Fire And Glass Poll

[Croc Hunter]

Anyone can vote anonymously and or discuss the entries here.
I've put them all on one page in order of entry HERE (http://www.streetsie.com/images/fire_glass/html/powweb_graphic_challenge.html) about 200Kb all up.

1. mujiefr
2. paulselhi
3. Teeka
4. Croc Hunter
5. Wyndra
6. oatesj77
7. Ironcleaver

Thanks to those who took the time to make a graphic, they are all winners. The ONE WEEK poll is only to see the peoples choice. Hmmm.. it's a tough choice to.. Good Luck to all.

[paulselhi]

who do i have to send an ear to to get a vote ?

[paulselhi]

hmmm..... $50 ?

[Ironcleaver]

From page 2 of the challenge thread:

Originally posted by Croc Hunter
I can try for you pauli. pm me if you like. unless you saw this already. :(

[paulselhi]

don't panic you got my vote, somehow i have to break the news to wyndra :o

[Ironcleaver]

no, no worries at all.. vote as you please.. it just looked like you were having problems having your voice heard, that's all :)

[YvetteKuhns]

I like them all. I almost voted for mujiefr, but then I chose paulselhi. The depth and lighting are great, the candle and flame are so realistic, the clarity of the glass in front compared with the background due to focus on the closest object is great. The wooden table and the coloring are nice.

The bee doesn't look as realistic in comparison, but the concept and the way the bee peers around the glass is neat. Another great masterpiece by Paul.

The color and effects for mujiefr's image are great. The yellow light and the shape of the egg look great. The theme is good, but not as unique as Paul's. Still another excellent work of art.

The image for oatesj77 has images spelled incorrectly, the color and theme do not appeal to me, but it is another interesting image. The gun image in the lower right appears to point at the background image in the center. Nice job.

Wyndra made a colorful psychedelic image that I like. Somewhat original but cool anyway. Ironcleaver's nice texture effects, color and lighting. Teeka and Croc Hunter have fire and water, two common themes. Nice work, but you had tough competition.

All nice work worthy of praise. :)

[Wyndra]

Someone took away my vote?
*wipes away a small tear*
:(

[Wyndra]

*Brandishing her sword*
I request a re-match.

[Ironcleaver]

<hides>

[muijefr]

Sorry folks but I see neither fire nor glass in Ironcleaver's entry but maybe that's the point of the entry.

http://www.the-ebiz.net/Smilies/hapy0007.gif

[Ironcleaver]

the title is - Abstract: "Fire and Ice as Viewed through Glass"

art is rarely "straight forward" anymore :)

in the larger image, as first posted in the contest thread, the abstract of glass can be seen clearer... (no pun indended) :)

[muijefr]

RE: ice cubes
http://www.the-ebiz.net/Smilies/hapy0007.gif

art is rarely "straight forward" anymore

I fully understand but this is straight forward. I have withdrawn my entry for consideration. Those who cast there ballets for my presentation should be allowed to revote.

Space Cadets (http://www.the-ebiz.net/forum/firenglass.html)

RE: you do know your winning right - that's not the point - nor was it ever my point.

[Ironcleaver]

you do know your winning right?

[paulselhi]

Originally posted by YvetteKuhns
I like them all. I almost voted for mujiefr, but then I chose paulselhi. The depth and lighting are great, the candle and flame are so realistic, the clarity of the glass in front compared with the background due to focus on the closest object is great. The wooden table and the coloring are nice.



The cheque is in the post

[paulselhi]

ooh..ooh can i change my vote again ? i think i need to do some tactical voting :D

[paulselhi]

CATESBY: Rescue, my Lord of Norfolk, rescue, rescue!
The king enacts more wonders than a man,
Daring an opposite to every danger:
His horse is slain, and all on foot he fights,
Seeking for Richmond in the throat of death.
Rescue, fair lord, or else the day is lost!

KING RICHARD III: A vote! a vote! my kingdom for a vote!

CATESBY: Withdraw, my lord; I'll help you to a vote.

[muijefr]

http://www.the-ebiz.net/Smilies/hapy0007.gif (http://www.the-ebiz.net/Streaming/Waterloo_s.html)

[oatesj77]

Nice to see some great art and such a variety on one subject, just goes to show how creative people can be.

