|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2007 : 10:13:28 [Permalink]
|
| Yes, both Net and SFN. Nothing new? Same there? |
 |
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2007 : 22:22:49 [Permalink]
|
Recurve boy.....
Hey, how are things down under there on the Really Big Island? I was in Sydney once, you guys sure know how to do Opera House!
You wrote:
Originally posted by bngbuck
Marfknox.....
1. Exactly how does a true photorealist produce a finished work of art. (The technique, the logistics, if you will of using a photograph, a canvas, and paint and painting tools to achieve a finished product?
2. How does a hyperrealist sculptor produce a finished Linda or Tourists? Again, the actual steps involved? |
What is she? An encyclopaedia?
Seriously, your answer would require a book. There are probably as many styles and techniques to produce a photorealistic painting as artists. |
Seriously, I have been seriously trying to learn something from Marf for some time, because the subject of perception is really, in one sense, what we have been talking about all along in this, and even a previous (my) thread relating to UFO/UAP activity.
I am intensely interested in this subject, and I even know a little bit about it, having spent some pretty good time in school (experimental and clinical psychology), and although not practicing my degree professionally, I have lived a long time and have had a lot of time to think about it. I am currently writing on some aspects of the subject, as you probably know if you have read in these Forums.
The trouble is, just as Marf really gets going dispensing her unquestioned knowledge - she really is an encyclopedia of art information - her apparent contempt for those who know less than her seems to take over and muck up the teaching podium, at least it does for me.
Are you knowledgable as to the world of art in the same way, if not to the same degree, that Marf is?
If you know the book that I need, tell me and I will try to find it! If there are indeed as many ways of doing photorealism and hyperrealistic sculpture as there are artists, then I guess I will have to reduce my expectations and ask: Are there any methods of image transfer from photo to canvas, or human body to sculpture, that are essentially the same for most of these craftsmen, irrespective of their finishing techniques?
As you can see, Marf wrote a pretty good description of the gridding method of transfer, and also of the method involving a projected image. We had a little breakdown in communication because I'm a touch slow conceptualizing, but Dave stepped in and cleared it up for me.
Then Marf needed to exercise her sarcastic tongue, and I, regrettably, responded in kind. This is doing neither of us nor her thread on the Forum any good.
So, if you know, how does the artist, having transferred a photo image to a canvas, proceed? I know that one paints, but is tracing outlines of every tiny detail of the projected image, and then proceeding to add color with a paintbrush almost minidrop by minidrop to the outlined image, the next step? How are the paint colors matched to the original photo colors? Is it done by eye or by machine? And what is the airbrush technique that prevents overspray, etc.,in such tiny areas?
I am fascinated because I know a little bit about creating computer images with both simple programs like paint, and also several of the more advanced Corel products. Frequently, one works pixel by pixel, and this is somewhat analogous to the laborious pointillistic type of work that (I guess I understand) the photorealistic people do.
Forget the 3-D sculpture for a moment, what more can you tell me about planar photographic reproduction by the manual application of pigment? I want to compare it to computer graphics, which I know very little of right now, but am constantly attempting to learn!
I love the way you Aussies spell! Encyclopaedia, for example, instead of encyclopedia! It's the English in you, isn't it? I like it better than a lot of the american vulgarizations of the mother tonque.
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 10/21/2007 : 22:33:37 [Permalink]
|
If it's realistic sculptures you're looking for, don't forget about wax figures.
 |
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
 Posted - 10/22/2007 : 07:08:40 [Permalink]
|
I know that many critics do not like photorealism and as a no talent painter I have to admit the problem with photorealism is that the paintings look like photgraphs not something living. I know this sounds kinda weird but photographs do not look like real life.
I am really busy and did not have time read all of the thread so if this point has already been mentioned please insult me and ignore this post.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2007 : 08:02:15 [Permalink]
|
furshur wrote: I know that many critics do not like photorealism and as a no talent painter I have to admit the problem with photorealism is that the paintings look like photgraphs not something living. I know this sounds kinda weird but photographs do not look like real life.
|
I think a lot of photorealistic painters do it exactly because it dehumanizes the subject or makes the subject seem frozen or dead. Sort of a comment on how technology by itself is rather cold due to its being purely objective and mechanical.
