I’d like to spark a conversation about abstraction and the nature of 3D animation. This is not about 2D vs 3D, but about how can 3D break its “euclidean prison”.
To start, I’ll point out that the pre-renaissance paintings that lack a correct use of perspective, are very interesting, because they deconstruct reality as our brain does. Kids do this too, a table is painted so all its features, top surface and legs, are visible, without regard for perspective. This is the approach of the 20th century art movements, which focused on interpretation instead of representation.
We create digital animation in 3D spaces, where perspective and physical representation are apropriately given to us. And even though we render 2D images (let’s exclude stereoscopy and games for the sake of the argument), we don’t seem to deconstruct space as 2D art would do.
Or is it that polygons are to euclidean space what drawing strokes to a piece of paper?
Is the 3D medium inevitably prisoner of representation? What efforts do you know towards abstract interpretation through 3D animation?
It’s what user (entity) does with it’s ability and knowledge.
CGI is nothing but an illusion. Major force - imperare - command & control for the material gain, profit. Colonize.
Representation is simple function of mimicking, a technique, learning process if you will, not an art - not even close to reality. It is mind deceived and led astray thinking, believing, trusting… an image is the matter. Thus separated from emotions, experience, pain, love, breathing… process of being alive, making a choice, acting upon and accepting the consequence in this great existence of everything.
The automatic perspective and the ease through which to achieve realism is why some people choose to work in CGI to begin with.
If you want to make images that people have to deconstruct, then why not download Krita and use that as your art making tool (since it’s a 2D painting program).
CGI is nothing but an illusion. Major force - imperare - command & control for the material gain, profit. Colonize.
Representation is simple function of mimicking, a technique, learning process if you will, not an art - not even close to reality. It is mind deceived and led astray thinking, believing, trusting… an image is the matter. Thus separated from emotions, experience, pain, love, breathing… process of being alive, making a choice, acting upon and accepting the consequence in this great existence of everything.
You seem to suggest 3D art creation is just a tool for control and greed, yet you are here as a Blender user on a 3D forum?
It’s a really interesting topic. I don’t have the answers you’re seeking, but I was thinking about this the other day from a philosophical standpoint. Some strong modern theories (in science) suggest the universe could just as easily be confine to 2D physical space. Which seems strange, but when thought from the perspective of a computer creating 3D environments it makes a lot of sense (in an abstract way). For something to become 3D, in any case, their needs to be some center of interpretation (A processor, a brain, or simpler still: movement, time…). Otherwise, anything static could only be interpreted in 2D and so fundamentally it’s equally plausible that it always exists that way.
If, for example, we were to come into existence in the universe in this exact moment in time and we were only able to see the snapshot of what we are seeing right now without the ability to discern, then it could ONLY be possible to interpret our universe as 2D. If, however, we were to come into the universe for a moment in this same scenario, EXCEPT with a complex brain like the one we have now, we would be able to discern that the 2D image we are seeing is part of a 3D universe. It was our ‘interpretation’ in this scenario that made the universe from something 2D into something 3D.
Not only a blender user, not only a CG content creator… not the only being around, yet within the only creation that is.
Suggesting: “It’s what user (entity) does with it’s ability and knowledge.”
In the second paragraph, constituting an illusion that drivesthe modern society. What happened after is an inception. - Will you ever let your enemy live freely? Love it so much as to forgive it? Let it be different?
I hope you become aware of the construct that makes you.
Have no doubt, there is no peace with it.
Maybe i am as conscious and aware as i believe to be, maybe am a simple construct of that which before me have wished, dared and loved to become ideal, might as well be just a child… but for the second time: “I am here.”
& need no reason or excuse
for
Nothing is, has ever been or will ever be static.
Since Nothing was, it is the constant flow.
Or so Stephen H. theorizes.
I love and love to play life.
So whatever comes along, because many seem to work for… “… an idea to be killed.”
What thrives me to work with CG is the mastery to visualize such an intricate illusions, then reveal the truth beneath. One day, any kid will be able to do it. Open source.
One of the first rooms I modeled in blender. Was there more to explore or did the naive-ness already explore everything? It comes down to if it’s fun to work on or not. Can you even see what you’re working on. Very psychedelic.
Abstract is fairly minimalist. Creating weird 3D art is far easier than other areas.
It’s mostly naive wonder, same with finding glitches in popular videogames. Or selecting all and pulling the bevel inside out.
The movie, interstellar, includes scenes near a black hole with very accurate rendering of the light around the blackhole, rendered using an algorithm based on einstein’s equations for the bending of light in a high gravity environment due to general relativity. The film contains quite a few inacuracies and inconsistencies in the plot but the rendering of the black-hole is spot-on, and not euclidean in it’s form. Other than things like rendering with an altered algorithm for ray tracing, or some clever tricks possible by making a 3d object look like an impossible object if viewed from a clever angle, 3d modelling and rendering is mroe or less restricted to normal euclidean geometry, to escape it you’d have to rewrite the very core principles of the programs. Good thing blender is open-source, means someone might try that, or may already be doing so/have done so.
‘Impossible objects’ again feel like something you discover when simply rotating around and oh wow, or something a teacher throws up on the board oneday for a few seconds. What use are they, silk screen designs? Up to the artist or editors. More or less restricted indeed and restrictions can be great things for creativity.
I remember a youtube video about molecular graphics, basically the software emule the atoms, enabling full spectral rendering(in theory, full physics computing)
