Am I really that out of the loop?

[enyawd72]

I saw an online contest for creating a new portrait of Johnny Depp Barnabas Collins in the same vein as the classic portrait from the series.

I would have loved to enter it, but I honestly couldn't even understand the rules. You had to download and use something called "assets" and templates, which I did, and I had no idea what the hell I was supposed to do with either of them.

That's the second or third art contest I haven't entered because of the computer requirements. Why can't you just create art the old fashioned way, scan it and submit it?

Does anybody NOT do art on a computer these days? Sure doesn't seem like it. I feel like a dinosaur sometimes.

[Mikey]

You feel like a dinosaur ?

The other day I had to go to the emergecy room ... All the people waiting in there were playing portable video games.

I mentioned it to the woman sitting next to me and she said they're not playing games, most are "texting"

I guess that means typing something

Weird ... just looking at them all made me think everybody was under somekind of mind control :)

[HardyGirl]

You feel like a dinosaur ?

The other day I had to go to the emergecy room ... All the people waiting in there were playing portable video games.

I mentioned it to the woman sitting next to me and she said they're not playing games, most are "texting"

I guess that means typing something

Weird ... just looking at them all made me think everybody was under somekind of mind control :)

I know, it reminds me of that Star Trek TNG episode "The Game". When it was raining for the 4th straight day a couple of weeks ago, I put a movie on for the kids to watch, and all of the staff that were there at the time pulled out their cell phones, almost simultaneously! I just sat w/ the kids shaking my head, and thinking, "Really?" :rolleyes:

[mazinz]

Weird ... just looking at them all made me think everybody was under somekind of mind control :)


They are. Take away that technology from them for a good half hour and watch them go into a fit almost like a drug withdrawal

[Mikey]

I know, it reminds me of that Star Trek TNG episode "The Game". When it was raining for the 4th straight day a couple of weeks ago, I put a movie on for the kids to watch, and all of the staff that were there at the time pulled out their cell phones, almost simultaneously! I just sat w/ the kids shaking my head, and thinking, "Really?" :rolleyes:

That's the one where Wesley is the only one left ?

I kinda like that one... A gulty pleasure :)

[samurainoir]

post the link, maybe one of us here can help you out.

Even if you create in traditional media, I'm sure that they require you to submit it electronically in a resolution, size and dimensions that they can use.

[huedell]

Take away technology and the advances it's given us, and you're back in the
Stone Age ....and without most of the luxuries that made those decades
that you DO approve of that much more enjoyable and easier to tackle.

You can't address today's advances w/out considering the ones from
the 17th century, the 18th, the 19th----from the 1950s to the 1980s

To deny modern day people modern luxuries such as checking their
e-mail, or chatting with friends from the workplace, or etc etc etc, seems hypocritical.

Oh---and I'm sure the irony that being disgusted with tech advances
while posting on the Net ...(and about TREK no less!)... isn't lost on anyone :)

[enyawd72]

Take away technology and the advances it's given us, and you're back in the
Stone Age ....and without most of the luxuries that made those decades
that you DO approve of that much more enjoyable and easier to tackle.

You can't address today's advances w/out considering the ones from
the 17th century, the 18th, the 19th----from the 1950s to the 1980s

To deny modern day people modern luxuries such as checking their
e-mail, or chatting with friends from the workplace, or etc etc etc, seems hypocritical.

Oh---and I'm sure the irony that being disgusted with tech advances
while posting on the Net ...(and about TREK no less!)... isn't lost on anyone :)

I never said I didn't approve of or were disgusted with any tech advances...only that I didn't understand some of them.
Whether you agree with it or not, the facts all indicate we are becoming a nation of dummies. When kids don't have to bother to learn how to write or spell correctly because the computer "fixes" everything for them, how is that a good thing? I've seen many examples of high school kids who are barely able to sign their own name.
Another problem with the net, is how it's making libraries obsolete. I can't tell you how many interesting books I've picked up simply because they were on the shelf. I wasn't looking for them, but discovered them. With the internet, there is no discovery. It only searches for what you tell it to.
Computers are great as a tool, but they've practically taken over every aspect of our lives. THAT'S what I have a problem with.

[kennermike]

I saw an online contest for creating a new portrait of Johnny Depp Barnabas Collins in the same vein as the classic portrait from the series.

I would have loved to enter it, but I honestly couldn't even understand the rules. You had to download and use something called "assets" and templates, which I did, and I had no idea what the hell I was supposed to do with either of them.

That's the second or third art contest I haven't entered because of the computer requirements. Why can't you just create art the old fashioned way, scan it and submit it?

Does anybody NOT do art on a computer these days? Sure doesn't seem like it. I feel like a dinosaur sometimes.
I agree with you

[kennermike]

I saw an online contest for creating a new portrait of Johnny Depp Barnabas Collins in the same vein as the classic portrait from the series.

I would have loved to enter it, but I honestly couldn't even understand the rules. You had to download and use something called "assets" and templates, which I did, and I had no idea what the hell I was supposed to do with either of them.

That's the second or third art contest I haven't entered because of the computer requirements. Why can't you just create art the old fashioned way, scan it and submit it?

Does anybody NOT do art on a computer these days? Sure doesn't seem like it. I feel like a dinosaur sometimes.

technology has gotten out of hand ,in terms of Art take Hollywood they are using computers for a every little thing and Im completely sick of it but I guess thats a bad example Hollywood is not Showart its showbusiness LOL.do things the old fashion way already
The whole texting thing is rediculas people walking around typing like mindless drons

[jessica]

I know, it reminds me of that Star Trek TNG episode "The Game". When it was raining for the 4th straight day a couple of weeks ago, I put a movie on for the kids to watch, and all of the staff that were there at the time pulled out their cell phones, almost simultaneously! I just sat w/ the kids shaking my head, and thinking, "Really?" :rolleyes:

i'd be the first to take out my cell phone, admittedly.

[4NDR01D]

In general, the people who complain about technology are the people who don't understand it or don't have it.

[Mikey]

In general, the people who complain about technology are the people who don't understand it or don't have it.

That's me on both accounts :)

[4NDR01D]

That's me on both accounts :)

It WAS me as well, until I got an iPhone, high speed internet (internet in general as I used to look down on "computer geeks"), HD TV, etc

[4NDR01D]

edit: double post

I really don't get the "Above it all" attitude that some people have towards technology. "Bah, facebook, stupid people sending messages back and forth, waste of friggin time, I don't even have a facebook account, therefore I'm better than the people that do blah blah blah", "Kids and their cell phones, always talking and texting blah blah blah", "Video games, kids always playing video games, when I was a kid I played scrabble blah blah blah".

[MegoScott]

I haven't used a paintbrush in 15 years. I should pick it up again, but I do love making art with a computer, and brother--That's where the money is.

I did take a long time to warm up to doing digital art. But after I graduated from school, freelance illustration was really tough, but jobs doing computer art were plentiful. An I quickly found I could do some things much better digitally. I barely understood how to use color when I was painting and now I make a living as a digital color artist.

[mazinz]

It is not so much the technology itself, in fact much of it has been a blessing in some respects (like video editing), but the symbiotic NEED that has been established is what most have issues with. You NEED your iphone, YOU NEED this tablet, you HAVE TO HAVE IT.

The tech is there, but the abuse and need comes in when it became such a mandatory part of life instead of something just for mild leisure. This is where I draw the line and have issue with it. Sorry for going off the original poster's topic a bit


enyawd72,
You are not out of the loop. If it makes you feel any better, this 20 year old girl of a friend of mine wants to go into photography, yet she NEVER took a picture with a REAL non digital camera. Has no idea about film, film types or even how to load it. I think that is more out of the loop than anything else

[enyawd72]

edit: double post

I really don't get the "Above it all" attitude that some people have towards technology.

I think too much technology makes people lazy and stupid, and there is mounting evidence that supports this.

I can write an entire paragraph without using spellcheck. Most people can't.
I can do basic math in my head faster than a person with a calculator on their cellphone.

[Mikey]

I think too much technology makes people lazy and stupid, and there is mounting evidence that supports this.

