Was bored yesterday...

[Lev]

There is just one flaw with the whole "good old ways" argument - if you think that there is no challenge in creating a photorealistic artwork with newer software - why aren't you sticking with trusty MSPaint?

[Thadanator]

so then why were you complaining, ThetaDot?

I would have to say Lev has a point, everything is supported by something else, or maybe I should be typing on a computer running on vacums, which were hand-pressed and forged in a rock.

[Eric Bareiss]

I was planning on sending everyone this post by pony express...but I figured I might as well post it online using my computer. I guess that's why they invented this thing.

[rowe]

Originally Posted by Eric Bareiss

I was planning on sending everyone this post by pony express...but I figured I might as well post it online using my computer. I guess that's why they invented this thing.

ok, i think you completely missed ThetaDot's point, hes not saying that he is opposed to technology, or advancement in anything for that matter. what he is saying is that wen the computer starts taking over the thought, something is lost. in some areas, it is insignificant but in areas such as art (3d art included) that something lost is huge.

[Koko Ed]

I am far better at using traditonal art methods than I am with computer programs but I wish to get better because the potential is so great.
I think an artist unique style can come through with computer art (you can even make art look abstract if you so wish). For the longest time I have been longing to create an independet comic but when looking at the immense cost of creating, printing and distributing such an endevour and the need to sell X amount of books just to break even that dream died on the vine. But now with the opportunity to produce such things electronically has rekinled my enthusiasm about my book and the mean which I can create it.
Now I just have to get better using 3D Studio Max (perhaps I should use flash or Shockwave instead).

[ChrisH]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

I am far better at using traditonal art methods than I am with computer programs but I wish to get better because the potential is so great.
I think an artist unique style can come through with computer art (you can even make art look abstract if you so wish). For the longest time I have been longing to create an independet comic but when looking at the immense cost of creating, printing and distributing such an endevour and the need to sell X amount of books just to break even that dream died on the vine. But now with the opportunity to produce such things electronically has rekinled my enthusiasm about my book and the mean which I can create it.
Now I just have to get better using 3D Studio Max (perhaps I should use flash or Shockwave instead).

Lord, it's been over twenty years since I weighed in on an argument about lighting, and then we were using heavy "luminaires" not this virtual stuff. Digital pictures back then were more like line drawings.

I really don't care what renderer you use or how you get your lighting effects. The only real questions are 1) do you know what effect you want, and why? 2) are you getting the effect that you want? 3) if not, do you know what to do about it?

How about this Final Exam? You walk into the room, a big black box theatre and are handed a scene number (at random) from the play you were supposed to read in advance. Your equipment is one elipsoidal spotlight, one wrench for mounting same, a box of gels and gobos, a 20 foot ladder, and a lighting tech in the booth because you can't be two places at once. Your classmates will be the actors, position them as you wish. Light that scene! you have 20 minutes .... be ready to defend your answer.

If you can pass that, you may understand enough about lighting to weigh in on the argument about what rendering technique to use. How you do it is not nearly as important as what is achieved in the end result.

[ThetaDot]

Originally Posted by ChrisH

Lord, it's been over twenty years since I weighed in on an argument about lighting, and then we were using heavy "luminaires" not this virtual stuff. Digital pictures back then were more like line drawings.

I really don't care what renderer you use or how you get your lighting effects. The only real questions are 1) do you know what effect you want, and why? 2) are you getting the effect that you want? 3) if not, do you know what to do about it?

How about this Final Exam? You walk into the room, a big black box theatre and are handed a scene number (at random) from the play you were supposed to read in advance. Your equipment is one elipsoidal spotlight, one wrench for mounting same, a box of gels and gobos, a 20 foot ladder, and a lighting tech in the booth because you can't be two places at once. Your classmates will be the actors, position them as you wish. Light that scene! you have 20 minutes .... be ready to defend your answer.

If you can pass that, you may understand enough about lighting to weigh in on the argument about what rendering technique to use. How you do it is not nearly as important as what is achieved in the end result.

hahahahaha oh my god
you win the prize for unique word dropping

and ms paint is amazing

and some of you are putting words into my mouth
they taste yucky

and Peace @ Matt Hallock
For all artists everywhere the place to improve your skills now are now Modeling, Animation, and Texturing (but that one is iffY).
I think the nice renderers are neat and certainly nice to look at..
I guess I just don't want people to make it the centerpiece of all of their work... because most of us can see right through it. I could take the jankiest model ever and make it look awesome with a nice renderer.
I've spent a lot of time playing with GI and it's fun. I just want people to learn how to fly the falcon before using the light speed button.

[jonathan lall]

Here's what I've gathered from this thread. These are paraphrases, and not exactly what was said.

Matt: Check out this 3D scene I quickly made because I had nothing better to do.

Others: Wow! You 'quickly' made that? It looks pretty good.

Theta: Shows how much skill you have; I'd face a gunman with a katana, just as I'd manually set the lighting in an image even if it made no difference in the final product.

Bottom Line: It looks good. Don't imply someone has less skill than yourself in fletching unless you can back it up. Clearly the parties involved know what they are talking about. I do not. Let's try and keep the threads civil?

[Steve W]

Great job. I at first was fooled to believing that it was a photo. As one who watches for mistakes in movies, only 1 thing caught my eye. The reflection in the glass table had trees and green in it wereas it looks like it should have had blue and sky. Remember this is coming from an old guy that can barely use his computer.

[ThetaDot]

i heart jonathan lall

[jonathan lall]

LMAO. If you rendered that, I'd be really impressed. But the colour kinda looks off. It's like it was made in 1981 or something.

[ThetaDot]

this is really oneof my most favorite threads ever
this thread rules

[David Kelly]

Wow, the topics that people complain and whine to each other about now is insane... Nice work Matt.


Check out the Indiana University School of New Media My major