I know what you mean about photographs looking not like real life, but I think some very talented photographers have been able to take some very life-like and emotionally or psychologically charged photos. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2007 : 08:07:21 [Permalink]
|
| bngbuck, you obviously find my rudeness toward you so severe that you feel the need to cry to the moderators about it. I know I've been a dickhead to you. I just didn't think I was being so much of a dickhead that we needed outside intervention. You know, staying within the bounds of lively and aggresive argument, but not going into the area of obscene or extremely hurtful. You are throwing it right back at me, so all the insults you've hurled regarding my maturity or sensitivity equally apply to you. I am sensitive. I do occasionally regress on this forum, probably largely because I've been on here for a couple years and its become a place where I'm in a comfort zone and I feel I can release some of my frustrations. If it is so hurting your feelings I simply won't respond to anything you write anymore, okay? |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2007 : 12:44:21 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said
| but I think some very talented photographers have been able to take some very life-like and emotionally or psychologically charged photos. |
I absolutely agree.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2007 : 13:02:29 [Permalink]
|
Marfknox.....
god, sounds like the World Series, what with all the hurling and such! Maybe the World Series of vomiting!
Barf, please calm down a little bit. I said:| The trouble is, just as Marf really gets going dispensing her unquestioned knowledge - she really is an encyclopedia of art information - her apparent contempt for those who know less than her seems to take over and muck up the teaching podium, at least it does for me. |
If you perceive that as a severe insult, I sincerely apologize! Also:We had a little breakdown in communication because I'm a touch slow conceptualizing, but Dave stepped in and cleared it up for me.
|
and:| Then Marf needed to exercise her sarcastic tongue, and I, regrettably, responded in kind. This is doing neither of us nor her thread on the Forum any good. |
Again, If you see this as serious insult, I am truly sorry! I meant it as a next-door apology, as I was talking to recurveboy, whom I had mistakenly percieved as your "sockpuppet". Dave set me straight as to my misperception of any misuse of your hosiery.
I am about as sensitive as an armadillo, especially after a few weeks around some of these folks here! Don't worry about my feelings Marf, but I promise I'll be more careful about yours in the future! I really had no idea. Really!
Permit me to publicly state:
1. I am probably the most immature 79 year old you will ever meet outside of the institution to which I am probably headed! I am currently entering my third childhood!
2. I love a snipe fight as much as sending someone on a snipe hunt!
3. I really do hate four letter word grade school shouting!
4. I sincerely feel that you are a very bright (sorry, Moon!), probably talented, extremely knowledgable young woman whom I have already learned a great deal from and about. From, because that is my "vocation" here on these Forums; about, because that is my avocation.
You surely will act as you see fit with regard to future interaction, as you should. I would hope that we could continue a dialog, but if you elect to opt out because of a concern for hurting my feelings, you will be making a mistake. And that would hurt my feelings!
Okay?
Bill Buck
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2007 : 13:31:16 [Permalink]
|
Hugh Humbert.....
I went through the Tussaud wonderland in London years ago, and the waxworks, while amazing and enormously varied, do not to me even approach the simulation of life (or death) that De Andrea's "Linda" does. Most of his work seems to be of nudes, and the attention to detail that he has given to many square feet of skin is astounding! And stimulating, I might add! The wax left me a little cold, the vinyl, quite the opposite!
I asked De Andrea about wax sculpture, and he said one word, "Cartoon!"
The whole thing makes me wonder if someone soon will start taking photographs of De Andrea's or Duane Hansen's vinyl sculptures and then proceed to make photorealistic paintings of those photographs! Photorealistichyperrealism! The next giant step forward in the March of Art! |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2007 : 13:58:59 [Permalink]
|
Furshur.....
Wow, you raise a really interesting issue. What is the perceptual difference between photographic representation of live organisms (humans, animals, plants, amoebae) and representation by photorealism?
And then apply the same analytic thought process to the difference in perception of photographs of inorganic objects (rocks, George Bush, etc.) and photorealistic paintings of such worthless crap.
Does a turd look different in a photograph or a photorealistic painting? If yes, then is there a different difference when you look at photo vs. photoreal of a piece of plutonium or Cheney?
The answer might help my work in '08 Furshit. I haven't figured out a way to insult you yet, but I'm reaching! |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2007 : 19:14:57 [Permalink]
|
Marf.....
Here is a computer doodle I did just using Paint.
BEELZEBUSH
I could get fifty times the definition using any of a dozen programs available at Comp USA. You can manipulate pixels one one thousandth of the size of the crude black and white pixels it took to put this together!
You can imagine what the folks at Industrial Art and Magic can do!
Does this kind of thing qualify as serious art, worthy of critical review, entry into the World of Art? Not my clumsy efforts, but REALLY good ultra high photorealistic TOTALLY COMPUTER created images?