I can write an entire paragraph without using spellcheck. Most people can't.
I can do basic math in my head faster than a person with a calculator on their cellphone.

and when my electric and water goes off I can slaughter a groundhog for food and drink my own urine :)

[enyawd72]

and when my electric and water goes off I can slaughter a groundhog for food and drink my own urine :)

That's what I'm talking about!

We shall feast together on groundhog stew whilst the snivelling techies wait for their microwaves to come back on so they may cook their spoiled Totino's pizza rolls!

[jimsmegos]

Throwing in my two cents... In my own personal observations I've noticed two things that I will say bother me in regards to modern technology.

1. The more ways there are to do the math the more difficult it is to get the CORRECT answer. What I mean by that is the point that an artist may be the greatest with a brush and canvass and their end result is absolutely breathtaking. However the inability to translate it into proper pixels and resolution leaves it virtually worthless on the digital stage. A true waste. The same principle can be applied to both video and audio production.

And now observation #2:

2. Considering the nature of modern technology it is indeed SO much easier for one person to the work of ten the workplace environment has changed. Again this is my opinion alone from personal experience so take it as you will... Considering that reasoning it is to me understandable that people will spend more time developing and nurturing 'cyber relationships' with peers because that's the only place they can find them. If you are fortunate enough to work in an office that has several people that comprise a department imagine if you will doing just your job by yourself, all day, everyday. No one else to throw ideas off of, ask advice or opinions etc... Humans need interaction. And we will get it however we can; in the real world or the cyber. Sadly the cyber appears to be the more accessible due to the modern working environment. This need to maintain the bottom line while all the while taking away real human interaction is something I feel will lead to a very odd Matrix like society out of necessity.

Even we Mego lovers were lonely ships at sea prior to the internet and our beloved Mego Museum and its forums.

Again just my two cents.

[kennermike]

Throwing in my two cents... In my own personal observations I've noticed two things that I will say bother me in regards to modern technology.

1. The more ways there are to do the math the more difficult it is to get the CORRECT answer. What I mean by that is the point that an artist may be the greatest with a brush and canvass and their end result is absolutely breathtaking. However the inability to translate it into proper pixels and resolution leaves it virtually worthless on the digital stage. A true waste. The same principle can be applied to both video and audio production.

And now observation #2:

2. Considering the nature of modern technology it is indeed SO much easier for one person to the work of ten the workplace environment has changed. Again this is my opinion alone from personal experience so take it as you will... Considering that reasoning it is to me understandable that people will spend more time developing and nurturing 'cyber relationships' with peers because that's the only place they can find them. If you are fortunate enough to work in an office that has several people that comprise a department imagine if you will doing just your job by yourself, all day, everyday. No one else to throw ideas off of, ask advice or opinions etc... Humans need interaction. And we will get it however we can; in the real world or the cyber. Sadly the cyber appears to be the more accessible due to the modern working environment. This need to maintain the bottom line while all the while taking away real human interaction is something I feel will lead to a very odd Matrix like society out of necessity.

Even we Mego lovers were lonely ships at sea prior to the internet and our beloved Mego Museum and its forums.

Again just my two cents.

well said Jim as always

[MegoScott]

Dark Shadows: The Barnabas Portrait Project by $Moonbeam13 on deviantART (http://moonbeam13.deviantart.com/journal/Dark-Shadows-The-Barnabas-Portrait-Project-295136507?moodonly=1)

All due respect, I think you are over reacting to this.

Assests in this case is just a bunch of photographs they want you to use as inspiration or reference or whatever. There's no requirement you do anything digitally. You will undoubtedly be more successful if your work looks like their movie is all.

Templates in this case are guides they want you to use because they want it in one of sizes--square, tall, whatever. And they want their logo on it so they supplied a Photoshop file with the logo in the place they want it.

So all you have to do is make your painting, scan it in, crop it to the size they want and stick the logo on top of it in Photoshop. I'm sure Tim Burton would love to see your traditional media technique, that's how he does things too.

[MegoScott]

Oh and you better get busy, the deadline is tomorrow. :smiley1:

[MegoScott]

Their terminology is off-putting. "Reference" makes more sense than "assets". Assets are commonly parts that you would be required to use somehow, like a digital model or something, but that's not the case here. They could explain templates better too.

Those deviant art kids...

[jimsmegos]

Their terminology is off-putting. "Reference" makes more sense than "assets". Assets are commonly parts that you would be required to use somehow, like a digital model or something, but that's not the case here. They could explain templates better too.

Those deviant art kids...

My point exactly... the terminology is a real 'B" It's like that movie "Nell" with Jodie Foster. We just don't understand each other very well, Chickabee.

[MegoScott]

Here's a nice watercolor this person (http://www.rachaelrossman.com/the-blog/) did.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7099/6932395078_82bbee1398_c.jpg

[MegoScott]

Looking around on the web, I feel bad for Tim Burton judging this thing. He's going to have to sort through some real crap.

[Brazoo]

Well, commercial work needs to adhere to certain specs and guidelines - whether it's digital or not... In fact it would actually be MORE complex if you were trying to create commercially reproducible artwork in the pre-digital age.

enyawd72 - You've got awesome skills man!

Don't make the computer component so daunting that it holds you back - compared to what you already know it's easy - feel free to ask questions!

[Brazoo]

On one hand, I get it - because there IS a lot of bad art that is dependent on computers without much skill, but I think there's a HUGE difference between you and one of those dudes - because you HAVE SKILL.

So to YOU the computer is just another tool to make sure you're art looks the way you want!

[Captain Big Trousers]

Random thoughts:

I think a lot of really interesting art today is made by combining traditional media with digital trickery.

I haven't owned a mobile phone since 1998. It is possible.

I hate these modern "television" thingies. What ever happened to family hour, gathered around the radio?

I did have a laugh at a group of teen boys walking through the mall last week, all staring at their phone screens as they walked. :smiley1:

[enyawd72]

So all you have to do is make your painting, scan it in, crop it to the size they want and stick the logo on top of it in Photoshop. I'm sure Tim Burton would love to see your traditional media technique, that's how he does things too.

Well, why didn't they just say so? Jeez, that's like writing a fifty page manual on how to flip a light switch.

Honestly, I had no idea what I was supposed to do. I downloaded all the stuff they said to and it was just file after file of crap with no instructions on what to do with any of it.
It totally confused me to the point of giving up before I even started. Despite posting on here and a few other message boards, I am not tech savvy.
Dammit Jim, I'm a painter not a computer programmer!

[The Toyroom]

I love tech...it's all about the future, baby! (Though I am still peeved at the delay on the personal flight packs...)

[HardyGirl]

edit: double post

I really don't get the "Above it all" attitude that some people have towards technology. "Bah, facebook, stupid people sending messages back and forth, waste of friggin time, I don't even have a facebook account, therefore I'm better than the people that do blah blah blah", "Kids and their cell phones, always talking and texting blah blah blah", "Video games, kids always playing video games, when I was a kid I played scrabble blah blah blah".

I am the QUEEN of blah blah blah! I don't think I'm better than everyone else. And I obviously understand some level of technology to use a PC, maintain a website and use YouTube. However, I don't get the need people have to constantly talk on a phone, wherever they happen to be. Texting is something I will NEVER understand. I don't know who came up w/ the concept of typing on a phone, (I always thought phones were for talking!). If you're somewhere you can't talk out loud, you got no business being on the phone, in my opinion. I have a phone at home, and a phone at work, and an e-mail address. It's not like I'm hard to reach. The only time I use my cell is when I'm traveling, b/c my older brother worries about me. Other than that...:no:

And yes, I'm anti-Facebook!

[Mikey]

Was in walmart and seen what I thought was a crazy guy talking to himself.

Then I noticed he had a headphone earpiece and was apparently talking on the telephone in his ear.

Then I noticed other people with that thing in their ear too --- but they weren't talking .......

............. weird :)

[4NDR01D]

I've seen the future brother, and it is....WEIRD!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjhB6J23Qjs

[ctc]

>However the inability to translate it into proper pixels and resolution leaves it virtually worthless on the digital stage. A true waste.

It's a separate skill set. I still maintain that there isn't a correct way to do any art; it's all about the end result.

As for the tech thing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saPhxZZQCWk

Don C.

