digital art
Mani Deli
aren't already. An image is of interest or it isn't. How it was done
is secondary. If an image attracts the viewer it is successful.
Many so-called fine artists today resent digital work because its
abstract quality can be achieved by most anyone and it is far more
interesting than most work presently accepted as fine art. What they
are really afraid of is that the digital media will reveal the utter
absurdity of Modern Academic Abstraction and negate the importance of
the schmiering around of many now famous personalities.
Not long from now digital output will also create a textural finish
and duplicate the impasto features of fashionable abstract painting.
This will encourage conservative modern art fundamentalists to further
hopelessly insist that the new media produces something which can't be
compared.
Five fractals are visually more interesting in every artistic aspect
than 90% of all modern abstraction. The only hope that the modern
abstract painter has is to carefully avoid looking at computer
abstraction and imagine that modern art is the same old game.
...no skill no art!
Want to get away from the indecipherable imbecilities and absurd pretensions of the modern art establishment?
Check out my web page http://www3.sympatico.ca/manideli/
Richard
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 15:50:26 -0400, Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca>
wrote:
>Computers will probably be the main means of producing artwork if they
>aren't already.
You can't predict the future.
Have you tried DRAWING on a computer?
Have you?
It is painfully slow, difficult, and awkward.
I used to use Adobe Illustrator.
Animators don't draw on computers, although they use computers to do
the simple task of filling shapes with colors, which probably used to
be done by unskilled laborers.
Computers still have severe limitations in many ways, and those won't
go away quickly. I used to program computers.
There is no intelligence, humanity, or magic in a computer.
There are only the software functions which a programmer slowly puts
together in painstaking detail over months and years. It's just a dumb
machine, basically, that can manipulate numbers faster than humans.
They used to predict that we'd be driving flying cars.
Where are the flying cars?
You can make better abstract art with computers, but anything is
better than modern art. So it's not even a small accomplishment.
-----= Posted via Newsfeed.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeed.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== 100,000 Groups! - 19 Servers! - Unlimited Download! =-----
WoN ereH
>You can't predict the future.
>Have you tried DRAWING on a computer?
>Have you?
>It is painfully slow, difficult, and awkward.
>I used to use Adobe Illustrator.
You obviously haven't attempted much with a computer. Photoshop and an
electronic drawing tablet makes drawing on the computer FABULOUS. Instantly
erase lines, whether drawn by mistake or in trying various alternatives. Using
distortion modes you can in seconds change rotation, perspective and size,
things that would take hours to do on paper and never give you the same
freedom, not to mention instantly changing brush sizes, brush sharpness, all
the various tools, cloning, masking, on and on, it is PERFECT for drawing
everything out in advance for painting, sculpting, etc. And it's FUN!
YMMV
Debra
Mark Miwird
says...
>You obviously haven't attempted much with a computer.
You're responding to yet another adolescent
rant from someone who hasn't a clue.
Drawing tablets have been available for
years. This dork obviously has never tried
using one - for that matter hasn't tried
much of anything, it would seem! Those
who use computers for much more complex
'drawings' than simple art work would
laugh at this simpleton's rants.
Mani Deli
>>Computers will probably be the main means of producing artwork if they
>>aren't already.
>
>Have you tried DRAWING on a computer?
Sure!
>It is painfully slow, difficult, and awkward.
Depends!
>I used to use Adobe Illustrator.
Try Photoshop or Painter. Bezier programs aren't good for freehand
style drawing in my opinnion.
>Animators don't draw on computers, although they use computers to do
>the simple task of filling shapes with colors, which probably used to
>be done by unskilled laborers.
>Computers still have severe limitations in many ways, and those won't
>go away quickly. I used to program computers.
>There is no intelligence, humanity, or magic in a computer.
Neither is there in any drawing instrument. It depends what you do
with it.
>You can make better abstract art with computers, but anything is
>better than modern art. So it's not even a small accomplishment.
I use the computer to refine my preliminary work. I do drawings and
painting notes. I input these with a scanner and do among other
things, variations, placement, sizing. This was all tedium that
previously had to be done by hand. I also refine the drawing and
color. I also use 3d to do modeling and poses, light and shade and
proportioning. The computer also influenced my ideas in a new way. .
Although I don't do original drawing on computer some do, I find
conventional material is easier and more speedily accurate but the
computer allows endless refinement formally unavailable.
I believe what counts is what is finally on the wall and whether it
pleases the viewer. How it was done, ones hope and intentions are of
no interest if that fails.
frankvo...@web.de
wrote:
>.... Those
>who use computers for much more complex
>'drawings' than simple art work would
>laugh at this simpleton's rants.
>
I do not laugh about the work of others. A few are quite interesting.
But I use the computer to generate drawings in the web by interactive
JAVA programs which allow a great lot of facilities to produce
drawings in real time by mouse interaction. Most of them are based on
the Op-art style. Build up your mind by having a look at:
Frank
Richard
On 11 Oct 2002 16:21:32 -0700, ma...@noemailever.com (Mark Miwird)
wrote:
>
>You're responding to yet another adolescent
>rant from someone who hasn't a clue.
>Drawing tablets have been available for
>years. This dork obviously has never tried
>using one - for that matter hasn't tried
>much of anything, it would seem! Those
>who use computers for much more complex
>'drawings' than simple art work would
>laugh at this simpleton's rants.
Shut up MeWeird. Yea, drawing tablets have been available since the
80's, but that doesn't mean they are anywhere near good enough to
replace traditional materials and methods. You're the one who is an
adolescant. You're the simpleton. Your attempt to seem smarter and
more knowledgable than me is pathetic and just reveals you to be a
jackass. You have nothing better to do than follow me around this
newsgroup.
Mark Miwird
>
>On 11 Oct 2002 16:21:32 -0700, ma...@noemailever.com (Mark Miwird)
>wrote:
>
>>.... Those
>>who use computers for much more complex
>>'drawings' than simple art work would
>>laugh at this simpleton's rants.
>
>I do not laugh about the work of others.
The comment you're responding to has nothing
to do with someone's art work. It was addressed
to the individual's posted comments here - otherwise
referred to as "this simpleton's rants."
DeeDee
thing! I love 'thought provoking' pictures ........ and yours sure are!
:-)
I see you like the human body, and parts. ;-)
Very Good!!
Hugs,
Dee
"Mani Deli" <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:admbqu81tmuvkpi5k...@4ax.com...