What is Digg?163 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -12/+109If you think this: http://www.wizard2.com/images/people/nsmoker.jpg is SFW then you probably work in the adult entertainment industry.
- joel2600, on 10/12/2007, -6/+93i feel sorry for all of you working on a saturday
- IgnatiousReilly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+61"An artist is someone who paints or draws using their own hand. Not a computer."
That's absurd. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -11/+63NSFW
Very cool though - birge, on 10/12/2007, -6/+51Honestly, this is kind of dumb. The guy basically samples a million points of a picture, and then does gradient interpolatation between them. Granted, he chooses the nonuniform sampling points, but that just makes him a glutton for punishment. In the end, he gets something that is basically a bitmap with linear interpolation. It's a neat effect, but the fact that he does it in illustrator doesn't really make it vector art.
- Experiment626, on 10/12/2007, -1/+38Notice the title of the blog (basangpanaginip.blogspot.com)? For the benefit of non-Filipino diggers, "basang panaginip" is Tagalog for "wet dream" :D
- quasipalm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+26hammydude
It's called Hyperrealism, and it is a style. The point is that you're making things realer than reality. If you take a look at the tape player or the tomatoe full screen, you'll see that the artist is really adding his or her flavor to the image, even though it's subtle.
Besides, if photography is an art, then reinventing your photographs in illustrator is too. :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperrealism_%28painting%29 - danglerman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22damn that Knightly is hot
- samk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20Agreed. Many of these are tediously copied photographs, as opposed to real computer art.
- diggik, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19Only finger-painters are artists?
Brushes are tools many, if not the majority, of artists use to paint their art.
A computer and its software is another tool. Frankly, a finger or hand is similarly a tool. - ahawks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18@neiltc13
"An artist is someone who paints or draws using their own hand. Not a computer."
So, the people who work at Pixar don't create art? Digital Photography isn't art, but film is?
Computer or paintbrush, the tool helps an artist bring out and produce a vision they have in their head.
I'm not saying vector art is great art, but who are you to judge based on the tools they use? - Legato, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17cscalfani:
that's the stupidest thing i have heard all of today - rompom7, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19it isn't about what you prefer, and infact, no one cares what you prefer.
it is about the fact that these vector images were created over countless hours, with much determination, and the fact that these artists have done such a superb job, you can bearly see the difference between this and a photograph.
i think everyone would admit that a photograph is a lot more realistic, but anyone can take a photograph. not everyone can display such work as this. - dirka, on 11/10/2007, -2/+15@Americruzan
Be careful of those nipples, someone could lose an eye... - KevinJB, on 11/10/2007, -5/+18"My personal definition of "NOT ART": "If I can do it without out years of training, then it's NOT ART."
So then, I guess that makes all the illustrations I do in my freetime NOT ART. Does the same go for any songs I compose for the piano then? - Nesh, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17"NSFW? Uhm, grow up a bit. Its art and has class. Unless you are that social retard in office space, I think you'll be fine looking at nudes as art..."
This would get me fired for browsing at work. We use Watchguard firewalls with content filtering, and one of the categories filtered is "Partial / Artistic Nudity." I also seem to remember a story a while back about content filters that look for fleshtones in image files. - masterjenkins, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Wow, working with meshes frustrates the hell out of me, so I can respect the amount of work it took to create these vectors. Very cool!
- Crypty, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13The problem with these vectors is they take weeks, sometimes months to complete. A good 3D artist(and believe me there are more good 3D artists than good Vector artists) could create any of these images, and probably much better in just a few days. On top of that, they would be viewable from any angle, poseable, and scalable (the only big advantage of vector art)
Basically, this is like someone carving a life size marble figure using a needle. Painstakingly pointless. - poipoipoi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11oh, i'd say computer-based guys are artists, but i'll also admit to having FAR mroe admiration to those who do it by hand.
t's the same with electronic muscians vs "real-world" (gtr/piano/etc) musicians. Computers remove the risk or randomness or whatever magical thing makes the art soar. - IgnatiousReilly, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12I agree. They're technically skilled, but most of them aren't artists. Take this tutorial for, example: http://www.creativebush.com/gmeshtutorial/ he's just tracing and sampling to recreate the photograph. God knows how long it took, and all he gets out of it is a scalable image that looks identical to the original photograph. What sort of masochist does this?
