

Well sayd Velgor, ur post should be make sticky so everyone read and make their post a bit more ‘wise’

#189

I don’t like the image, because it’s boring. Just some nails…:rolleyes:
But I’m impressed by the realism that 3d-renderers can produce.
Furthermore, the modeling of the nails is pretty nice… :wink:

#190

its so realistic ! nice work !:thumbsup:

#191

Yep, they sure are good renders! And even without micro-poly displacement (not in Brazil yet), the scratches are soooo beautifully detailed (with a bump map?). How big were the textures?

The only thing that makes this look CG:ish is, that it looks too balanced and beautiful :wink:

Great stuff! Please, make a tutorial!!

#192

If i ever want 12 pages of posts i will either post a photorealistic render and then no wire or post and image and ask is my render art?

if i want 24 pages or replies ill do both.

#193

amazing work! Probably one of the most realistic 3d images i’ve seen. Congrats!

#194

Someone around the beginning posted that they were wondering how he did the threads in the screws. my guess is that he modelled them as nails and took a helix and overlapped it a little around the outer edge of the model and subtracted it out to get the ridges of the screws thread…or atleast thats what I would have done. Very nice either way!

#195

“A successful work of art is not one which resolves contradictions in a spurious harmony, but one which expresses the idea of harmony negatively by embodying the contradictions, pure and uncompromised, in its innermost structure.” Adorno

“Art is a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist’s metaphysical value-judgments. An artist recreates those aspects of reality which represent his fundamental view of man’s nature.” Proust

Is the render of the bollts art? No. It does not represent its creator’s view of reality nor tell us anything about human nature. It is a technical exercise, nothing more.

#196

Art is:

  • the products of human creativity

A form of human activity created primarily as an aesthetic expression, especially, but not limited to drawing, painting and sculpture

“art does not need to be innovative to be good”

The skillful application of correct knowledge in the order of making. It is a habit residing in the soul of the artist which is ordered toward making rather than mere doing.

Art is not, as the metaphysicians say, the manifestation of some mysterious idea of beauty or God; it is not, as the aesthetical physiologists say, a game in which man lets off his excess of stored-up energy; it is not the expression of man’s emotions by external signs; it is not the production of pleasing objects; and, above all, it is not pleasure; but it is a means of union among men, joining them together in the same feelings, and indispensable for the life and progress toward well-being of individuals and of humanity. - Leo Tolstoy.

I can get quotes too. But it doesn’t really change things, does it? To coin a phrase; art is as art does.

Robert Barrett Browning would tell people that their interpretation of one of his poems was correct and very insightful, even if those intrepretations were contradictory. Why? Was he just being faceous? I believe that he was saying that whatever we feel or think about an artistic expression is the correct answer because it is the correct answer for that individual. Whatever viceral response you get is the right one for you. No two people can look at anything without having their own intrepretation of the object. Our individual nature and life experiences make us unique. Sure, there is a lot of cross-over and common experience, but still there is a vast amount of difference.

For example, if I look at a puppy I may recall events from very early childhood and the joys of playing with my first puppy at age 3. However, someone else may be saddened by the memory of the loss of a favorite pet years and years ago. Isn’t it still a puppy that we are both looking at? Am I wrong to feel joy at its antics, and floppy eared playfulness? Or is the other wrong by feeling a tinge of grief for a departed pet?

No. We are both correct. Each intrepretation is the right one for that person. And to make this even more ephemeral, that feeling or reaction will change. My mood might be different and I only see the chewed shoes or soiled rug when I look at the puppy and the other guy recalls his joys of playing catch with Rover.

We will never agree on what is or is not art. I believe that you can find art in almost anything that brings some sort of emotional or intellectual response. There is art in the ordinary. It doesn’t have to be pretty to be art, and it doesn’t have to change the world or make me weep either. Maybe I don’t have such a rigid view because I don’t have “formal” training. I’m not saying that any such education is limiting, but rather that I’ve formed my own opinion through experience. Hey, maybe I AM wrong. What’s the harm in that? Someone has to buy the velvet paintings of Elvis…One man’s treasure is another man’s garbage.

All I am asking is for people to be more open minded and not so quick to judge. If you like it, say so. If you don’t, try to suggest something to make it better (constructively) or just go on your way. Trying to browbeat, or use flawed logic won’t ever do more than engender anger and 13 page threads.

#197

:buttrock: Incredible! Really Nice Piece.:buttrock:

#198

Okay, it is fine to say that everything is art. But that doesn’t get us anywhere, does it? It’s fine to say that everyone is different and all viewpoints are equally valid. But that doesn’t tell us anything. We may as well say nothing at all.

My point is that defending something as “art” should not be taken lightly, especially in a forum for “artists.” Are the people in here trying to create art? That should be answered, and saying “no” isn’t a bad thing. We don’t need to call everything art. But if at least some of us ARE trying to create something that is MORE than an image, more than a collection of pixels (whatever this “more” means) we ought to have an idea of what it is that we are trying to do.

Now, this can be answered by each person in their own way. However, as the real MEANING of being human lies in our SOCIAL interaction, perhaps we should come up with a shared understanding. We could ask questions: what is it that moves you? Are you trying to create something that is moving? Or is a pile of bolts that looks like a pile of bolts all we are trying to create. It looks good, it may be art, but does it do anything worthwhile for anyone? Let’s make moral judgements: is it a waste of valuable human energy to make a flawless image of bolts? I think so. If it serves the purpose of getting its creator a job and therefore money, fine. But let’s not say that it is what we are all striving to create, as members of a society. We should have more MEANINGFUL things on our minds than how to make bolts look real. I think.

So, we should judge works that are posted on here by terms that are more than technical. Let’s try to talk about beauty and what moves us and what gets us in touch with something higher than ourselves. I think THAT is the purpose of art. And we should be concerned with art, even if everything we do isn’t artistic.

But, once again, if you want to call everything art and say that everything is good (or that it doesn’t matter), then you don’t need to say anything at all.

#199

oh please… I hate when someone starts to pop in all this social interaction bulls**t into the meaning of art. Then perhaps we should start talking about our subconsciousness and what we really are? Here I like to say we are automatic creatures, with merely enormous amount of predefined actions. But that’s of course another topic. I dont think we should give art such prominence. To me art is something that you do and the result gives pleasure to yourself. If it also gives pleasure to others - great, then you can proud of yourself. Whatever you do. Whether it is technical thing or painting, doesn’t matter. I think a car is also art creation. Someone has said a very good sentence: “when you clearly understand essence of things, see reasons and outcome, then we have possibility to estimate. Then all we have to do is to head our operations in to the right direction and we can create”.

P.S. read my signature, that also explains a lot :wink:

#200

If you don’t bother who you are are and what you’re capable of, then why do you even bother to live??