[Tittle]

Well I had already posted this at the bottom of another topic so I am posting it again in hopes of getting more attention.
Four of us from the Forum got together and started working on the idea for a web archive of artwork and possibly web hosting. We are in the first stages of getting this ready so we need people to submit their art so that we have something to actually put in this archive. So send your art to [email protected]
We hope that we have enough submissions and responses to this idea so that we can provide a more professional place for talented artists to display their work and possibly get hosted. Thanks

[Tittle]

Man I thought there were a lot of people that were interested in this idea and yet not one person responded to this topic. Maybe you guys just didn't see it. Well just to restate what I said before...
Striker Ustorfixx Me and a few other guys are putting together the resources for an image archive and possibly web hosting for artists. If people really want this thing to happen they are gonna have to start responding and sending stuff in to us so that we can start working on it. If not the idea is just gonna die without support from the community. So send the stuff in to [email protected]

[Loki]

I think it's a great idea! this forum takes a bit to get replies going, so don't give up!
I have a little idea - please don't take this the wrong way, but what about this:

In order to get people motivated even more as they are, why don't we vote images in. If someone likes the image and wants to see it in the gallery, they should put something like "I vote this image in the gallery" ...
If someone gets for example three votes, it will be taken in.

This suggestion is NOT made to exclude anyone, but the group of people in this forum has a certain 'taste' (which includes a lot of styles) so the gallery would be a little hall of fame people can be proud of to be in.
Otherwise you'd be swamped with images - and sometimes (very rarely) there are images noone likes - why should those be on there?

Call me an elitist pig, arrogant bastard or whatever - I just do this for motivation's sake and to make this collection a 'treasure chest' - there should be enough people with different taste here so that it wouldn't become a pure 'comic (or whatever style) gallery'. And the number of votes can be very low (like three) so everyone gets a good chance ...

Bad idea?? Maybe - it's just a suggestion

Loki

[putting the anti-flame helmet on *click*]

[Striker]

Hrmmm... I hadn't really thought of that. It's a good idea though, I like it Loki... thx. Heh.. although it may exclude any work I do for a while from getting into the archive.

We still need some participation from the rest of the people in the forum though...

If you want this to happen people PLEASE LET US KNOW! This thing wont get off the ground if we dont see enough support for it.

[AprilYSH]

build it and they will come.

start it with your stuff, there are four of you, you say?

it will be more attractive once there's actually something to look at.

show me the url. show me an automated submission/uploader. i'll be in there.

------------------

http://clix.to/vanity

[Xcal]

Hey, if you're responsible enought to start this up and get this going, and provide a "free" service for other artists to display their goods, I'd vote your images in whatever they looked like. Sure, there are plenty of works out there that I can criticize and complain, or judge, but I wouldn't worry, because you judge every work on its own merit, not compared to "so and so's Streetfighter fanpic is so much better than yours".

As for my work, here's a list of what I'm most proud of. Take a look, vote or not, feel free to download and post any of them that you think would be a good addition, as long as none of them are altered. I'd also like to know which you choose also.
http://artofsin.com/art/slides/swordmaid.jpg
http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/lothlorien/artists/jsin/bouncer.jpg
http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/lothlorien/artists/jsin/hanging.jpg
http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/lothlorien/artists/jsin/warderwisdom.jpg
http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/lothlorien/artists/jsin/rage_copy.jpg

http://artofsin.com/art/slides/gribble1.jpg

Thanks.

XCAL
http://artofsin.com

[Frost]

I agree with Loki's idea. If everyone keeps posting every 1hr drawing of his experiments, you'll soon find yourself having gigabytes of wasteful images. Or maybe each person should have a select number of images he can post (approximately 8 or so?), and each time he has something new, he can replace one of his existing ones with the new one he prefers, that way everyone has work on it, no bad feelings, no blaming others for them thinking their pics are not worth posting, etc.

Just my 2 cents.
frost.