Their are, of course, exceptions: http://www.bertmonroy.com/ - rompom7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10The server is starting to get slugish.. heres the dugg mirror.
http://www.duggmirror.com/design/The_World_s_Most_Photorealistic_Vector_Art/ - abacadabbra, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10usually the head lines on digg are sensationalized to an extent but this is no stretch these are photo realistic photo's. i wonder if the artists sale prints? awsome post dreamflows hope to see more of this type of stuff soon!
- int19h, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15Nova Scotia Wildlife Federation?
Naval Special Warfare Foundation?
Should I know what NSWF stands for? - hum4nt0rch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Vector graphics are calculated mathmatically as opposed to being prerendered like what you get in photoshop. If you had the original illustrator file of these you could literal make the image life sized and very little quality would be lost. But if you resize a photograph it looks worse and worse as you resize it.
- bleutuna, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Amazing technical skill - but what use is this? It's a copy of a photograph, without any style used.
I had a discussion with an up and coming graphic artist not too long ago, who was worried he was becoming useless due to Illustrator's LiveTrace2.0 technology, and how that will progress as time goes on. He felt that he wasn't needed, becuase software could now do vector stuff so well on its own.
Then I explained to him that the point of vector art isn't to simply mimic a photograph, but instead, show the artists view on the world and that particular image. Using a photograph as a reference point, then subsequently manipulating colors, shadows, and forms to create something derived - but wholey original - is what vector's good for.
With this stuff, as technically amazing as it is, the only purpose i can see is for print reproduction in REALL HUGE applications. Cause now you've got a huge vector, so you can print it as big as you want. Otherwise - why not just look at the photograph in question? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Scroll down that page, and gawk the baseball glove. Unbelievable.
- random19, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7http://www.duggmirror.com/design/The_World_s_Most_Photorealistic_Vector_Art/
For future reference, just replace digg.com with duggmirror.com in the address of the story...;) - kubudubudubuntu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8http://www.wade.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/tutorial1.htm
Heres one i thought was amazing that i found a long time ago, but it's apparently already been digged =) - hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"My personal definition of "NOT ART": "If I can do it without out years of training, then it's NOT ART."
That says a lot about the "artists" signed by the RIAA. - KyleGoetz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9@Wavey:
Have you ever read any academic papers in any field? They are all like that; hell, to most people, most of the comments on Digg and Slashdot are jargon-filled. It's simple: the piece is written for a specific audience. In the case of what you posted, it was meant for an audience of art critics. In any case, I can understand what they wrote, and using no jargon just dilutes the information. For example, as someone who is (assumedly) knowledgeable about computers, would you rather read, "I torrented a file the other day, and some n00b included a MD5 file in the zip," or would you rather read, "I got a copy of a file from a hundred different people the other day (torrent), and the person who made the file was obviously clueless (n00b) because he included a document with it intended to check the validity of the file's contents (MD5 file), but the method I used for acquiring the file in the first place already uses that method to check the integrity of the file (again, this is implied already by using the word "torrent")"? As you can see, using the non-jargon merely increases the length of the comment AND deletes accurate information.
Now here's the meaning to what you posted (jargon-free and only semi-accurate because of that):
"And yet, the failure of the avantgarde to recognize a new life praxis through art and politics resulted in precisely those historical phenomena which make any revival of the avantgarde's projects today highly problematic, if not impossible: namely, the false sublations of the art/life dichotomy in fascism with its aesthetization of politics, in Western mass culture with its fictionalization of reality, and in socialist realism with its claims of reality status for its fiction."
