I have seen the future of customizing...

[ctc]

>Is an oil painting more "art" than a digital painting?

Usually. The problem with computer art is that a lot of artists get lazy, and start relying on established templates. And yeah; manual artists do the same thing too (does EVERYONE Jim Lee draw have the same face?!?!?) but there's still the need to actually produce each image/item and in doing so there's a much higher chance for variation.

By the time the second gen of artists who have access to the technology comes around they'll think in terms OF the technology. Reducing novelty further 'cos they'll already have so many established templates. (Didja notice the mutants in "I Am Legend" moved a lot like the Morlocks from the last "Time Machine" movie?) By the third gen you've gone from using the tool to produce your idea to producing ideas suited to the tool.

Don C.

[Cadmus Customs]

If I had the ability to take a model that I made myself on the computer with a 3D program and run off a copy, that would be awesome. I guess I do have that already, it'll just me nice when it's less expensive.

And if then *I* had the ability to download MegoScott's work and run off a copy, that'd be even awesomer

Joel

[Cadmus Customs]

Well since you used Flatt as an example. Take the Flattworld Bela, Phantom(one just sold on ebay for over $700) or Rocky Horror characters.
The production run, mass produced excellent likness figures were about $60 right off the press. One that the artist made BY HAND could not be touched for less the $500. They figures will look damn near the same. Same heads, bodies and clothes. The only difference is that the artsits hands created the piece, not a machine, not other people. Original artist, original work, still looks best and is worth more to collectors.
When it comes to scans, of course the likness of the sculpt is on, but like Scott say, some of the quality of the work is gone when it come to paints.

Price is irrelevent, people are paying for his 'brand' (his name--his standard of excellence) and its exclusivity. The quality might be better, although it really shouldn't be, which was my point. He's putting his name on the mass-produced stuff, it should be up to his known standards, right?

And it's a given that in the wrong hands, any piece will turn into a piece...of crap. Most of us have bought heads or parts from other people and used them without physically modifying the piece. Those pieces -in theory- could be a mouse click away someday. What you do with them once you get them is not what I meant. A good customizer will take a part like that and make it better *if need be.*

Joel aka Big Wang Manufacturing

[huedell]

This talk about prototypes and handmade stuff being worth more is ALL ABOUT
exclusivity---and nothing else----

if some want to make a case for the prices being higher for these because the artist
had more intimate reaction with it---well, I don't buy it (literally)

And even if it DOES---then it must be noted that that mentality has nothing to
do with "art" anyway. It has to do...again... with exclusivity or collectibility.

What's "toy" like about that?

There's no argument here as far as I'm concerned...no debate.

A good figure is a good thing.

An easier to make figure is...a good thing...better than a figure that is HARDER to make.

The ends justify the means.

Everything else...all arguments to the contrary are pretentious stances.

Give the people what they want.

The best toys for the lowest prices.

These digital rendering machines, and the options they provide, make this goal
more possible than any "artist" (as defined in this thread) ever could.

[darklord1967]

Again, I disagree. If I need to match a knick-knack to my living room, I am making an aesthetic decision. Does it make me an artist? NO. It makes me a dude with a couch, a vase and (probably) a woman I want to please.
Would I have the skills to reupholster the couch? No. Would I have the skills to refire the vase? No. I would merely have the skills to match the objects. And Garanimals taught us that at an early age.
It's not art, it's not craft, it's not skill.

Pardon me for saying so, but that is a really narrow and cynical definition of art. It is one that many in the art world disagree with, and one that I most certainly disagree with.

Your definition AUTOMATICALLY disqualifies the artistic legitimacy of many of the stunningly beautiful custom MEGO action figures that we've seen on this (and other) message boards simply because the creators of those figures composited their creations together from the finished items provided to them by others.

In addition, you are grossly over-simplifying what I was suggesting with your "Garanimals" example. I was not inferring a rudimentary matching of "squares with squares, and circles with circles or blue with blue, and red with red". And I believe you know that.

In my view, there is DEFINITELY an "art" to being able to look at disparigingly different objects, shapes, and colors and making the creative decision to combine them in a certain specific way to create an artistic vision or meaning that is pleasing, funny, dramatic, frightening... etc.

This is a skill that not everyone has, and one that requires an artistic sensibility and an artistic eye.