[kingdom warrior]

I'm a Traditional Illustrator but I understand the computer side of it, it's just a matter of sitting down and working through it.

I pencil and ink and paint traditionally, but I will scan and enhance, watermark,resize etc on my Mac. I don't color on the computer, just don't have the patience for it...I'd rather just do it the old school way.

A lot of those contest you need to stay clear of, most of them are Popularity contest. especially if it's through facebook and voting for pieces unless you have 4000 friends you have no shot against a kid who has a thousands of friends who are all voting for him or her.

I entered a Duran Duran contest last year and it was brutal,so many hacks trying to get votes but Duran Duran did make choices of their favs and I got Honorable mention by them.

I don't mind a pro using new tools especially when they MASTERED the traditional ones, It's the hacks who I have a problem with who when you turn off the computer, can't reproduce on paper or canvas what they boast they can do on a computer......anyone is a Rembrandt with Great computer software, but that does not make you an artist.......

[kingdom warrior]

It's a separate skill set. I still maintain that there isn't a correct way to do any art; it's all about the end result.

Don C.

Yes there is, there are Professionals and there are amateurs.
an Amateur clicks and uses cheats to get his work done

a Pro critically thinks what he needs to do to make his design work. his drawing may go through many stages to get there.

Learning to use the proper tools is the first place you start, Learning how to traditionally do art is how you understand
how the Masters did it. How light comes to play how to mix colors and how to fix your mistakes. once you master traditional you can then work
in Digital if you so choose to do it.

Just because I can look under the hood of a car does not make me a mechanic
Just because I know my daughter is sick does not make me a Doctor.

The end results may be the same but in the end the Pro will always do better
because he can do IT ALL THE TIME over and over he or she is trained to come up with new ideas that the amateur can not do...........

[Gorn Captain]

In general, the people who complain about technology are the people who don't understand it or don't have it.

Maybe they just can't wrap their heads around it (in which case it isn't their fault), or maybe they cannot afford it (again not their fault).

[Gorn Captain]

You had to download and use something called "assets"

Some assets are way better and simpler...
Into the Blue, 2005, Jessica Alba - Download Wallpaper | Wallpapers voor je Desktop (http://wallpapers-diq.net/nl_36_~_Into_the_Blue,_2005,_Jessica_Alba.html)

[ctc]

>Yes there is, there are Professionals and there are amateurs.

I disagree and agree with this. I think there are pros and amateurs, but I don't think the hardware seaprates them.

>an Amateur clicks and uses cheats to get his work done

True; but I think it shows in the work. That's why it's important to separate the ideas of "good" and "enjoyable." People tend to confuse them, so anything they like is de-facto good.

>a Pro critically thinks what he needs to do to make his design work.

THAT'S the key! There's a plan and a vision.... but I don't think it's how you get to your end-state that makes the dif; it's where that end-state is. Dip pen, computer, markers, finger paints.... it doesn't matter if it gets you where you want to go.

>Learning how to traditionally do art is how you understand how the Masters did it.

Yeah, but it's not a religion. You don't learn colour theory or rotations or perspective or which end of the pen goes in the ink because of some moral imperative or dogmatic tradition: you learn them becuse they work.

>once you master traditional you can then work in Digital if you so choose to do it.

This feels so bad to me 'cos I don't like computers, but.... there isn't a heirarchy of tool use. I don't have to master acrylics before being "allowed" to use watercolour or oils. They're different techniques and you can do them in whatever order you want, depending on what you hope to achieve. They share a lot of universal ideas.... like the aforementioned colour theory.... but they're not one interconnected whole. Oil is different from watercolour. Computer art is just another tool, separate from the rest.

I think part of the problem folks around here have with the CGI is that you've never seen any that doesn't suck. Overwrought movie effects and crappy comic colour that makes everything look plastic are the norm. I've seen some great computer stuff. (Mostly from Japan and Europe.) I've also seen how readily it becomes a crutch too.... but I've seen that with other techniques too. (Remember the 90's, where "draw like Jim Lee = success?")

>The end results may be the same

I don't think they are, but I don't think the tools or techniques denote that.

>but in the end the Pro will always do better because he can do IT ALL THE TIME over and over

Maybe; but everyone has an off day, or dries up.

>he or she is trained to come up with new ideas that the amateur can not do

THIS I disagree with a bunch. I think a lot of pros suffer from the need to do things "right," and end up doing the same things over and over. But this goes to the heart of my point: it's the underlying idea that I think marks the worth of the work.

Don C.

[Brazoo]

To me the debate about using digital mediums is different than what enyawd was originally talking about, because even if this was before computers existed he'd have to know how to create artwork to spec if he wanted to take on commercial work.

On professionalism, I think it's extremely important for professionals to understand technical skills that support their work. Look at it this way - serious professional musicians don't just play nice music - they have an understanding of the technical aspects of recording as well.

[Brazoo]

As for the debate about digitally created art instead of traditionally created art -

I can see how using digital techniques can make an artist lazy and cut corners - like correcting mistakes or making alterations could curb someone's drive to be able to master their craft without those techniques. You could say the same thing for people who use erasers though - there's not much difference - it's just another extension of eraser technology.

To me there's always going to be different camps of professional artists - there's the people who want to play with every tool in the toolbox - and there are the people who find creativity giving themselves limitations. To me they're just different paths - and I'm probably somewhere in between the two paths.

I agree that learning natural mediums and historical theory makes you a far better artist - but I think someone with those skills can work in any medium and do great work.

[Brazoo]

You can work in non-digital mediums and stay in the creative shallow end too - I think the difference is that a lot of people learn the basics of computer graphics and THINK they're in the deep end.

From what I've observed.

This artist is a great example - from what I know, Jonathan Bergeron didn't touch computers for years, but got a Wacom tablet and does incredible digital work now:

Here's some of his recent traditional paintings: The art of JONATHAN BERGERON - 2011 Paintings (http://www.johnnycrap.com/)

Here's some of his digital art: The art of JONATHAN BERGERON - Digital art (http://www.johnnycrap.com/digital-art)

[kingdom warrior]

>Yes there is, there are Professionals and there are amateurs.

I disagree and agree with this. I think there are pros and amateurs, but I don't think the hardware seaprates them.

>an Amateur clicks and uses cheats to get his work done

True; but I think it shows in the work. That's why it's important to separate the ideas of "good" and "enjoyable." People tend to confuse them, so anything they like is de-facto good.

>a Pro critically thinks what he needs to do to make his design work.

THAT'S the key! There's a plan and a vision.... but I don't think it's how you get to your end-state that makes the dif; it's where that end-state is. Dip pen, computer, markers, finger paints.... it doesn't matter if it gets you where you want to go.

>Learning how to traditionally do art is how you understand how the Masters did it.

Yeah, but it's not a religion. You don't learn colour theory or rotations or perspective or which end of the pen goes in the ink because of some moral imperative or dogmatic tradition: you learn them becuse they work.

>once you master traditional you can then work in Digital if you so choose to do it.

This feels so bad to me 'cos I don't like computers, but.... there isn't a heirarchy of tool use. I don't have to master acrylics before being "allowed" to use watercolour or oils. They're different techniques and you can do them in whatever order you want, depending on what you hope to achieve. They share a lot of universal ideas.... like the aforementioned colour theory.... but they're not one interconnected whole. Oil is different from watercolour. Computer art is just another tool, separate from the rest.

I think part of the problem folks around here have with the CGI is that you've never seen any that doesn't suck. Overwrought movie effects and crappy comic colour that makes everything look plastic are the norm. I've seen some great computer stuff. (Mostly from Japan and Europe.) I've also seen how readily it becomes a crutch too.... but I've seen that with other techniques too. (Remember the 90's, where "draw like Jim Lee = success?")

>The end results may be the same

I don't think they are, but I don't think the tools or techniques denote that.

>but in the end the Pro will always do better because he can do IT ALL THE TIME over and over

Maybe; but everyone has an off day, or dries up.

>he or she is trained to come up with new ideas that the amateur can not do

THIS I disagree with a bunch. I think a lot of pros suffer from the need to do things "right," and end up doing the same things over and over. But this goes to the heart of my point: it's the underlying idea that I think marks the worth of the work.

