Hahaha being in a foamy bubble is ok especially when we talk about software.
To be clear, that was more a testimony aimed at @BaidDSB, because of a cross topic conversation that started about being self-taught and finding a job in CG, then it moved on about the importance of knowing other 3D software to get a job in some fields like AAA games, VFX…
To be a self-learner that’s either a choice or because you don’t have money, nonetheless that makes finding a job a bit more difficult. Starting a career may be tough too, because without prior professional experience it’s harder for employers to be 100% sure that you may be able to do the work, it get much easier once you have 2/3 pro work in your portfolio. Working with blender can make it even more difficult, especially depending on the kind of job your aiming. I don’t want to sound pessimistic, it can work ! But at least it’s important to know how these industries works and what kind of job you may find given these specs.
In my case I’m quite stubborn and didn’t listen to all these advice and it eventually worked after some difficult years. That’s just my own experience of course, each people is different.
But if you don’t have the constraints of working in CG or you already work, I think it’s totally ok to stick to blender. To be more on topic, what is important IMO is trying to stay open minded and curious in general. And see image making as a whole.
Are we doing blender, cg, 3D, imagery ? If at some point blender disappear would we stop doing 3D or should we try to do the same thing in another software ?
At least it’s interesting to see what other software are capable of, or the work of other artist, being 3D, 2D, digital, traditional… regardless of software/method they uses. Needless to say that probably you use a 2D app for textures, other software for compositing or editing. So you aren’t 100% a blender user when it comes to imaging.
But the lack of curiosity and being in it’s own bubble is quite human, I’ve seen people working in 2D animation saying that “they don’t like the look of 3D”, to me that sound like a lack of curiosity and a very naive statement. Should I ask if they don’t like stop motion then ? Or some successful 3D that mimics 2D ? To me these kind of statements only shows a lack of curiosity rather than an informed opinion.
I agree with the point of art being communication. But communication can happen without it being direct, person-to-person, at the same time, facing each other. Much communication happens asynchronously, and it did so even before the internet. And it needn’t be both ways either to be valuable. We still ponder art created by people long since dead. In fact I am hard pressed to think of art other than performance art where instantaneous, in-person feedback is an integral and necessary part of it. (Beyond the early stages of learning, when in-person mentoring and immediate feedback are invaluable, but even much of that can be done electronically.)
If anything, IMO the internet has democratized art, both creation and appreciation, and made communication between creator and audience much easier. Many more artists can show their work to the world at large, can get feedback for it – and maybe even make a living from it. It has also broadened the reach for connecting with kindred spirits for creators – yeah, that’s a bubble, but it’s a good, encouraging bubble if you don’t lock yourself inside it. Artists throughout the ages have formed small groups of compatriots to withstand the hostility of the greater, established art community towards the avant-garde, and that has been good for art overall.
So I don’t see how the internet is inhibiting art and communication about it.
This thread has become an interesting exploration of many aspects of art and the lives of people engaged in art. Hurrah. However the original premise (as stated in the title of the thread) concerns me. …too isolated. Too isolated for whom, for what? Who sets the ‘appropriate’ standard of interactivity? Who’s the judge of whether one is meeting the required standard? Etc.
I can live with statements like ‘I would like to know a more diverse range of artists’ or ‘How can I meet a more diverse range of artists’. But the title as it stands is, well, problematic. I think there is an implication that Blender artists are too isolated ‘for their own good’. Clearly some wiser person needs to set them straight.
So maybe the question: Are XYZ-artists are too isolated (and to be honest i now read “isolationist” the first time ) is a general all time evergreen… and unanswerable… ??
I have read/seen dozen of posts, article, videos where the authors talk about their “favorite” / only used app like there is nothing other valuable in the world… and the range of this is vast and infinite from different note pad apps, text editors, word processors, spreadsheets, drawing/painting programs, file/image/internet browsers, forum/blog/wiki software, OS,…
And this also applies to coffee makers, electric tools for wood and metal, smartphones, bikes, cars, cloth maker, … you name it…
Most given answer to a question regarding some detailed described problem with a product made by X-Company: “Buy yourself something good from B-Company.” (Or replace X-… , B-… with Opensource-Y and Industrystandard-App-C or vice versa ).
I agree with you my point was only to give a solution if a artist or creater feels isolated from a community which he wants to interact.
I only can encouerage you to do it so that you can compare it whats the difference is instead of thinking of it without experience it.
Also true in my view is exactly this advantage also the disadvantage
In the www poeple present art for poeple that are interested in because they are serch for it.
But all the poeple with no interest and dont know that they have interest will not search.
(would be interesting to see a metadata diagramm if poeple get connected to art presentation if they have no interest )
If you paint outside much more poeple will take a look at your art who will never search for art in the internet (its only my thought…maybe i should start a statistik while i am paint outside before making such statement).
Feedback is also relative.
IMO the best feedback is if a conversation starts in front of your art about your work and nobody knows that you are the artist…if they get what you try to communicate its well done…this feedback is difficult to get in the www.
I dont think that www is better or worse but different and its a virtual enviroment not a real one.
In the most primal and primitive form everything has to do with communication.
Such as for example if you are interested to look for the real meaning of cave paintings - it was about historical documentation of events - the most direct way of getting an experience out of the head and storing it on an exobrain.
Though because artwork is non-verbal communication nobody can say it correctly and on point. Perhaps we could buy 100 books on art critique and read for the next 50 years or so to make a point.
But if you exclude the entire meaning of intellectual definition (to say exactly what art is and what is not) the actual point, is not exactly to pinpoint that some artwork is awful/good/masterpiece but, more of it is like a snapshot in timespace. When you were somewhere and done something.
As for example as I look at some drawings I made as a kid, is not the point if I was a genius and become millionaire artist. But these drawings somehow are the proof that I did something 25-30 years ago.
I am not sure about that or do you include communication with yourselve too.
I am also not sure if poeple realise themselve as a subject and not a object.
There is this extraodenary guy who lives 27 years alone in the wood, would be interesting if he produced some kind of art or if he needs no intention to express themselve in this book he told only about consuming some kind of art not the intention to produce it.
I would love to see them
I guess thats it nothing more (but thats a lot with no restriction) or less.
Would be funny if the new money value would be painted pictures with no absolute value only a relative one.
“Isolated” in the sense that they have trouble doing things they want to do because they only interact with a small segment of society. If you want an overly technical description.
A lot of people seem to have trouble reaching the kind of people they want because they only reach out among people they feel are “like themselves”. I first noted it among writers, when it became clear how many were trying to get readers by reaching out in communities for writers. Since then I have noticed similar tendencies elsewhere. One example for the Blender community is how many talk about pushing Blender as a tool for feature film production, but very few of them seem to want to get involved with any other parts of film production than animation, and it ends up with nobody really knowing how to make ‘the right people’ look at Blender, because ‘the right people’ are not a part of the crcles where these people prefer to travel. And others that could use some interaction with animators shy away because they want someone to make the first move.
Just off the top of my head, some assembly required.
I think people who are still developing their skills stick within communities because they offer support both technical and emotional. Once they become confident in their skills they are more likely to seek a wider audience and interact with ‘the industry’.
On another note, I’ve noticed an increasing use of Blender by recognized industry artists. In the Favourite Artists thread I posted a link to Jama Jurabaev, who used to use Cinema4d but now seems to use mostly Blender. Just earlier today I was looking at a preview for a course by Gaelle Seguillon (concept artist) who uses Blender for the 3D bits of her workflow. Plus I’ve seen a lot of others using Blender, e.g. Danar Worya who works for Naughty Dog I think.
) is a general all time evergreen… and unanswerable… ??