[Striker]

Hey, thanks for showin some support guys, I think that I personally have seen enough interest now that we can move on with this thing and get it running without having thoughts of this thing failing. You've set me at ease over this thing and now I am confident that it will be worthwhile to spend time and yes... even money on to be able to provide this for everyone.

Also, I saw some great ideas mentioned and all of them are in careful consideration, if there are any more ideas out there don't hesitate to voice your opinions/thoughts on how this thing should be set up, because afterall.. it is for all of us.

As for the pics Xcal, I'd have to say that swordmaid, bouncer, and warderwisdom were equally matched as my favorites.. I liked the color in swordmaid compared to the other works, the humor in bouncer was great, and mainly the setting/attention to detail in warderwisdom. After those I'd pic hanging because of the storytelling aspect.

While technically well done, the rage pic ironically lacked feeling/motion and was also a bit unorigional (I've seen that pose and a variation of the character done countless times). I think the lack of color in this pic mutes the feeling of rage expressed by the character. I'd like to see it colored and I also think that if an outdoor setting was added to the pic it would really add to the effect. When I saw it I visualized the character racing up over the top of a hill with a cloud of dust chasing after him, leaving the ground as he rounds the peak... clumps of dirt and grass flying from the feet and hands as he tears accross the countryside.. perhaps in hot pursuit of something.. whether it be animal or human or even alien... and maybe some trees in the background... and all of it in color...

Anyway... that's just what came to my mind, all of your work is very well done and well.. I feel like drawing now so I guess your work has not only entertained me, but aslo inspired me!

[ustorfixx]

Thanks Loki for your idea. You are right, I wouldn't want to go through a million crappy pictures or "updates", I want to see the good stuff and I believe thats what everyone would want to see. Plus the voting would get some interaction going with the public. I think soon we will get how it going to work together and get it up.
For interaction's sake, the idea was because of the board so I only feel that the people of the board should have a say in it. (what I am gettin to is), we havn't come up with a name yet. So, suggestions?
Keep the ideas rollin'.

--Ustor

[Blind]

How about "The Art-chive" or some such thing? Hehehe... art-chive. You could probably even snag the domain.

BTW, I think you guys are doing a great thing trying to put this site together. It's nice to see people of similar interest come together and do something like this.

The layout could be really simple, too. Easy to keep up to date. Maybe just a bunch of news blurbs on the home page with a nice logo at the top (hold a contest to create the logo - or make Dhab do it ), and then links to all the different galleries? Kind of like Digital Blasphemy? You could have daily/weekly submissions gallery, a "most votes" gallery, a few feature galleries for the "stars" amongst the group, etc. And maybe there could be commentary written by various members of the group, or a tips section, articles from various people, etc. The options are endless. Well, I'm just thinking out loud...

------------------
- Blind
[email protected]
Clan Shred Company

[Loki]

Allrighty! I was kinda scared that people would think I wanted to be elitist.
It's just about volume-contro and motivation. And that would make our gallery something special too, becuase usually one person (owner of the page, mostly) decides what is being shown on the page. But here we have a collective deciding, so that could be quite interesting.
And then it means something to be up there. That's one thing I don't really like about gameart.com, that you have 1000+ images and you never see the really cool stuff, because it's too much to go through ... I know they feature stuff, etc., but that's the impression I had ...

Namewise, I've got no idea ... hmm we could just call it "Da Gallery" (Da also meaning digital art) ... but oh well ...

[Affected]

So traditional work goes, too? (As opposed to digital)

------------------
Affected

Knowledge is belief and belief is knowledge
http://affected.xs.mw

[Oscar Alexander]

Okay, great idea. I wanna help you out, but it might take a while since I'm working hard on my own Digital Artist's Resource with some cool people over at 3D Palette.

What I can do is set up an SQL database where every artist can upload 10 images MAX with a maximum of 1mb per image (discussable). The uploading and maintenance of your account can be done through a simple web-interface...

What I need is a server that supports PHP and MySQL (maybe a cool domainname is nice too), I'll do the rest.

Mail me,

Oscar Alexander | [email protected]

[This message has been edited by Oscar Alexander (edited March 02, 2000).]

