Hi Forum
Let me start by saying that I don't mean to be contentious or offend anyone. I'm just wondering OK?
I've been browsing the photo gallery - great source of inspiration; ideas, techniques and so on - or at least it would be if anyone bothered to explain what they had done; what they were trying to achieve; whether they had learned anything in the process of making the image? Some of the comments consist simply of variants of "Nice job. How did you do it?". Perhaps we could obviate the need for that question?
I personally come here to learn, but if John D is the only one willing to share his insights I may as well just enter into correspondence with him and come here just to enjoy the pretty pictures - since without context, that is all we are getting - sometimes the technique is more important than the image, the 'how' not the 'what'. Would we like Pollock if we didn't have the framework of 'action' and 'immersion'? Beuys if we didn't have the 'humanism'? Perhaps people want to protect their secrets? I don't know.
This software we all love is so deep, we all need a little help. Am I wrong? Shoot me if you want but please, lets turn the gallery into a source of real inspiration.
respectfully B_man
Replies
Hi,
I think you're right. If anyone, (and you can see it on some of mypictures), ask me how I did, I answer and explain. I don't explainsystematically, it takes time, but I'm happy to share ! If I have a"secret" picture, I don't share it....(it's a joke)
I suppose everyone has secrets....is it you behind the mask ?
Best regards
Bernard
Bang!... well you did say "shoot me" if you were wrong.
JD is often the best source for technical answers.. being the source of the code.
However, I think that if you look again you will find many here willing to share their process, as well as lively debates on various issues. I believe that few to none automatically assume that any individual work is interesting to all. If you see one you like, ask about it. If it was posted six months ago, it is very possible that the creator will have forgotten the exact sequence.
cheers
Michael
I agree with you in most part. There are lively discussions here. Case in point being the current preset organisation discussion. I have learned more about the techniques and uses people put SA to in this discussion than I would have imagined. So thanks to everyone. And that really is my point - there are SO many different approaches to this huge programme. If someone posts an image or video without context? They are only allowing one of two responses; I like it or I don't like it; because we know nothing; we can only make a qualitative judgement based on the image before us. If all a person wants is a pat on the back and reassurance then thats fine, we all need that, I just think they are missing a real opportunity for discourse. You may notice that the majority of images go uncommented upon? There is simply no 'room' in a 'blank' image for comment. I am not insisting that everyone provide a dissertation to accompany every image/video, I'm just saying a brief note would 'open' things up. Just my opinion; just the way I evaluate. You know yourself there are dozens of ways to achieve the same or similar results. I, you or anyone else may be using a ten step process to produce what someone else's two step process can produce. This software, more than any other [ and I am a software addict ] relies on process. I am interested in those processes, reading previous posts makes it clear that many are not. I'm not speaking to or for everyone. I know you yourself have been very free with your practice [ and a fascinating one it is ] but I had to dig to find out what you do and how. You recently presented us with a 'blank' video? I would have liked some entry point...another in my series of...exploring ideas about...you know what I mean? It would be nice to be able to enter into discussion with the artists about the art [ professional or hobbyist ] and not simply type "Very nice, Michael".
p.s. I'm not picking on you, just talking : )
respectfully B_man
and yes, Bernard that is me [ but with digitally enhanced teeth! ]
videos are often a little harder to discuss in the context of SA as much of the work (at least for me lately) is done outside the program. That said I understand your interest. I do think that commenting or requesting info on every image can lead to the opposite effect where the beauty of the image is subverted to the interest in the process. I post "still" works at another site and often get request to explain which brush or what program.. eventually it feels like the work is being ignored for the technique. It is a bit different here as we all share an enthusiasm for the same tool. I suppose though as I can look at most images and "see" the general steps involved, my position might be a bit colored.
B_Man,
How can you say you agree in most part and then go on about how you don't agree? The fact is that, as you put it, "how you evaluate" is not necessarily how others may evaluate. For you to require that others live by your set of expectations is a tall order. I personally am both inspired and influenced just by the visual postings without comment. The directions I go in with my creations are influenced deeply by the work I see posted here. At times I would like to delve more into the process and I have the freedom to ask for help. There are very generous people who share a great deal here on this site. More than I would expect. And I am always grateful.
The creation of art is a private process arrived at through many hours of experimentation, tedium, pain and joy. To expect that someone who has worked so hard to develop an approach or style to open the door to "copyists" is not exactly fair. In some instances this affects livelihood. As much as I love Charis' art and would like to know step by step how he got there, I am deeply respectful and honor both the privacy of his process and his right to that. My process is more a stream of consciousness approach and many times not describable. Sometimes I am generous with my discoveries and approaches and other times I am admittedly selfish and very private. It depends on the situation.
Regardless, there is no subtitute for the willingness to log in the hours and do the work on your own. That is the only true way to learn Studio Artist or accomplish any other endeavor in life. That gives ones life meaning and a sense of accomplishment. To have helping hands along the way is always a plus and to be deeply appreciated. On this site there are many who give quite freely. And the possibility of asking for help always exists.
Regards, Paul
Paul
Thanks for the response. Firstly I read Michael's post to contain at least four pertinent facts. I accept and agree with two and a half of those, therefore 'the most part'. I also said that I didn't speak to or for everyone or require anyone to adhere to my 'doctrine'. You make me sound like a fanatic when I am merely as interested in the people as the work. You yourself are an interesting and obviously commited character, if you wish to remain largely private I respect that - i am wearing a mask myself : )
As for copyists - we all know how Pollock worked. You ever tried 'copying' a Pollock, a 'Rothko'? I am not as it seems to be coming across, asking 'specifically' for help, more 'colloquially'. Having worked for the last ten years as an electronic music/media technician I know how to help myself and others. I also "get' the 'graphic synthesizer' paradigm better than most. I dropped Studio Artist after V1.5 because it didn't do what I could see it potentially could - happily it now does, and more. And hey...it's just plain good to talk to people with the same interests.
thank you for taking the time to talk
B_man
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next