Don C.

Great points Don! agree with a lot you said.....:yes:

[kingdom warrior]

You can work in non-digital mediums and stay in the shallow end too - I think the difference is that a lot of people learn the basics of computer graphics and THINK they're in the deep end, creatively.

From what I've observed.

This artist is a great example - from what I know, Jonathan Bergeron didn't touch computers for years, but got a Wacom tablet and does incredible digital work now:

Here's some of his recent traditional paintings: The art of JONATHAN BERGERON - 2011 Paintings (http://www.johnnycrap.com/)

Here's some of his digital art: The art of JONATHAN BERGERON - Digital art (http://www.johnnycrap.com/digital-art)

See this is where Digital works here's a very talented painter who learned to work on a computer and the work is almost exactly like his painted work....the ONLY down side is there is no physical Original to hang in a gallery or sell.....the Hardcore collector who wants to own the original will never have it. Big time problem years from now. Art collectors want original art not xerox print outs....

Ask Roberto(Blue Meanie) if he wants to own a REAL comic page or just have a high quality print of a comic book page......and see what he says....

[MegoScott]

...anyone is a Rembrandt with Great computer software, but that does not make you an artist.......

Where can I get that software? Sounds awesome!

Seriously, it's not like there's a button in Photoshop that makes stuff look great. (Although we all know LENSE FLARE makes everything better...) If you have no sense of color or composition or proportion or whatever the computer doesn't help you. You are either an artist or you aren't, the medium doesn't matter. And when you can do something 100 times faster on a computer doesn't that help with the whole creative process?

I have a turn of the century travel poster on my living room wall. I stare at it all the time and marvel that it was done without Photoshop layers. The artist was undoubtedly talented and his technique with his materials was amazing, I could never touch it. And if he was working today he'd be using Photoshop and blowing people's minds.

I'm paraphrasing a friend of mine here: Anyone can learn to draw. Drawing is just a skill. It takes talent to do something good with it.

[samurainoir]

Just to pull the curtain back on this... Welcome to the age of influence rather than persuasion. This contest isn't really about the art (although crowd sourcing should in fact be the major topic all PRO designers and illustrators should be debating right now rather than tools).

I think the traditional Vs digital tools debate is moot. Even if you create traditionally, you need to be able to deliver digitally, we covered this. MegoScott is a terrific example of an artist who's job requires him to work digitally because that is where the animation industry has gone (and for the most part, monthly comics for the majors as well when it comes to colouring)... So if you don't work digitally, you don't get the work, Is that correct Scott? By definition, the difference between pro and amateur is that you get paid for your work.

The true purpose of these kind of contests is viral marketing... By entering into them and telling your friends to vote on them, you are also telling them that there is a Dark Shadows movie coming out starring Johnny Depp. The folks running this know that they will be receiving a ridiculous amount of unusable entries for their purposes, but it will be for the express purpose of directing traffic to their website or affiliate, not discovering the next big talent. As Earth 2 Chris mentioned in his Dark Knight thread, it's actually not votes that will ultimately decide... So why do they want you to ask all of your friends and family to vote? If you are inclined to enter, you are likely already a fan with a similar demographic of peers. Sad to say, but if you can't figure it out, you are likely outside the target demographic anyways. Particularly if this is the deviantArt crowd we are talking about.

Remember when they used to announce open casting calls for roles? They had them for any number of in development movies and tv shows. I seem to recall Wonder Woman had one years ago. But that s not how Hollywood generally works when casting a lead... Even if you are an unknown, to even get a real shot you need an agent to book you an audition. However, it creates a marketing opportunity that grabbed headlines and gave you a visual and a bite for Entertainment tonight.

Similarly, there is already an inter-company network of internal and external professional illustrators that they can call in to churn out t-shirt designs and happy meal packaging without going through the trouble and hassles of holding a contest. Seriously... they have Jose Garcia Lopez, do I need to say anymore?

So... They do not need to persuade you to tell your friends... They are influencing you to market for them. For free. Welcome to the world of social media.

[Mikey]

For me, as long as something is nice and I like it I don't care if it's been painted or digitally created.

Paintings are just a mess of color designed to fool your eyes --- so is digital art.

[Brazoo]

See this is where Digital works here's a very talented painter who learned to work on a computer and the work is almost exactly like his painted work....the ONLY down side is there is no physical Original to hang in a gallery or sell.....the Hardcore collector who wants to own the original will never have it. Big time problem years from now. Art collectors want original art not xerox print outs....

Ask Roberto(Blue Meanie) if he wants to own a REAL comic page or just have a high quality print of a comic book page......and see what he says....


In this case I believe Bergeron's digital work is for commercial gigs - so I don't think his intention was to sell original art for this stuff - but I get your point.

Obviously digital art has to be printed, so to me you have to compare it to print media art, not originals. I don't know if Roberto is interested in anything other than original art - he might not like ANY kind of prints (lithography, woodcuts, letterpress, screenprinting, etching...)

I think you're really underestimating the art market that exists for high quality digital prints. There's a huge and growing market for giclée prints.

Do I personally like giclées over other printing techniques or originals? No. Actually most of the art I own is screenprinted - and even then I prefer work that was created FOR screenprinting and printed by the artist.

My point being that everyone has personal likes and dislikes for different mediums. I know people who LOVE giclées, because they can't afford original work, but they love that they still have collector value - they're not just mass produced offset posters.

[MegoScott]

MegoScott is a terrific example of an artist who's job requires him to work digitally because that is where the animation industry has gone (and for the most part, monthly comics for the majors as well when it comes to colouring)... Is that correct Scott?



I dunno, I'm kind of a hack myself. I have to admit that 15 years in digital art has killed my traditional chops. Plus doing background painting and color design is kind of a weird specialty. I'm constantly painting other people's pencil drawings. All that time I spent learning to draw...

But still I'm good at what I do and it's fun and satisfying to be part of a creative team.

[kingdom warrior]

I dunno, I'm kind of a hack myself. I have to admit that 15 years in digital art has killed my traditional chops. Plus doing background painting and color design is kind of a weird specialty. I'm constantly painting other people's pencil drawings. All that time I spent learning to draw...

But still I'm good at what I do and it's fun and satisfying to be part of a creative team.

Scott I saw your Digital stuff you ain't no hack....that takes a lot of skill to paint backgrounds for animation......no easy task

[jimsmegos]

>However the inability to translate it into proper pixels and resolution leaves it virtually worthless on the digital stage. A true waste.

It's a separate skill set. I still maintain that there isn't a correct way to do any art; it's all about the end result.

As for the tech thing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saPhxZZQCWk

Don C.

I agree with your point. What I was saying that if you are missing the skills or don't know someone who can convert your hardcopy into the proper digital file, the piece is unusable for the project.

[Brazoo]

Just to pull the curtain back on this... Welcome to the age of influence rather than persuasion. This contest isn't really about the art (although crowd sourcing should in fact be the major topic all PRO designers and illustrators should be debating right now rather than tools).

I think the traditional Vs digital tools debate is moot. Even if you create traditionally, you need to be able to deliver digitally, we covered this. MegoScott is a terrific example of an artist who's job requires him to work digitally because that is where the animation industry has gone (and for the most part, monthly comics for the majors as well when it comes to colouring)... Is that correct Scott?

The true purpose of these kind of contests is viral marketing... By entering into them and telling your friends to vote on them, you are also telling them that there is a Dark Shadows movie coming out starring Johnny Depp. The folks running this know that they will be receiving a ridiculous amount of unusable entries for their purposes, but it will be for the express purpose of directing traffic to their website or affiliate, not discovering the next big talent. As Earth 2 Chris mentioned in his Dark Knight thread, it's actually not votes that will ultimately decide... So why do they want you to ask all of your friends and family to vote? If you are inclined to enter, you are likely already a fan with a similar demographic of peers.

Remember when they used to announce open casting calls for roles? They had them for any number of in development movies and tv shows. I seem to recall Wonder Woman had one years ago. But that s not how Hollywood generally works when casting a lead... Even if you are an unknown, to even get a real shot you need an agent to book you an audition. However, it creates a marketing opportunity that grabbed headlines and gave you a visual and a bite for Entertainment tonight.