Because the avantgarde movement failed to create a set of customs and practices related to real life through art and politics, various circumstances arose to prevent the revival of much of the avantgarde movement. Specifically:
1) the false sublations (this is a philosophical term that I don't fully understand, but it's like ending a concept and elevating it at the same time; Hegel, a German philosopher coined the term, I think) of the art/life dichotomy (please tell me you understand this phrase, I learned "dichotomy" in public school junior high) with its artistic rendering of politics
2) the movement treated reality as fiction in Western mass culture
3) and in socialist realism (a branch of avantgarde I, as a person who is unfamiliar with art, have never heard of) where the creators claimed their fiction was reality
The only phrases I wasn't able to understand immediately were "socialist realism" (I'd be willing to bet that it was a movement that used socialist philosophy to render subjects realistically) and "false sublations". Everything else an American should have learned in junior high or high school (except for the word "praxis").
In summation, one should always write to the target audience, and I'm sure the source of that paragraph did not intent for a bunch of computer geeks to read his piece. Similarly, art critics have no right to criticize the authors of The Handbook of Applied Cryptography as jargon-filled because they do not understand computer technology. - inactive, on 11/10/2007, -23/+29At this point I would rather have a photograph. Art is not just making it look realistic, it is also about the style you choose, what you have in the painting, what it represents, etc. and making it look really real life like looks.... well kind of boring.
Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Painting#Baroque_and_Rococo for several types of styles. - vbsurfer, on 11/10/2007, -1/+7I do a lot of illustrator art work. This kind of stuff is done more for a hobby. There is a lot of technique but more of having a lot of time on your hands. Good stuff, but not my taste.
- Jerky1312, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Imagecave, winner of the 2006 Most Unreliable Image Hosting Company.
- Billistic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Dude, they probably do...
- NeutrinoQ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So this is how playboy does it......
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8that isnt the point.
With photos you snap what is there and maybe take hundreds to get the perfect pict
for print advertising this could turn into a gold mine.. or even the porn industry.
And i cant wait until games look like that. - indicio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5All creative endevors come from your brain. The tool you use to create with matters much less than the quality of your creative idea. Which is more mindless, someone who can only strum 3 chords on a guitar or someone who can only put together canned grooves in garageband.
Some exceptional composers can conveive and arrange music in their heads and write it down with pencil in paper having never heard the music. Jazz musicians spend hundreds of hours developing an arsenal of musical ideas that they can string together into improvisation, and many electronic musicians spend hours painstakingly crafting their compositions. - jbus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Great work... Can we please have some SVGs???
- indicio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I think those are technically impressive, but the perspective of an art director or buyer, I am not sure where a peice of vector art like that would have a real benefit. If you are placing a photo in a magazine modern digital formats and traditional medium and large format photos more than suffice for fidelity. If you are using a large format - billboards, building installations, buses etc., the image is not really intended for close scrutinty, they need to look good as you are wizzing by in your car.
- Klowner, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6An artist is someone who smears mud on a rock with THEIR HANDS! Not using paint and brushes, that's not art!
*makes idiot face @neiltc13* - macdaddydwj, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Art is not to be judged based on how it was created, but by what it does for those who experience it.
If it invokes some feeling, then it was good art.
If it doesn't, then it may be wanting. - int19h, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10ahhh.... safe for work
- fugazi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Omg I just signed up and they sent me a one way ticket to Nigeria! Yes!
- Billistic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Here's a vector of an engine I created
http://www.billylog.com/vecengine.jpg - SlashNot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4while the technique is cool, The result is SO similar to a photo I really do not see the point in doing it at all. Drawings are great because there is still a touch of unreality in it. These are so close to actual photographs its like..."huh ok"
- ThisIsMyName, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Wow! All those "Bandwidth Exceeded" images do look photo realistic! Who woulda thought...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3this is vector art
http://browse.deviantart.com/digitalart/vector/ - FishPoisonCon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3remember what you said the point of vector art was?
- nathanmock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Mirror of the results:
http://www.aberrant.us/mirror/realistic/ - FishPoisonCon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3eh... it's basically tracing - does take a lot of time and practice, and IS useful... but it's just tracing. for those confused over whether it's art or not... it's artisanship - think interpretation vs. replication.
most of the picts didnt load, but was still impressive (but not because it's "art"), nice little tutorial too: http://www.creativebush.com/gmeshtutorial/ -
Show 51 - 100 of 161 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