Some of the finest artists in the world are designers (interior, fashion, packaging, automotive, etc.) who have no drafting or drawing skill at all.

Some forms of art are purely aesthetic (requiring no craft ability) Film-editing comes to mind. When I went to film school, I observed with my own eyes two groups of students given the exact same raw film footage, and told to edit it together any way they wished.

The finished works that came from both groups was radically different in their aesthetic sensibility. One group managed to edit the footage together in a way that created a comedic short. The other group came up with a straight-forward dramatic short... both from the same footage.

Look, I've never really liked these debates about what constitutes true "art" since that is such a subjective thing.

And with the advent of technological advancement in the modern world, this is ultimately a pointless debate, in my view.

If art history teaches us anything it is that every new bit of technological advancement that is applied to art is initially considered illegitimate.

When the airbrush / spraypaint was first introduced, its use was NOT considered "real art" because prior to that, the subtle fadings and gradiations of color in an artistic work had always painstakingly required fine hand and brush work.

This defeatist outlook on the uses of the newest technological innovations and tools in the world of art will always continue for "purists".

But for those of you that feel this way, please understand that there was once a time when YOUR artistic creations, and the modern tools you use to create them were once considered artistically illegitimate by someone before you.

In my eyes, if the creation of a work requires (at minimum) a creative artistic aesthetic sensibility then there is at least some artistic legitimacy there.

On the other hand, I have a real problem with a totally WHITE canvas, loosely and broadly painted entirely in WHITE (even with "traditional tools"), hanging in a museum of Modern Art and labeled "Polar Bear in a Snow Storm" as a work of modern art (actual example).

I cast an equally dubious artistic eye upon a volkswagen vehicle that has had a sledgehammer taken to it, and then has been partially crushed, and is then placed in the corner of an art gallery behind velvet ropes and under a spotlight... while being labeled "art" (another actual example).

Ultimately, I may not consider these creations "true art", but the point is there will always be someone ready to label them just that.

I might probably be more inclined to dismiss the artistic legitimacy of 3D- Printing as it applies to custom action figure making IF the custom work in question began and ended with the 3D printed object.

But it does not... and it likely never will. There will always still be HUMAN contribution required to complete the final custom work (assembly, sanding, filing, painting, finishing)... to say nothing of the creative aesthetic decisions that potentially went into the digital file creation process (Ie: this nose with that pair of eyes, and that third mouth, all combined on this shape of a cranium, with that hairstyle). The artistic desicion-making process is the same. The tools to facilitate those decisions are just getting better and more convenient. That's all.

Do you really want chinese sweatshops cranking out copies of nice customs bought off ebay? Seriously, think about it. Who is going use this? Is average Joe customizer gonna pay the money for one to make a Green Lantern custom? No. Is Big Wang manufacturing gonna buy a custom Green Lantern custom and scan and copy masters for thousands of bootlegs? YES Boycott 3d printing.

That's one heck of a leap in logic there, my friend. I'm sure the scenario you describe is possible. But you are not taking into account how the cost of technology radically drops after its initial introduction. This has already been the case with 3D printing. Once the universal drop in price occurs, the technology becomes more and more available to the average consumer.

Furthermore, there are a number of customizers on this site (myself included) who have been willing to shell out thousands upon thousands of dollars to create a particular piece of work.

YES celebrate 3D printing.

[huedell]

darklord---your reply post to misterdroid was well rendered.

Personally, his posts regarding 3D printing come across purely as exercises in
verbally negating it---one of the biggest casualities in that process being the
definition of "art"...and what constitutes "skill" or "talent" within art.

misterdroid, no need to pummel artistic expression because you don't approve
of 3d printing----you're better off trying a more accurate way of communicating
your criticism towards 3D printing, otherwise your stance doesn't have much
stability as evidenced by what darklord took the trouble to type out above.

incidentally, the bulk of history's art wouldn't exist if there wasn't a neccessity
to "please" or "impress" the opposite sex...be that art "poetry" or "interior decorating"

[UnderdogDJLSW]

On the other hand, I have a real problem with a totally WHITE canvas, loosely and broadly painted entirely in WHITE (even with "traditional tools"), hanging in a museum of Modern Art and labeled "Polar Bear in a Snow Storm" as a work of modern art (actual example).

