Things that come to your mind when having a conversation with Miss Chinadoll

[Zungur]

As the title says ...

 

[Eulalia]

Lovely sketches Zungur - sorry they've got rather overlooked, I'll try to raise their profile.

 

[Zungur]

Thank you but don't worry.
I am used to the fact that traditional drawings, especially uncoloured ones, get only a fraction of public interest in comparison to 3-D stuff and actually I don't mind a bit.
If a small group of people likes my little doodles this is quite enough for me.

 

[windar]

Thank you but don't worry.
I am used to the fact that traditional drawings, especially uncoloured ones, get only a fraction of public interest in comparison to 3-D stuff and actually I don't mind a bit.
If a small group of people likes my little doodles this is quite enough for me.

No insult to those who produce computer generated art (the term 3D is really inaccurate, since hand drawings also show 3 dimensions through the use of perspective just as computer-generated works do), but I generally prefer traditional drawings. I think for me it's because the CGI are fully-formed, sort of a take-it or leave-it proposition, while the hand drawings depend on your brain to fill in the gaps, allowing a more personal response to the art. Does that make sense?

 

[malins]

If a small group of people likes my little doodles this is quite enough for me.

they're a lot more than just 'doodles' ...

I think for me it's because the CGI are fully-formed, sort of a take-it or leave-it proposition, while the hand drawings depend on your brain to fill in the gaps, allowing a more personal response to the art. Does that make sense?

makes perfect sense for me ... the CGI renderings will for instance sometimes have super-realistic textures for the objects, signaling to my senses "this is real" but then when they fail in any part of it (pose not quite right anatomically, artificial looking face...) then this collapses into "it's just a manikin/puppet" and so the emotional connection gets lost.

The hand drawing in contrast doesn't "look real" in the same way, but from the beginning causes my imagination to fill things in and make it come alive. That also means my imagination will be more active from the beginning and then tends to go on maybe construct more around it ...

So my absolute favorite images do actually tend to be hand drawings.

(the term 3D is really inaccurate, since hand drawings also show 3 dimensions through the use of perspective just as computer-generated works do)

a conceptual difference is that if someone has set up a scene in a 3D animation program, they can at any time change camera perspectives, distance, and lighting and then let the computer render out the scenes. So for instance if it's a scene with several perspectives -- they can change between "bird's eye" perspective, first person view of a protagonist, view from onlookers, etc. and if the scene is well-posed all they have to do is start the render after selecting the camera angle. Because all elements exist as a 3D representation in the scene. In a hand drawing, changing perspective from say executioner to victim means starting from scratch.
In that way I think "3D art" is an acceptable term, meaning "created in and rendered out of a 3D animation program".

 

[old slave]

Does that make sense?

It does to me.

Give me a montycrusto over CGI any time.

 

[Zungur]

And this one

 

[fallenmystic]

makes perfect sense for me ... the CGI renderings will for instance sometimes have super-realistic textures for the objects, signaling to my senses "this is real" but then when they fail in any part of it (pose not quite right anatomically, artificial looking face...) then this collapses into "it's just a manikin/puppet" and so the emotional connection gets lost.

This is sometimes called as the "Uncanny Valley" effect, as you probably know. A popular approach to deal with the problem is to use a stylized graphics rather than a realistic one, as you can see from the art style in such movies like Frozen, or in many video games.

It's interesting to note that it's not as frequently used in the field of erotic art, probably because most of the artists who produce such works use basically the same models DAZ studio provides (namely, Genesis or the old Victoria/Michael models).

DAZ used to provide a few stylized characters, but assets compatible with those characters are not as numerous as those compatible with more realistic models. I don't know if DAZ nowadays uses an unified model which can be morphed into a stylized one. But for whatever reason, we seldom see an erotic render made with DAZ which features stylized characters.

Thankfully, with the advance of the technology, we are starting to see such renders which seem to have crossed the valley. If it becomes a norm, I suppose the field would be more similar to photography in a sense that the most of the artist's job is to fiddle with lighting or camera. Few would argue that photography isn't really a genre of art, however, I cannot deny that hand drawing will always retain its own charm, as it's much superior in expressing the artist's personality than 3D art.

And 3D art is also similar to photography in a sense that it's easier to begin with - everyone knows how to point a camera to something and take a shot. In the case of 3D art, they even share their models and props, that's why we have so many similar looking renders with mediocre quality which all look the same.

But that doesn't mean the medium itself has inherent flaws that prevents even a talented artist from producing a stunning piece of art. It's just like we have much fewer number of those who publish their drawings on the internet compared with those who upload random pictures they took with their mobile devices nowadays. It certainly doesn't mean there is no talented photographer any more who can turn a photo into a legitimate piece of art.

 

[malins]

This is sometimes called as the "Uncanny Valley" effect, as you probably know. A popular approach to deal with the problem is to use a stylized graphics rather than a realistic one, as you can see from the art style in such movies like Frozen, or in many video games.

Yes I know that term, and in general far beyond the question of 3D rendering...
there are always some kinds of storytelling or depiction that work better in stylized form than in live action or realistic rendering.
A lot of fairytales for instance (which come from an oral and not visual tradition) if you try to visualize them as live action, will be far less acceptable to the imagination than a cartoon version.

But that doesn't mean the medium itself has inherent flaws that prevents even a talented artist to produce a stunning piece of art.

I wasn't trying to make the argument '3D renderings cannot ever be art'
as it was sometimes made from the perspective of painting in the 19th century, that 'photography cannot be art' .
I think that question is intuitively settled by the fact that 3D rendering artists can -- while using the same programs and base models as others - develop distinctive styles and expressions that are recognizable.