I really would like your views on computer "Art"
Bill Buck |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2007 : 21:35:14 [Permalink]
|
bngbuck, seeing as I can't tell when you are being sarcastic and when you are not, I don't feel like continuing this or any conversation with you. Too damn frustrating.
Also, if you are genuinely interested in art, read about it. Personally I love anything by Arthur Danto, but "After the End of Art" and "The Abuse of Beauty" start to deal with some of the things you've addressed. John Berger's "Ways of Seeing" is pretty good too, and both of those guys write in a pretty straightforward manner, opposed to most aesthetics philosophers and critics who use pretentious word salads. Go to openings that feature art that seems interesting to you. Talk to other people in the business or academic field. I'm sick of talking about it and then dealing with your pseudo insults and questions I'm not sure are sarcastic or not. I don't care if you are kidding or not. You annoy me. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/22/2007 : 23:02:29 [Permalink]
|
Here's a blow-up of the same image.
You can easily see the imperfections in the image here! Photorealism, it's not! The tail is especially hokey! Hell, it took two hours! The whole thing about eight! And I do not pretend to be an artist!
But start with a photograph, use high definition pixellation and a huge color palette, and the results could be the greatest portrait of Dubya's alter ego yet this month!
Is computer doodling Art? |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2007 : 00:04:55 [Permalink]
|
Marf.....
I'm reading as fast as I can! Give me a few days, at least! I appreciate your references, and I'll do my best in the weeks to come to absorb as much as I can of what you have suggested. I am dead serious, I appreciate your references and I will do my best to read what you have proposed.
In the meantime, I also am serious in getting your response to my questions about computer "art". It seems to me to be a legitimate issue in the history of Art, related to pop art and photorealism,
perhaps even the subjects of hyperrealistic sculpture and the like!
I intended nothing sarcastic in the above, and if you see anything
offensive in it, I apologize for whatever you took offense to!
It is not my intention at this point to offend you. I do have a very serious interest in what constitutes the perception of art, and I am kind of focused at this point on - can a computer produce art? Visual art?
Poetry, literature, music - all may also be legitimate questions and lead one directly into the vast morass of AI. Lots of meat to chew on for folks with bigger incisors than mine!
But the question of what constitutes the perception of (visual) art is a good starting place for such a discussion. And perhaps it would lead to some insight as to how Alan Turing's famous question might be applied to the computer as artist!
In the meantime, with no sarcasm intended or used, do you feel that any images that can be currently produced on a computer (no use of brush, pencil, charcoal, pastel, ink, etc.); just the CPU, keyboard, and mouse, together with a good program like the current version of Corel Draw, can produce images worthy of consideration or criticism as Art?
Could the doodle I produced above be refined by purely the manipulation of a keyboard and mouse into a work of art?
Could Half-Mooners hilarious PhotoShopped images be massaged into art?
What do you think? Obviously nobody knows what the future history of art will be, but we can have opinions!
Anybody else have an idea? |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 10/23/2007 : 07:14:08 [Permalink]
|
| I'm reading as fast as I can! Give me a few days, at least! I appreciate your references, and I'll do my best in the weeks to come to absorb as much as I can of what you have suggested. I am dead serious, I appreciate your references and I will do my best to read what you have proposed. |
If you are still processing what I already wrote, why are you asking me a buttload more questions? That leads to redundancies. For instance:
In the meantime, I also am serious in getting your response to my questions about computer "art". It seems to me to be a legitimate issue in the history of Art, related to pop art and photorealism,
perhaps even the subjects of hyperrealistic sculpture and the like! |
I already answered this question on page 1: | Okay, I also hate the question about what makes it art because I am so tired of people confusing what is art with what is good art. If it is presented as art, it is art. If someone shits on a stick and sticks it in a gallery with a label, it is art. If a child scribbles on a paper and says "Hey look at my drawing." it is art. Why do I take this stance? Because it those things aren't art, then what are they? Isn't it a waste of our time to argue about what art is when what we really want to argue about is weather this thing (art or not) has much value or merit? |
Seriously, if you care, go find out for yourself. Plenty of resources out there, and I'm not some kind of grand poobah of art.
Edited to add: You want to know about the definition of what is art, go to amazon.com and type in "aesthetics" and buy a textbook full of essays written on the subject. I personally no longer care about that unanswerable question. Unanswerable because everyone from Plato to Tolstoy has an answer that contradicts everyone else's answers, and they're all right and they're all wrong depending on the context. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 10/23/2007 07:20:44 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
What is Photorealism?