Similarly, there is already an inter-company network of internal and external professional illustrators that they can call in to churn out t-shirt designs and happy meal packaging without going through the trouble and hassles of holding a contest. Seriously... they have Jose Garcia Lopez, do I need to say anymore?

So... They do not need to persuade you to tell your friends... They are influencing you to market for them. Welcome to the world of social media.


Haha - I almost started post about this about this about three times now, and stopped myself because it seemed to open a whole other can of worms...

I agree - crowd sourcing IS a horrible bi-product of modern technology that devalues art much more than anything else about the digital age.

One other thing to keep in mind, is that ANYTHING you enter into these contests you usually give up your ownership rights. In this case the intellectual property is owned by WB anyway - so it's not a big deal - but in some cases you could be giving up work you fully created, if you don't watch it.

Big picture - at best you're getting practice creating work for an assignment, likely for free. You're being used for marketing, not for your art skill. Personally, I think enyawd is better than that - from what I've seen.

[kingdom warrior]

In this case I believe Bergeron's digital work is for commercial gigs - so I don't think his intention was to sell original art for this stuff - but I get your point.

Obviously digital art has to be printed, so to me you have to compare it to print media art, not originals. I don't know if Roberto is interested in anything other than original art - he might not like ANY kind of prints (lithography, woodcuts, letterpress, screenprinting, etching...)

I think you're really underestimating the art market that exists for high quality digital prints. There's a huge and growing market for giclée prints.

Do I personally like giclées over other printing techniques or originals? No. Actually most of the art I own is screenprinted - and even then I prefer work that was created FOR screenprinting and printed by the artist.

My point being that everyone has personal likes and dislikes for different mediums. I know people who LOVE giclées, because they can't afford original work, but they love that they still have collector value - they're not just mass produced offset posters.

I hear ya, giclées are high end prints when you can't own the original.....but if you're an art collector you will never be satisfied with this.....but i get you...:)

[kingdom warrior]

Where can I get that software? Sounds awesome!

Seriously, it's not like there's a button in Photoshop that makes stuff look great. (Although we all know LENSE FLARE makes everything better...) If you have no sense of color or composition or proportion or whatever the computer doesn't help you. You are either an artist or you aren't, the medium doesn't matter. And when you can do something 100 times faster on a computer doesn't that help with the whole creative process?

I have a turn of the century travel poster on my living room wall. I stare at it all the time and marvel that it was done without Photoshop layers. The artist was undoubtedly talented and his technique with his materials was amazing, I could never touch it. And if he was working today he'd be using Photoshop and blowing people's minds.

I'm paraphrasing a friend of mine here: Anyone can learn to draw. Drawing is just a skill. It takes talent to do something good with it.


Scott, I was being sarcastic when I said that little Rembrandt thing lol. but I'm pointing out artist who without that software come nowhere close to doing what they do on a piece of paper or Canvas. for me. that's a cheat. Yes i understand that it's another tool, but if that tool did not exist either that artist strings along as a hack or really sits down and learns his craft the hard way by drawing and painting all the time..........

I'm not in any way speaking of the Pro who decides to use digital software

[ctc]

>What I was saying that if you are missing the skills or don't know someone who can convert your hardcopy into the proper digital file, the piece is unusable for the project.

True; and I think a lot of the rift between traditionalists and digitalists does a disservice to both in this regard. As an artist, you always want to be ADDING to your repitoire. The more techniques you master, the better the finished product.

As a comic guy, I find one of the great things about digital is that anyone can produce a comic and get it out there for folks to see. No publisher, no printer, no real cost. (Except bandwidth.) 'Course that means a lot of really, REALLY bad stuff gets out there; but that's more than made up for by the good stuff that would never have been seen otherwise. Even the bad stuff can have merit too. I've seen a lot of comics with awesome ideas, characters, scenes.... even though the person doing them is a horrible artist, or cruddy writer.... or both!

Don C.

[kingdom warrior]

>the difference between pro and amateur is that you get paid for your work.

No, the difference is you take pride in learning your craft, can take a critique (without crying when your art directer rips apart your work) and you can deliver on time to meet tight deadlines.

That's a Pro

Even a Hack can get paid for a bad job done....look up Rob Liefield....

[MegoScott]

But I don't understand how is it a cheat? Sitting down to learn oil painting techniques and sitting down to learn Fractal Painter are different sides of the same coin. It's just learning to manipulate a medium. The fundamentals of drawing don't change from paper to digital tablet, the fundamentals of color aren't limited to tubes of acrylic paint.

[samurainoir]

I dunno, I'm kind of a hack myself. I have to admit that 15 years in digital art has killed my traditional chops. Plus doing background painting and color design is kind of a weird specialty. I'm constantly painting other people's pencil drawings. All that time I spent learning to draw...

But still I'm good at what I do and it's fun and satisfying to be part of a creative team.

But my understanding is, that just like the finished interior colour work in monthly comics, no one paints colour traditionally anymore unless you have a grant from the National Film Board of Canada, and even then they think you are nuts. (all the animators I know up here are all in the 3-d game).

Unless you're name is Alex Ross or similar, and even then I don't think there is anyone currently in comics who does the labour intensive task of traditionally painting 22 pages of mainstream comics a month.

Getting work In the monthly grind these days means colouring digitally if you are a colour artist. Otherwise you don't get the work, you don't get paid. You don't get to call yourself a pro.

Pro gets paid
Amateur doesn't
By definition.
Tools put money in your pocket or they don't.

Commercial artist is professionally paid to deliver a work that is generally consumed as reproduction. The fact that a market has sprung up on original comics art is gravy... For that particular industry. Try asking for you art back in advertising, commercial design or storyboarding after you've delivered it to your client... And better yet, try and Turn around and sell it on ebay and see what your client thinks given that they paid you for that art already. (again though, digital has changed the rules)

Anyone who's ever seen Greg Horn at a convention sees how many prints he sells at twenty bucks a pop. He says it's like printing your own money. On top of that, have you seen how much of his images grace product? The royalties on that far outshines whatever he would have made on original art... and there are plenty of examples of his traditional art out there, but his career did not take off until digital. No amount of railing against digital erases the fact that he has a portfolio of clients that would make most ad agencies wet themselves.

Given that Blue Meanie tastes run towards the vintage art and period. I would hazard a guess and say that those pieces he's most interested (outside of convention sketches) have most likely left the hands of the artists long ago, and it's the art dealers that are the ones making the real cheddar off of it. It's an all too common story, which is why many older artist are finding a market in making recreations of work they are most associated with.

Sad to say, but money talks and is the only measure between whether you deserve to call yourself pro and am, not tools.

I've run into too many ridiculously talented artists who just couldn't adapt... Including one chap I met recently that rattled off a list of jobs and clients that certainly impressed me to no end, being a huge fanboy of old school illustration. I just about wept when I heard that he's driving a bus... And no longer a professional artist. He even laughed his *** off at me when I asked him about original art.

[MegoScott]

I took a stab at coloring comics. Even with a computer it's a STAGGERING amount of work. It may not be to everyone's taste, but it's pretty impressive what those guys can pull off under ridiculous deadlines.

Actually, the computer has made that work way more intense than it ever was because of what you can do. I'm sure the publishers want all the bells and whistles, all the FX they can get out of the artist.

[kingdom warrior]

But I don't understand how is it a cheat? Sitting down to learn oil painting techniques and sitting down to learn Fractal Painter are different sides of the same coin. It's just learning to manipulate a medium. The fundamentals of drawing don't change from paper to digital tablet, the fundamentals of color aren't limited to tubes of acrylic paint.

Again for the Hack it's a Cheat, as an Illustrator I have come across tons of artist who take a pic, scan it then change it to a line drawing and then color it and say I'm an artist......really???? How so is that?? I have a good friend who's an Art Director.....one of the things he does to guys who ports are weak is he pulls out a piece of paper and tells them to draw something gives them about 20 minutes to come up with something.