[Danny]

With all the respect, I think this whole enterprise should be kept as pure and as digital as possible. So no traditional stuff, or stuff based on scanned pencil sketches or worse yet, images that have scanned elements in them.
I think this site could be a wonderfull oppertunity to show eachother and the world what Digital Art really can be like.
As of now a lot of people don't think too highly of the digital medium. The consensus with the majority of people is that digital art is for the largest part created by the computer. Push of a button graphics. Call it ignorance if you want, but really, you can't blame people who harbour such opinions. Take your pick from magazines about about digital art, or books on how to learn to use PhotoShop and Painter (our prime tools really) and 9 out of 10 times you'll see articles and galleries filled with nothing but scan based crap.
The last thing we need is yet another site like that.
Further more, I think the voting idea is great for the very reasons Frost and Loki pointed out..

just my thoughts,

Danny

------------------
[email protected]

[hennifer]

danny - you're ruling out a LOT of artwork by saying "nothing based on a pencil sketch." from the posts i've been reading here, it looks like a large number (i'd say the majority) if people are working in pencil first.

also, how are you going to tell? i've done a couple of portraits that were based on a pencil sketch for proportion (i find it easier to get proportions correct by hand) but you'd NEVER be able to tell that from the finished product.

the same can be said for scanned elements even. i forget the name of the guy who does matte paintings for movies, but some of the elements in his are scanned, and i'll be damned if i can always tell! i've also seen some pictures which used scanned textures overtop to give very subtle atmospheric hints.

i don't see the point of eliminating all of these types of digital art. if you're worried about storage space, i'd say right now you have nothing to worry about. once the archive gets going, if you're finding that space is at a premium, but the artwork is very popular, the site could be split, or images could be stored at different locations...

all in all, you want a site that accurately represents digital art, don't you?

[Mongoose]

Could I see some of your work hennifer?

[Pigeon]

I think I agree with hennifer. Digital work can be just one step of the process, but it still is an important tool. It's like pasting a photograph or magazine clipping onto a canvas and then paiting over it with acrylics. We can't say it's not a painting because it has a photo in it. I see Danny's point too, though. Digital art is different than digitized art, and we definitely want to stress the former.

------------------
-Pigeon
http://members.aol.com/dndunakin

[Loki]

Danny: first of all - thanks for the compliments ... you make me blush!

But I'm sorry, I have to fall in your back a little bit. While I basically agree with and except your very passionate view, I wouldn't see matters so black and white.
First of all, some people do incredible things with scanned images (look at [url=http://www.viennapaint.com).]www.viennapaint.com).[/url] Of course there's not a lot of painting involved, but it's definetely a digital art.
So, if somebody is really skilled in that art, it should be recognized and not banned. On the other hand, when people present (like recently) overpainted scans as original illustrations, they should be _ignored_ (mongoose would say: kicked in the ass, burned, etc.
Now, scanning pencil drawings and working over them is a very common technique that is used by a lot of people (including master spooge and my sorry self, since you mentioned us). The reason for that is, that IMHO ideas flow easier than on the machine. I'm at least doing little thumbnails for most of my paintings.
But, if you have a completed paper-illustration that you scanned, colorcorrected and dodged and burned a little bit, it would, again IMHO, not count as digital art (quoting Capt. Picard: ... the line must be drrrrawn heeeerre!!!!

I think as long as an image looks cool (that's totally subjective here), you know that and how it's been created digitally it should be valued as digital art.

Hmmm, those would be my $0.02

Loki

------------------
--
DigitalIllustrationOutpost - http://www.vigilante.net/~loki

[Loki]

god - I meant "accept" and not "except" in one of the first few sentences above ... hhrmph!

[Affected]

Um... So you're saying even pencil sketches should not be allowed to be painted on? Based on what?
I'm painting a picture on top of a sketch I posted here right now:

I drew the sketch in a bar, listening to music and talking with people. There's no way to do that while in front of a computer. And since the sketch is drawn, I see no reason whatsoever for me to draw ANOTHER sketch using my Wacom, just to avoid using the scanner. So why can't I scan the sketch and draw on that? That's the only reference I'm using, I hardly see that as cheating.