I cast an equally dubious artistic eye upon a volkswagen vehicle that has had a sledgehammer taken to it, and then has been partially crushed, and is then placed in the corner of an art gallery behind velvet ropes and under a spotlight... while being labeled "art" (another actual example).

Ultimately, I may not consider these creations "true art", but the point is there will always be someone ready to label them just that.

I'm not a big fan of this type of art either, but the whole reason it exists is to create discussion and emotion and introspect. Make the viewer think. i.e. If the result of a 3D printer is causing us to be emotional and debate its existence, then it can be classified as an art form

[WannabeMego]

MMMmmm...Looks Familiar:

http://megomuseum.com/community/showthread.php?t=1625

Oh yeah, thats where I've seen it before...how do you like that...MMMmmm

[Raydeen1]

Wow.
As a former 3D artist, I can tell you, you need artistic talent to make characters. Buildings, vehicles (a real Harley for instance) you need to be more analytical and engineer minded. Sure I can make a cool spaceship but could I make a realisitc sopwith camel?

That said, there are thousands of free 3D models on the internet available for download. Some very good, some not so good but you could find enough good models to modify into pretty much anyone your heart desires.

This thing would make my custom making much easier as I could do all 3D models and then simply print them as opposed to sculpting, making a mold, casting...... This would be a great time saver.

I'm going to ask my boss about it and see if we can get one. He loves crap like this and all I need do is show him how we could use it at work and he'd be all over it. If he goes for it, I'll make some Mego parts and post pix. Hands, heads, feet. Something like that.

[spiderrogue]

it'd be great for making new heads....but i still would want to mold/cast them once they were done in this...
anyone remember that scene in jurassic park 3, towards the beginning, where they are using a 3-d like this to replicate the raptors wind pipe or whatever it was?

[CrimsonGhost]

it'd be great for making new heads....but i still would want to mold/cast them once they were done in this...
anyone remember that scene in jurassic park 3, towards the beginning, where they are using a 3-d like this to replicate the raptors wind pipe or whatever it was?

You would have to, the prints have a texture to them. They would need to be smoothed out, and also, they are usually hollow.

[Cadmus Customs]

You would have to, the prints have a texture to them. They would need to be smoothed out, and also, they are usually hollow.

I guess we're looking at different machines, unless you saw them sculpting in Playdoh, milk chocolate or frosting (not kidding). The silicone sculpts are smooth and ready to go. And they can sculpt hollow, filled or a cool honeycomb-like middle to keep parts strong and/or have a top. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Joel

[CrimsonGhost]

That is true, I have seen different materials used and I guess the stuff I was seeing was the lower end stuff, which has a bit of a texture. Not the weird gel looking stuff either, because that seems mostly useless for customs.

Either way, I would think you would want to make a mold instead of printing out numerous copies.

[misterdroid]

darklord---your reply post to misterdroid was well rendered.

Personally, his posts regarding 3D printing come across purely as exercises in
verbally negating it---one of the biggest casualities in that process being the
definition of "art"...and what constitutes "skill" or "talent" within art.

misterdroid, no need to pummel artistic expression because you don't approve
of 3d printing----you're better off trying a more accurate way of communicating
your criticism towards 3D printing, otherwise your stance doesn't have much
stability as evidenced by what darklord took the trouble to type out above.

incidentally, the bulk of history's art wouldn't exist if there wasn't a neccessity
to "please" or "impress" the opposite sex...be that art "poetry" or "interior decorating"

I agree that my stance on 3d printing is irrational. I accept that. Sculpting is one of my favorite art forms and I am the kind of dork that will travel to see sculpture. From Rodin to action figures... I LOVE IT. Sorry. My argument was poorly thought out and a tad personal, but this kind of stuff ****es me off. It cheapens something I hold dear, and in turn makes me kind of emotional and brash in my thinking. There are great applications for this technology, and I have actually read about it quite a bit, but I get so damn protective when I feel "craftsmanship" is threatened. Consider this my retraction of my post (which would have been graded poorly in a high school debate class).

[Customslab]

prototype to me is the first one made of something not the second or on even if all of something was handmade and yes some people may think prototypes are worth more and i guess they are to some .i personaly don't, to me when a prototype ...lets say a figure is really worth something is when it was never made only the one prototype lives so to speek thats when they truely are worth something to me