He wants to evaluate their drawing skills with a pencil and paper and coming up with Ideas on the fly.......a Pro who knows how to work quickly can do something an amateur cannot plain and simple. it's nice that you have 15 nice art pieces....now how long did it take you to do them? and show me the process of how you came up with it.....I want to know you can come up with something in a few days not 6months. He told me you'd be surprised how many guys can't draw to save their lives and they're coming in for positions working on big time accounts, He said I'm not going to hand a Kid who can barely draw an account that's due in the morning if his computer goes down, I have to be assured that he can deliver hardcopy if need be, how's he gonna do that if he has no art skills to begin with?

[Brazoo]

Methinks 200 years ago this would be an argument about artists who buy commercially available brushes and paints, and artists who make them themselves.

I think it's true that some people NEED to stand on one leg and cross their arms over their head and really struggle to create something they consider worthy - and I think sometimes people are genuinely more impressed by artists who take the long road.

When I thought Chris Ware did all his ornate decorations and crazy typography using a computer I liked it, but I was floored when I found out he did it all using non-digital techniques.

For some reason, that made a difference to me. So, while I'm basically on-side with MegoScott - despite my logic - I think I also can agree with kingdom warrior's instincts here to some degree.

I also agree with MegoScott that creating digital art can be just as complex and difficult as creating art in any other medium.

Also, for the record - I think you both make great art.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to designing a crappy website in Illustrator...

[kingdom warrior]

Methinks 200 years ago this would be an argument about artists who buy commercially available brushes and paints, and artists who make them themselves.

I think it's true that some people NEED to stand on one leg and cross their arms over their head and really struggle to create something they consider worthy - and I think sometimes people are genuinely more impressed by artists who take the long road.

When I thought Chris Ware did all his ornate decorations and crazy typography using a computer I liked it, but I was floored when I found out he did it all using non-digital techniques.

For some reason, that made a difference to me. So, while I'm basically on-side with MegoScott - despite my logic - I think I also can agree with kingdom warrior's instincts here to some degree.

I also agree with MegoScott that creating digital art can be just as complex and difficult as creating art in any other medium.

Also, for the record - I think you both make great art.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to designing a crappy website in Illustrator...

Scott sees it from the Pro view which I totally agree with. it's not easy to work with those tools BUT the fact that he WAS a traditional artist in the first place gives him the advantage that a young person or hack who has NOT dedicated to learning the traditional ways first.

[Brazoo]

I've run into too many ridiculously talented artists who just couldn't adapt... Including one chap I met recently that rattled off a list of jobs and clients that certainly impressed me to no end, being a huge fanboy of old school illustration. I just about wept when I heard that he's driving a bus... And no longer a professional artist. He even laughed his *** off at me when I asked him about original art.


Agreed! I have a friend who does incredible commercial illustrations - who should be earning 100 times what he is now and be a lot more well known - but he was such a technophobe for so long that it really held back his career. He actually does a lot of work with a computer in the art field now, but less creative work that he should be able to do.

It's not JUST about creating art digitally or non-digitally, I think if you want to work commercially, you need to network, market yourself, know how to control the quality of your work in print and online AND for your archives/portfolio...

And I guess someone could just get lucky and you could make enough to just pay people to do that stuff for you...

Personally, I think it's more practical to just get a computer and take a few hours and learn this stuff. Scanning art, making it look good - checking the colours and levels - knowing what kinds of files to use where - trust me - it's NOT that hard.

[Brazoo]

Scott sees it from the Pro view which I totally agree with. it's not easy to work with those tools BUT the fact that he WAS a traditional artist in the first place gives him the advantage that a young person or hack who has NOT dedicated to learning the traditional ways first.

I agree that you need a foundation before you can do great quality work. I think it would be hard to get a solid foundation if you started creating art with a digital medium. I don't know if it would be impossible - maybe I just lack the vision to see it.

[kingdom warrior]

It's not JUST about creating art digitally or non-digitally, I think if you want to work commercially, you need to network, market yourself, know how to control the quality of your work in print and online AND for your archives/portfolio...

And I guess someone could just get lucky and you could make enough to just pay people to do that stuff for you...

Personally, I think it's more practical to just get a computer and take a few hours and learn this stuff. Scanning art, making it look good - checking the colours and levels - knowing what kinds of files to use where - trust me - it's NOT that hard.

Yup,Yup and Yup.......it's not hard at all actually editing your work is just as important as doing the actual work.....

[Brazoo]

Using photography as an example, I think you can learn about composition, use of light and shadow, colour theory - all the foundational concepts you need for any art medium. Like, you don't NEED to learn to draw or paint to be a great photographer.... Even though photography is modern technology. So I'm not sure if it's different than using digital mediums. Most digital mediums imitate or make use of other mediums to some degree - so it's hard to sift through for me.

[Brazoo]

Yup,Yup and Yup.......it's not hard at all actually editing your work is just as important as doing the actual work.....

Yeah - sorry, I didn't mean to imply that YOU didn't know that - I know you do!

I was just making a general point - hopefully trying to encourage enyawd not to think of learning this stuff as such stumbling block.

[kingdom warrior]

Yeah - sorry, I didn't mean to imply that YOU didn't know that - I know you do!

I was just making a general point - hopefully trying to encourage enyawd not to think of learning this stuff as such stumbling block.

Hehehehe I know what you meant :grin:

[MegoScott]

Scott sees it from the Pro view which I totally agree with. it's not easy to work with those tools BUT the fact that he WAS a traditional artist in the first place gives him the advantage that a young person or hack who has NOT dedicated to learning the traditional ways first.

It sounds to me like your real problem is with lazy, naive young artists looking for shortcuts. :smiley1: agreed!

[samurainoir]

He told me you'd be surprised how many guys can't draw to save their lives and they're coming in for positions working on big time accounts, He said I'm not going to hand a Kid who can barely draw an account that's due in the morning if his computer goes down, I have to be assured that he can deliver hardcopy if need be, how's he gonna do that if he has no art skills to begin with?

okay, I'll bite.

What furshuluggin industry could you possibly be talking about where a "Big Account" client accepts something hand drawn as a deliverable outside of initial design and conceptual stages? Most luxury product these days are photography based... Just look at the world around you in billboards and magazines. Big accounts like Cars, Travel, banking, toys, Dining, cosmetics, clothing, shoes, movies, food... Photoshop rules the roost. Packaging, fonts, logos, typography... All digital. Even traditionally illustrated stuff generally gets passed through illustrator and photoshop before delivery for either major or minor revision, and they certainly don't go to print or live online on their own.

If you're talking about illustrations for licensed product... The busiest guys up here (who are also sometimes a comics company) are delivering coloured Digital To their clients even if the original art is hand drawn.

and the straw argument of what if your computer goes down honestly holds about as much water as what if you spill coffee on your drawing. At least you've likely backed up remotely online if you are a professional (dropbox) and we live in a society where we are surrounded by computers. I don't know any household or office environment that doesn't have multiple machines.

[kingdom warrior]

Using photography as an example, I think you can learn about composition, use of light and shadow, colour theory - all the foundational concepts you need for any art medium. Like, you don't NEED to learn to draw or paint to be a great photographer.... Even though photography is modern technology. So I'm not sure if it's different than using digital mediums. Most digital mediums imitate or make use of other mediums to some degree - so it's hard to sift through for me.

I think it goes hand in hand, if you're an artist you should take photography 101
I can here my College professor saying Reference! Reference! Reference! don't act like you know how to draw something look at it and take a picture of it, if you don't have a photographic memory.....lol

Alex Ross's career took off once he started working from his own photos so did painter Olivia and Patrick Nagel..........

[ctc]

>no one paints colour traditionally anymore unless you have a grant from the National Film Board of Canada, and even then they think you are nuts. (all the animators I know up here are all in the 3-d game).

There are some diehards out there. Remember that a lot of the drift in technique happens for a lot of reasons. Digital became the thing ‘cos most print shops are digital.... it’s cheaper and easier than having plates made, separations, etchings, movable type.... Producers thought to remove the “middleman” by producing strictly digital work, since it’s gonna end up that way. I kinda suspect that’s why the digital colouring done in places like Japan and Europe (especially France and Italy) looks so good whereas ours doesn’t: those places had traditions of high quality colouring, facilitated by more complex printing being the norm. It was easier to adapt. For us, digital colouring meant altering our normal, flat colours (which look fine in the old school, 4-colour, low res days) to the larger palette and subtler effects of digital. (Creating, for the LONGEST time a muddy, urethaned mess.)