The truth is that when browsing for instance photography with real live models on DA etc.,
one can compare the results that different photographers get when they work with the same model ...
and there are some photographers that will put every model they work with through the same set of default poses;
others find unique approaches.

Now of course the models of 3D rendering are 'dead' objects,
but the talent and expressivity of photographers shows just as much when they work with inanimate objects ...
whether it's architecture, landscape, geometries of nature or still life ...
the true artists will have their inimitable style also when photographing inanimate objects.

And I think that also applies to 3D rendering,
some who work with it just go through the motions and some have an inimitable style.

the old Victoria/Michael models

haha I've figured out 'Victoria' is the one who has skin that looks like cardboard

 

[chinadoll]

this is all good stuff, hehe

 

[Zungur]

I just now had a little conversation with dear chinadoll and well ... there are those girls that bring about the best or the worst in a man.
At least this is what came to my mind:

 

[chinadoll]

I just now had a little conversation with dear chinadoll and well ... there are those girls that bring about the best or the worst in a man.
At least this is what came to my mind:

just be careful with that thing

 

[Zungur]

Too late for that ...

 

[phlebas]

Thank you but don't worry.
I am used to the fact that traditional drawings, especially uncoloured ones, get only a fraction of public interest in comparison to 3-D stuff and actually I don't mind a bit.
If a small group of people likes my little doodles this is quite enough for me.

There is always a special place for drawings, they are capable of a degree of individuality that is usually lacking in even the best 3d art. The few line artists we have had here have all brought a unique perspective to their art. No need to apologise, you are all special.

FallenMystic has used a term regarding the 3d art, " crossed the valley". It's true, there is some computer art now which can be hard to pic as artificial, the combination of technology and skill is really almost frightening. Such work threatens photography, not drawings.

I feel at times that my own field, photo manipulation, is becoming the poor relation. The best work is hard for casual observers to appreciate, and lesser work is all too obvious. Still, I maintain that this stuff comes from within, it is a manifestation of something that needs to be expressed, and the reactions of others are almost incidental.

Keep going Zungur as long as you derive satisfaction from your work.

 

[fallenmystic]

It's true, there is some computer art now which can be hard to pic as artificial, the combination of technology and skill is really almost frightening. Such work threatens photography, not drawings.

I mainly agree with this. However, it's often the case that many apparently 2D looking artworks or animations have been created using a 3D software nowadays. There can be multiple ways to achieve that, but here's probably one of the more interesting ways to mix drawing and 3D rendering:

(Fast-forward to 2:30, if you don't have time.)

 

[Zungur]

Now, there are a lot of very knowledgable and clever replies here. And some of the analyses of the differences between traditional and copmputer generated pictures are perfectly spot on.
Still, I never intended to say that 'drawing' is inferior to '3D' . I just stated, that it usually finds much less public interest - and, most importantly - that I don't mind a bit.

I also don't think that one kind of 'art' (whatever this term might mean in different languages) is threatening any of the other ones. Remember that photography was called the end of painting? TV the end of movie theaters? Internet the end of TV? And, around 6500 years ago, most probably the invention of scratching signs into clay tablet the end of story telling?

I'm (much tomy dismay) old enough to have heard over and over again: "Stop to put your nose into all these stupid books! A boy has to go out and do sports!" as a kid. Well, whenever I look at my paycheck, how glad I am for every hour I spend reading, instead of kicking a ball around ...
And today parents are complaining that kids just look into their smartphones, instead of reading.

So, I don't think one kind of art will kill another one.
It did never happen and it won't. We are just in the lucky position to have more different ways to express ourselves than ever before in human history.

If I just could, I would make my drawings as realistic as photographs. And if I could do that, I would try to make them move. And if I could do that, I would try to do themin virtual reality. And if I could do that I would try to make them touchable. And if I could do that, I would try to make them real.
I can't, so I will continue to draw just what I like and will be happy if you like it as well

 

[fallenmystic]

How I see it is that art is about the sentiments and originality of an artist, not about tools. Some tools are better suited for certain jobs than others. But sometimes, it is when you achieve something normally very difficult to do with a certain method - like drawing a photorealistic image of an apple with colour pencils, for example - that you feel an awe and get artistic inspiration.

So I don't think there can be any objective right answer to such questions. What really matters for an artist is finding a way to express one's sentiments with enough originality that can separate one's works with those from others. He or she better know what tools are available to achieve certain effects and what tools are more efficient at doing certain things compared with others.

But in the end, it's the artist who decides what tools to use to express his or her ideas and emotions in the most effective and original way as possible.

 

[Zungur]

I'm sure you are right.
But since I don't consider myself an artist, I just can go on having fun ))

 

[montycrusto]

I'm sure you are right.
But since I don't consider myself an artist, I just can go on having fun ))

You are one whether you consider yourself one or not But don’t let that (or anything else) spoil your fun.

 

[montycrusto]

Interesting discussion here alongside @Zungur ’s wonderful art. (Yes, I said ART) .. obviously I’m biased towards traditional drawing.. it’s just right for me somehow.. but I’m glad all these other media exist too and I would never say any approach is better or worse than another. (Although I do object to people calling their photo-edits “drawings” when all they’ve done is put them through a photoshop “art filter”...)

I think the brain responds to drawings in a slightly different way, from how it sees photos; you can trace a photo exactly and it can look horribly “wrong” in the drawing, while it’s fine in the photo. Often this is to do with perspective distortion; the eye accepts distortions in photos as the products of foreshortening and perspective, while THE SAME distortion in a drawing will be rejected (or ascribed to artist incompetence). So you have to be bloody careful when using reference photos to avoid that.