there could be another side to this issue. boring is, well, boring. not interesting. relatively worthless.
in todays digital world, its easier than ever to have your ideas stolen. most who spend time on something knows the value of ideas. perhaps its just easier and safer for the majority to post boring things. either for the sake of posting blender art or just posting side “distraction” projects.
I’ll just say for that piece it has the entertainment factor involves even if it’s surreal. The time loop is a movie trope itself that is used often. As the surreal bit is interesting, the time loop is not because it’s been repeated so often. However the time loop is making the piece entertaining.
Garagefarm that is an excellent suggestion - but already done. It’s called the ‘default cube’.
Now if you feel I’m being hard on you guys let me bring in an expert who’s book you should have next to your computer if you are at all serious about learning CG. His name is Luke Ahearn and his book ‘3D Game Textures’ is textbook in many college degrees. In chapter ONE this is what he has to say about ‘art’ and ‘cg’,
Although you don’t need to have an advanced degree in
art to create great textures, let’s face it: almost anyone can learn
what buttons to push in Photoshop, but the person who
understands and skillfully applies the basics of art can make a
texture that stands out above the rest.
There are many types of art and aspects of visual art that you
should further explore in order to develop as a game artist. Some of
the things you can study and/or practice are
Painting (oil, water color, etc.)
Lighting (for film, still photography, the stage, or CG)
Color theory and application
I’d imagine he knows what he is talking about and to back that up I also remember an interview with the Pixar bossman who answering a question about their hiring policy said and I quote,
‘you can teach technology to an artist but not always art to a technician’ ‘We will hire a good artist even if he (or she) knows nothing about the software.’
The modern Art circus is an tax evasion scheme of the super-rich.
On top of it you have the social engineering of the postmodernist to twist and turn the minds of the people, inverting and perverting the role of the artists in society.
It has become propaganda, not art.
Good point Romanji and reminds of a question put to Oskar Kokoshka, what he thought of modern art, and his answer was interesting and spot on - he said, ‘It is in fact very good art in that it is a dehumanized art that perfectly reflects a dehumanized society’. Today’s society is a circus and that is reflected in its art.
The starter of this thread, was not actually a creator of gallery art, but comics in the french style. They have not used this thread to link to any of their work, which I would actually like to see. I believe linking an expressive (and surreal) animation made in Blender is proof that Blender can be an expressive tool for art that used the medium of CGI to create it’s demo.
I’m actually involved in a Blender project that will be appearing at the Saatchi Gallery next year - I can’t show you any of it, but it was designed by the sculptor Unus Safardiar. Here is some of our previous work together:
Yogyog - when the comic is finished I’ll be happy to post a link to Amazon and as someone else mentioned here, I too am a bit cautious about posting anything about a work in progress. I had a few bad experiences including one when years ago seeking feedback for a comic I was penciling saw the exact same story published as a (poorly written) novel six months later. Unfortunately I could not prove the completed pencils and colored pages predated publication of the novel and was left with just one option which was to send heavies with baseball bats and potato sack to the place of residence of the thief. Since then only a very select few see any work in progress. You might remember also a novel that made some female American author famous and that involved teenagers kidnapped and forced to fight to the death in cages? That story was most likely stolen from a Dutch 3D artist who published exactly that as a graphic novel on forums a few years prior.
Cool and I agree. But the fact the Italian sports vehicle has such importance (not mundane to you and many others) is interesting when in any practical way it does nothing a Trabant can’t. Go faster you will say but that’s not the point and especially with regard to ‘art’. Taking a step back and thinking about why people generally desire say a Ferrari more than a Trabant brings to mind what was called the system of objects (Jean Baudrillard) where signs and symbols form a language in which and by acquiring an object its meaning is transferred to its owner. If you can’t afford the actual car, you can purchase a cap and a jacket and experience some transfer of that same meaning. Having said that, the Trabant is now as friends in Berlin tell me, a desirable object because and again of associated and transferable meaning and so both Ferrari and Trabant might have equal value as ‘art’ if art is taken in this instance as the car object being like a metonym for a social system. I’ll concede the Ferrari took more work in design and production than the Trabant…
Another interesting example of created meaning and transfer is the Chinese government’s crackdown on Peppa Pig which has being appropriated by Chinese youth as a symbol of resistance to authoritarianism.