Sometimes the push comes from elsewhere, like higher up. A lot of animation companies went CGI ‘cos it’s easier and cheaper. It also tends to LOOK it; but I chalk it up to being the modern equivalent of HB’s “limited animation” techniques: a way to churn out product for the more voluminous tv market.

....but for everyone else, the beautiful thing about the digital age is that you have a choice: I can do one chapter of my book as watercolour, one B&W inks, acrylic, airbrush, digital, marker and pencil.... and it all comes out of the print shop the same. ‘Course, the trick is adjusting the computer bits so’s to make it look like the original.... but like I said, that’s another skill set. I’d bet the main reason you don’t see more old school techniques from the Medium Two is ‘cos it doesn’t fit what the current idea of “correct” is for comic colour.

>I have come across tons of artist who take a pic, scan it then change it to a line drawing and then color it and say I'm an artist......really????

You can do that without a computer:

http://bleachness.livejournal.com/446299.html

I think that’s more a measure of the artist than the tools.

>Scanning art, making it look good - checking the colours and levels - knowing what kinds of files to use where - trust me - it's NOT that hard.

Depends on what you’re doing. I like to stick to the same techniques, and print shop because I’ve already got things down to where I want them. It’s not as hard as, oh.... watercolours, but it’s definitely a new skill and brings with it a new set of challenges.

>I think it would be hard to get a solid foundation if you started creating art with a digital medium.

You could. It’s like any other art form. I think people consider it a cheat ‘cos I can have the computer do my rotations, light effects, shadows.... I don’t have to really understand how that stuff works to pull it off. But I think you get the equivalent with TRADITIONAL art too. I’m thinking of comics in the 90's; how many guys would draw like Jim Lee without any real understanding of why they were putting stuff where they did. “Draw faces like this!” ‘Course, how much of Jim Lee was the same; “Art Adams does crosshatching like this, so if I do MORE of it, that’s good right?” You can go further back and trace the “Wood to Buschema” genealogy. It’s like having a computer do your hilighting: you put the flare here and the penumbra there because that’s the template, but you don’t know why.

Don C.

[kingdom warrior]

okay, I'll bite.

What furshuluggin industry could you possibly be talking about where a "Big Account" client accepts something hand drawn as a deliverable outside of initial design and conceptual stages? Most luxury product these days are photography based... Just look at the world around you in billboards and magazines. Big accounts like Cars, Travel, Dining, cosmetics, clothing, shoes, movies, food... Photoshop rules the roost. Packaging, fonts, logos, typography... All digital. Even traditionally illustrated stuff generally gets passed through illustrator and photoshop before delivery.

If you're talking about illustrations for licensed product... The busiest guys up here (who are also a comics company) are delivering coloured Digital To their clients even if the original art is hand drawn.

and the straw argument of what if your computer goes down honestly holds about as much water as what if you spill coffee on your drawing. At least you've likely backed up remotely online if you are a professional, and we live in a society where we are surrounded by computers.
Edit******

Sorry Ed, I wasn't clear with my thoughts didn't explain it properly.....

Oh and FYI I've been working in advertising as a Freelancer for 20 years, I don't need advertising 101 but thanks for throwing all that info for those who are not...... are you in the biz?

He does it to guys who's ports are questionable as you may know, in the first stages of commercial work. a comp is done by hand or done digitally. I know I do them....and Idea starts with an idea from the art director a comp is then drawn before you bring in a photographer to shoot a clients product....or you do an in house mock up ad.....time is money you don't pay a photographer to do the grunt work he shoots what the art director tells him to do.

Really????? all artist back up their stuff? you know that for a fact? you'd be surprised how many artist don't do that. I hear my Art Director tell everyone to make sure they back up their work when doing it on the computer and how many times they forget to do it........artist are poor little bunch who are lucky if they have more than one computer.

and No not every household has two computers.......not everyone has it like that....


Steve.

[enyawd72]

This thread kind of derailed from my original intent. I wasn't trying to start a debate about computer vs. traditional art. That said, I do find it humorous when someone looks at my work and asks what program I used to create it.

Personally, I've never been able to embrace computer art. To me it's just not the same because it lacks that human touch. It's impersonal. Look at animation. Today's animation is so slick and perfect, but it doesn't inspire the same kind of awe that looking at a Fleischer cartoon, or a Disney film like Snow White.

I collect Bowen statues and busts, and you can see a difference in the statues Randy sculpts by hand vs. some of his team that do digital sculptures.
The digital sculpts are perfect. They're slick and symmetrical. They are also often soulless. I can't even describe what they lack, but something's just "off". It's kind of like digital music. A lot of it sounds sterile. It just doesn't have that richness of sound you get from old recordings, flaws and all.

Guess I'm just old.

[Brazoo]

I think it goes hand in hand, if you're an artist you should take photography 101
I can here my College professor saying Reference! Reference! Reference! don't act like you know how to draw something look at it and take a picture of it, if you don't have a photographic memory.....lol

Alex Ross's career took off once he started working from his own photos so did painter Olivia and Patrick Nagel..........

Ah okay - so we're specifically talking about painting and drawing though.

Like, I think it's probably valuable for a photographer to go through the motions of learning analog photography for the discipline of it - but there's little question that this idea is going to be very quaint one day soon. The same way NOBODY today is saying you 'you need to learn to make daguerreotypes if you want to learn the fundamentals of photography."

Anyway - maybe I'm loosing my own point here...




okay, I'll bite.

What furshuluggin industry could you possibly be talking about where a "Big Account" client accepts something hand drawn as a deliverable outside of initial design and conceptual stages? Most luxury product these days are photography based... Just look at the world around you in billboards and magazines. Big accounts like Cars, Travel, banking, toys, Dining, cosmetics, clothing, shoes, movies, food... Photoshop rules the roost. Packaging, fonts, logos, typography... All digital. Even traditionally illustrated stuff generally gets passed through illustrator and photoshop before delivery for either major or minor revision, and they certainly don't go to print or live online on their own.

If you're talking about illustrations for licensed product... The busiest guys up here (who are also sometimes a comics company) are delivering coloured Digital To their clients even if the original art is hand drawn.

and the straw argument of what if your computer goes down honestly holds about as much water as what if you spill coffee on your drawing. At least you've likely backed up remotely online if you are a professional (dropbox) and we live in a society where we are surrounded by computers.

I agree - and I also want to compliment you on your MAD speak!

[kingdom warrior]

It sounds to me like your real problem is with lazy, naive young artists looking for shortcuts. :smiley1: agreed!

YUP!!!!! :smiley1:

[kingdom warrior]

Personally, I've never been able to embrace computer art. To me it's just not the same because it lacks that human touch. It's impersonal. Look at animation. Today's animation is so slick and perfect, but it doesn't inspire the same kind of awe that looking at a Fleischer cartoon, or a Disney film like Snow White.

I collect Bowen statues and busts, and you can see a difference in the statues Randy sculpts by hand vs. some of his team that do digital sculptures.
The digital sculpts are perfect. They're slick and symmetrical. They are also often soulless. I can't even describe what they lack, but something's just "off". It's kind of like digital music. A lot of it sounds sterile. It just doesn't have that richness of sound you get from old recordings, flaws and all.

Guess I'm just old.
See, back in the olden days (old man voice)when the Fleisher/Famous studios and Disney studios did animation, It was ALL hand done, the rotoscoping was hand done so yes there was a human element, they were under pressure to do it right because on the big screen you can see mistakes very clearly. Disney made sure he got many top guys of the day to paint the backgrounds so there is a lot of love behind that work that many of those illustrators took pride in doing. Disney did a Great job in recapturing that magic when it had it's great run in the 90's

I kinda marvel at how the Superman cartoons done in the 1940's by the Fleisher/Famous studios still have never been topped by any of the modern incarnations of Superman cartoons. the WB Superman of the 90's was good but no where near as good as the 40's version.

[Brazoo]

This thread kind of derailed from my original intent. I wasn't trying to start a debate about computer vs. traditional art. That said, I do find it humorous when someone looks at my work and asks what program I used to create it.