Did I misunderstand your post?

------------------
Affected

Knowledge is belief and belief is knowledge
http://affected.xs.mw

[Muzman]

Ahh the age old quest for the impossible; namely purity.

anyway, you probably don't want to call this vapour site "the artchive" on account of The Artchive

[Danny]

Hey Loki,

I see what you're trying to say. I agree with you that cool things can be done with scanned things. Good examples would indeed be viennapaint.com (is this the patriot in you pointing out this link? ). I don't think it should be banned either. Just that
it should be kept clear of digital paint for the very reasons I tried to explain in my previous posts.
For me it's VERY important to know how an image has been created. What methods were used etc. etc. You can't judge creative scanning (to use a more friendly label ) in the same way as painting. And therefor I don't think scanned based images are suitable in an archive that spawned from a forum that has such a love for painting.

I have much less of a problem with the sketch and scan approach as it still is handcrafted work, however I can be quite the purist at times. I know the feeling that sketches can flow a bit easier on good old fashioned paper. The wacom's surface is a bit too smooth (Smooth as an Android's bottom as Commander Riker would say... ) for stuff like that. I just accepted this and tried to adapt to it as much as possible. Maybe a hint for others?

Quoting Star Trek is fun,
Danny


------------------
[email protected]

[Affected]

Oh, about the name of the site - it should have 'sijun.com' or something in it, right? I mean, it IS very much tied to this forum... (That, of course, will require authorization from Dhabih)
All I can think of at the moment is 'the Sijun.com All-stars' or 'the Sijun.com Guest stars' (OK, neither is too good. Think of something better!)

------------------
Affected

Knowledge is belief and belief is knowledge
http://affected.xs.mw

[Affected]

Me, I just simply don't like line sketching with the wacom, therefore if I don't work from a scan I start painting without any lines for guidance. I'm just too practical to do a new sketch just for the sake of purity. Besides, it's boring.

------------------
Affected

Knowledge is belief and belief is knowledge
http://affected.xs.mw

[Danny]

Hi Affected,

your picture is coming along quite nicely.
As I explained to Loki, I have less of a problem with sketching-->scanning-->painting, as it still involves drawing. However I would have prefered to see you do the sketching digitally aswell. You might think what the hell that diffirence would make. I believe there certainly would be one as it simply is a whole diffirent medium. I kinda see it as a challenge to do everything digitally. Now obviously sitting in a cafe might indeed make this somewhat difficult. Please note that I never refered to your method as cheating...

Danny

------------------
[email protected]

[Affected]

Yeah, no problem, I was just wondering...

[Pigeon]

Hmmm...

<RANT>
Perhaps there should be more of a distinction here between digital painting and digital art. Digital painting is digital art, but digital art is NOT neccessarily digital painting. Let's look at a 'real world' example: Andy Warhol. Andy Warhol is an artist, right? However, he made (or had someone else make) photographic silkscreens. He manipulated photographs into the print medium. Do we deny that the result is silkscreen print art?

Another example: Marcel DuChamp. He took a men's urinal, signed it, and called it sculpture. And it is.

So if I scan a photograph, or my face, or whatever, and call it digital art, then IT IS!

Now, if I recall correctly, this the Digital Art Forum, not the Digital Paint Forum. So any art archive should be inclusive of all Digital Art, but perhaps have sub-categories of Digital Paintings, comic colorings, 3D renderings, etc.
</RANT>

Sorry for the rant. Just had to get that off my chest.

------------------
-Pigeon
http://members.aol.com/dndunakin

[Loki]

All points taken from my side ...

Can we now start the gallery? Can start voting people in, if we like the image? Do we all agree on that? We should move digital existentialist discussions to another thread and get that baby going!

[Frost]

Coming from the pixel-based demo scene, I tend to also have some of Danny's oppinions; and some may see me as a 'purist' =). But basically, as long as the hard work is put in, I suppose that in the end, it's fine, be it a scanned paper sketch, erm, and dare I say even 3d meshed helpers?