This, “… art is simply an entertainment of mind since ever…”
As is valued & judged by the ruling class and their employees. It’s as biased as it can get – just a subjective perception, not a rule – no matter how the class believes is enlightened. Why you would never get a penny in life even for “My Beloved Daughter”, if you don’t sentiment with the right ppl.
TANTA GLORIA POST MORTEM
Art – seeking a way to entertain brain and getting dear to heart via g-spot.
…it will always reflect the success by the audience’s reaction.
Take me as an example… Dark Grotesque Fictional Photo-Realism…
…when I get a like it’s either someone judging it on a technical level (most of the people go down that route by either examining its complexity or simplicity, or liking the theme, this is when I and my Artwork technically fail), or in the best case someone that is creeped out, cringes and turns away (which is a massive compliment to the type of feeling I want to deliver… success.) : )
when you start seeing it this way… you may actually get away from comparing Boring with Over-Saturation … because maybe your artwork actually “wants” to express and deliver the feeling of boredom… this is where some people pay even $15 mio for it @cgCody
If you’re explaining that to me, I think my point may have been missed. The OP wants to dictate what is considered good art based on what he perceives as boring. What I’m saying is that this topic is so subjective, that even a white square can become notable enough to earn such a price tag.
In other words, I’m of the opinion that there is no such thing as good art or bad art. Art is art, and interpretation is personal.
While I tend to agree with you, that a drawing generally as something more fresh and expressive than CG that is very polished and somewhat ‘colder’… I also do find than some people doing drawings are also producing boring (IMO) stuff, so do some photographer and so do some cinematographer, and it’s the same in music or literature.
When technical drawing was done with a pencil, you could find people really good at drawing but that can’t do something with any creativity inside.
People can take photos very easily with their smartphone but generally it’s not for artistic purpose.
Also , why pointing out blender ? I think this is about 3D in general ?
In the end, people that do work that really stand out, technically and creatively are quite rare , but they exist in all the artistic fields. And as 3D is a multi-headed beast, some people prefer the technical side ( ex : doing the best explosion ever) rather than the artistic side, and I think it’s ok !
I’m of the opinion that there is no such thing as good art or bad art. Art is art, and interpretation is personal.
I actually disagree with this popular notion. Although there is a lot of subjectivity in art, it is still a cultural human endeavour, in the sense that people’s response to an artwork is important, and not only the whims of the artist.
So, for me, there are two ways to judge art: one is my own limited opinion on art and artworks, which is a completely subjective judging.
The other is the judgment of history, which is far less subjective. An artwork that has endured the judgement of time is almost assured to be excellent. (Even if I don’t like it.)
It is true that history is a harsh judge, so a lot of good art is forgotten unjustly. But those artworks that are remembered are almost always great.
I have a few thoughts about art by definition.
According to both Google and Bing art is “the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.”
The main word that pops out at me is “skill” which seems to exclude black, white, and entirely unaltered canvases. Suppose I create a solid grey canvas, an expression of human creative skill and imagination to be appreciated for its emotional power. Even if it was expressive and imaginative and did somehow provoke emotion, there is practically no creative skill involved. Therefore, at the very best, it is mediocre art by definition. You could argue, however, that it did in fact take substantial creative skill to come up with the idea of a grey canvas. Conversely, the skill required to create that grey canvas is so minimal that it pales in comparison to truly great artwork which requires years or even a lifetime of learning and practice.
This is why it bugs me when simple and quite frankly boring or flat out bad “art” is put where so many great masterpieces brought about after years of development of skill should hang.