Personally, I've never been able to embrace computer art. To me it's just not the same because it lacks that human touch. It's impersonal. Look at animation. Today's animation is so slick and perfect, but it doesn't inspire the same kind of awe that looking at a Fleischer cartoon, or a Disney film like Snow White.

I collect Bowen statues and busts, and you can see a difference in the statues Randy sculpts by hand vs. some of his team that do digital sculptures.
The digital sculpts are perfect. They're slick and symmetrical. They are also often soulless. I can't even describe what they lack, but something's just "off". It's kind of like digital music. A lot of it sounds sterile. It just doesn't have that richness of sound you get from old recordings, flaws and all.

Guess I'm just old.

I completely get what you're saying. Of my friends I'm known as the curmudgeon who hates technology. Seriously, my closest friends nicknamed me "Pops" - and these are people my own age!

I'm the last person to advocate that you change the way you work, but in the old days painters had to take photos and slides of their paintings to show galleries their work - without tons of photography skills and expensive equipment or the help of a photographer you couldn't get good results. So in this case the digital technology is cheaper, the quality is better, and the artist (even one with limited basic skills) has WAY more control.

I don't see a downside.

In the pre-digital days if you did a painting for a publication you'd still have to create work within certain specifications. You'd still need to learn a few technical terms. If anything with computers you need to learn less terms. Besides, pre-digital colour management sucked.

[Brazoo]

Please don't get held back from doing what you want again - feel free to PM me with questions. I'm sure others on here feel the same way!

(Though, I do caution you about entering a lot of contests - as samurai pointed out.)

[samurainoir]

Edit******

Sorry Ed, I wasn't clear with my thoughts didn't explain it properly.....

Oh and FYI I've been working in advertising as a Freelancer for 20 years, I don't need advertising 101 but thanks for throwing all that info for those who are not...... are you in the biz?

He does it to guys who's ports are questionable as you may know, in the first stages of commercial work. a comp is done by hand or done digitally. I know I do them....and Idea starts with an idea from the art director a comp is then drawn before you bring in a photographer to shoot a clients product....or you do an in house mock up ad.....time is money you don't pay a photographer to do the grunt work he shoots what the art director tells him to do.

Really????? all artist back up their stuff? you know that for a fact? you'd be surprised how many artist don't do that. I hear my Art Director tell everyone to make sure they back up their work when doing it on the computer and how many times they forget to do it........artist are poor little bunch who are lucky if they have more than one computer.

and No not every household has two computers.......not everyone has it like that....


Steve.

Steve, the short, honest answer is "I'm in recovery" and hope never to have to work with an agency ever again. It's also probably obvious at this point that my multi-computer household and office is pixel-ly buttered with digital bread.

I personally would never show clients anything as a purely hand-drawn conceptual for sign-off because generally I find that they can't make the leap across that chasm and life is so much easier if I didn't need to turn them into Evel Knievel. If it's inevitably a photographic solution, our mock-ups are always comprised of stock photography because it's ridiculously easy to source and we can assemble something much closer to the final quickly in the Adobe Suite before heading into the shoot and then it's as easy as dropping it into an already existing template to fine tune for presentation/sign-off/delivery.

I have had the unhappy job of firing production managers/artists/designers/programmers because they did not back up their digital assets and/or follow my obsessive compulsive alpha numeric project archiving system which ensured everyone on the team had access, and as a result it cost us $$$. The only excuse for an artists' computer going down I have ever accepted was that huge blackout that took out most of the East Coast. Illness is a much more common and acceptable excuse. We live in a city filled with internet cafes open all hours, 24 hour kinkos, and they have access to the office which is filled with workstations (again, blackout would be the only reason why they would all be not working). You can even autosave at versioned intervals in Dropbox or similar (your computer goes down... it's backed up online, ready to access at the next workstation)... Cloud Computing has existed for a few years now at this point, we're past the point of excuses for not backing up, really truly. samurainoir1.0 was very draconian and you crossed him at your peril.

samurainoir2.0 however, is a much more relaxed person today, and through some odd osmosis, finds himself lucky enough to have acquired members of the Mego Museum community as clients, lovely people all.

In this new mobile world order, we do find ourselves often running out to the 24 hour walmart in the dead of the night to acquire random laptops, smartphones, and tablets because it's required to stay current and we evolve or we die.

[samurainoir]

It sounds to me like your real problem is with lazy, naive young artists looking for shortcuts. :smiley1: agreed!

But these have always existed, not just in the age of digital. We tend to look at the Golden/Silver/Bronze age comics and see the cream of the crop, but let's face it... most of them were drawn by naive young artists looking for shortcuts. Particularly given the status of the form as quick, cheap and disposable children's entertainment... ephemera. A majority of them just don't have a degree of high quality art by any standard if you take an across the board survey of all the ones that made it into print.

Are there going to be naive young artists looking for shortcuts today? Sure, just like there have always been. It's not like someone like Rich Buckler was any different with his kirby swipe file and lightbox. And we see the lineage of swipers/tracers all the way back to Bob Kane!

If someone believes that the majority of comics art today sucks, well that might be true, but the sad truth is that the majority of all comics art has generally sucked across the past century. It's not unique to the digital age. (heck, we can say that about ALL forms of art across the ages... music, literature, cave paintings... most of it sucked and that's why most of it does not survive).

Check out Neal Adams interview at word balloon, his opinion is that there is a higher quality of artist working today because when he got into the game, most of the artists weren't very good, and no wonder given the low pay vs other forms of lucrative commercial work available to an illustrator at that time. People with talent and ability generally did not stay in comics (himself included eventually), and he claims that was why it was so easy for him to climb to the top. (again, his opinion).
Word Balloon The Pop Culture Interview Podcast: Comic Books Past Present And Future With Neal Adams and Tony Akins (http://wordballoon.blogspot.ca/2012/02/comic-books-past-present-and-future.html)


As for animation... how can anyone watch a Toy Story or Finding Nemo (or insert your own favourite Pixar film) and consider it "lifeless" just because human hands haven't touched it? Does it make the characters any less compelling or unable to illicit an emotional response? Are they just lazy and naive and taking shortcuts because everything isn't hand-painted or drawn, but rendered via mathematical formula and programming language? Audiences of millions disagree.

[kingdom warrior]

Steve, the short, honest answer is "I'm in recovery" and hope never to have to work with an agency ever again. It's also probably obvious at this point that my multi-computer household and office is pixel-ly buttered with digital bread.

I personally would never show clients anything as a purely hand-drawn conceptual for sign-off because generally I find that they can't make the leap across that chasm and life is so much easier if I didn't need to turn them into Evel Knievel. If it's inevitably a photographic solution, our mock-ups are always comprised of stock photography because it's ridiculously easy to source and we can assemble something much closer to the final quickly in the Adobe Suite before heading into the shoot and then it's as easy as dropping it into an already existing template to fine tune for presentation/sign-off/delivery.

I have had the unhappy job of firing production managers/artists/designers/programmers because they did not back up their digital assets and/or follow my obsessive compulsive alpha numeric project archiving system which ensured everyone on the team had access, and as a result it cost us $$$. The only excuse for an artists' computer going down I have ever accepted was that huge blackout that took out most of the East Coast. Illness is a much more common and acceptable excuse. We live in a city filled with internet cafes open all hours, 24 hour kinkos, and they have access to the office which is filled with workstations (again, blackout would be the only reason why they would all be not working). You can even autosave at versioned intervals in Dropbox or similar (your computer goes down... it's backed up online, ready to access at the next workstation)... Cloud Computing has existed for a few years now at this point, we're past the point of excuses for not backing up, really truly. samurainoir1.0 was very draconian and you crossed him at your peril.

samurainoir2.0 however, is a much more relaxed person today, and through some odd osmosis, finds himself lucky enough to have acquired members of the Mego Museum community as clients, lovely people all.

In this new mobile world order, we do find ourselves often running out to the 24 hour walmart in the dead of the night to acquire random laptops, smartphones, and tablets because it's required to stay current and we evolve or we die.

Ah ok, now I totally get where you're coming from Ed, sorry I came at you my apologies. Totally understand now.