To me, it's ok as long as the picture has been drawn by brush, and shows a clear talent and understanding of proportions, colors, perspective, image composition, lighting, shading, etc. -- work done by HAND, not by a scanner or renderer.

It's all a matter of merit and hard work in my very, very humble oppinion. I just expect others to put in as much work as I do in creating my images, without using tools/devices/sources that makes the art for you... then again, "digital art" also involves 3d renders, scan collages, etc...

Sorry if any of the above messages came across badly... I haven't slept in a while... =)

I do agree with Loki on the "Let's get it on" message. It's going to be quite cool! =)))

Zzzzzzz...
frost.

[Danny]

Hennifer,

perhaps I should elaborate my opinion a little further. First let me state that I've always had strong reservations on the use of scanning equipment in conjunction with digital painting. To put it simply, I just don't like the tool. The devil's invention if you ask me. What I find the most fun about being an artist is the actual painting. This is exactly what using a scanner takes away. I don't think it belongs in the toolbox of a painter. Imagine conventional painters sticking bits of photographs on their canvasses. It wouldn't be accepted as a painting.

Having said that, one should see the use of scanners in two seperate areas. In the professional industry scanners are frequently used simply because of time pressure and/or very specific whishes by art-directors, clients, etc. where visual accurateness is more important then the joy of painting. This is where your point of matte-painters comes in. If we take a look at the webpages of the two most known artists on this forum, Craig Mullins (Spooge Demon) and Peter Baustaedter (Loki) you'll notice that for their jobs, a lot of the time they are required to use scanned elements. Often provided by their clients. However if you take a look at their personal work, you'll see that the scanner is left aside and they resort to the pureness of painting (rare exceptions excluded such as Loki's lovely Marsian Crash image). What I'm trying to point out here is that they are both incredible artists, capable of painting anything they set their minds to without having to reach for the scanner. Wouldn't you rather see THAT work as opposed to professional work that is often pressured and influenced by people who don't care about painterly pureness? I know I would, even though both their pro work and personal work looks stunning.

The professional industry is what it is. I won't critize anyone in such a situation for using scan-equipment cos I know that often there is no choice. Sad as it may be.

An interessting analogy can be made by looking at animators. Either in the digital world where you have Motion-capture vs. Hand keyed animations, or in the conventional world where you have Rotoscoping filmfootage vs. handdrawn animations. Ask any hardcore animator what he or she prefers and I bet I can guarantee you the answer.

Remember we're dealing here with discussions for an Image archive that originated on this Forum. The forum of Dhabih Eng, 100% painter! I just don't think it would be appropriate to post images that aren't 100% hand-crafted. I for one wouldn't want to have my work displayed next to an image that might be a potential scan-paint hybrid.
You've pointed out already that it's often VERY hard to spot such images. Many people unfamiliar with digital art still think computer graphics are created by people pushing a few buttons and out comes this fully rendered image. Digital art is already being seen as an inferior medium. A big reason for this is because of all the confusion surrounding it and the pace at which it develops.
Setting up yet another archive containing scan-paint hybrid images, where no effort is made to clear up this confusion is in my view hammering another nail on the coffin.

I want to see a website that accurately represents digital *PAINTING* and not an open invite for more Threnody disasters (for those who remember)...

What I'm wondering is that you're saying that you've done several portraits based on pencil sketches because you find it easier to get the proportions right by hand.. I have no idea what you mean by this.. Are you saying that you use a mouse instead of a pen/tablet? If so I can understand your reasons. Sketching is harder with a mouse, tho not impossible (pixelers have done this for many years). If not, I see very little reason your choice unless you are someone like Patrick Woodroffe who's whole style and look is based on the spontaneity of pencil sketches. Besides.. Wacom's lend themselves just fine for sketching if you ask me.

Hennifer, please bare in mind that this is my opinion. It is by no means a flame to your person. I just feel very strongly about this. I hope you will sympathize with this.

pfeww... long one,

Danny :P



------------------
[email protected]