I gotta say I loved the one by mujiefr a lot of depth, kept me looking at it for some time. it has a dark feeling almost ominous. I also liked the piece by Ironcleaver, though I felt like I was looking at one of those 3d posters trying to find something recognizable it its structure. if you go on to alter this in any way some sort of distorted facial image would be great to work in to one or both sides-just an idea.

Overall some great work, and I look forward to seeing more in the future.

Btw I can spell, I just have 10 thumbs :D

[paulselhi]

bump


there can be only one !!!

[BerksWebGuy]

OK...I'll make it quick for my top 2.

mujiefr - I like it...especially the lightening bolt...and the skewed image looking through the top 'sphere'.

paulselhi - This one gets my vote. Great shadow and light effects...but I don't know where one light source is coming from since there is a shadow going to the front glass from the candle...and the bee could use a tad bit of work. But its tops for me...real images are always harder to create since you have rules to follow...abstract is alittle easier since you can make it whatever you want.

The poll is closed and I can't vote :(

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by BerksWebGuy
.real images are always harder to create since you have rules to follow...abstract is alittle easier since you can make it whatever you want.

Oh so far from true....
Any idiot (monkey) can learn to render- to copy the surface. Nothing distinguished in that.
But it takes someone with enhanced HUMAN capacity to divine and express the inner essence of things.
In fact, if it's replication you're after why not just use a camera? A camera is a non-thinking tool, it does not differentiate at all. It sees everything with equal importance.
ABSTRACTIONS are a form of communication far older than language. Never, never say something is good because it looks "REAL".:p

[paulselhi]

How do we define good abstract art as opposed to bad abstract art ?

Well you could argue everyone has the right as an individual to make their own choices, thus what may be rubbish abstract art to one is genius to another

I do hate the "art inteligencia" who claim that by years of intensive study you can aquire the skills to tell the great from the dross ( seeing as in my opinion at lot of their art is in fact dross)

talking of monkeys.. a chimp can create art.. a chimp can express itself with abstract art, to some it is rubbish but to others it may well be seen as a masterpiece

Going back to the art intelligencia ( see can't even spell it !!) i can see that training may well help you to appreciate the effort an artist has made in adjusting lighting, hue, shades,proportion etc etc but does that then enable them to say this is great art and that is not ?

I think so many are hoodwinked into agreeing that some art is excellent art just because the "experts" claim it is

Then again art apreciation is also dynamic, the art i hated as a youth i now admire (and that includes classical music) so what we percieve as great one day may be banal another day

In my view "pleasing" abstract art is "easier" to create than "realistic" "realistic art" - is that a common term ?

However whether my "pleasing" abstract art is "great" art is another matter..well who cares good or bad, great or humble..i made it..it exsits..it is therefore perfect...oooh oooh i few a socrates attack coming on........Hic...

[YvetteKuhns]

Paul, I don't think Wyndra was calling YOU a monkey or an idiot. She only disagreed with BerksWebGuy's remark. I think he meant that there are expectations for real images since we know what the image "should" look like. Abstract has no expectations as to what the image will be. I agree with him.

And if she WAS inferring that you are less than talented, she is just jealous. ;) All art has value just as a rose and a daisy are both beautiful, just different.

[paulselhi]

oh dear i never thought wyndra was making any comment about my work !! i think she was just answering BWG

I think both forms are difficult but in different respects.

in realism you are continoulsly woorying about whether or not your work will be percieved by OTHERS as realistic

With the abstract you are continuoulsy reassesing the work being your own critic, what may seem great to an outsider may well be seen as abysmal to the artist who scraps it all and starts again

there can be a good blend between abstract and realisim especially in 3d art, remember the lightning image i did a few days ago. we can all fire up terragen press a few buttons and get a picture postcard image i like some times to play with the point of view etc to get something of a cross between realisim and the obscure

I do like to do totally abstract stuff now and again but i much prefer to have a "real" image ( well my computer generated real image !!) as the starting point. making a good 3d image is easy..making a great 3d image is the hard part

edit*** and then again 3d art is so much different, it is a blending of physics, photography and 2d art forms

You have to deal with creating the shapes and forms, you have to texture them, texturing itself deals with many many aspects, luminocity,color, diffusion,bump,reflection,transparency,specularity

there are noise channels that would have harvard professors weeping into thier log tables

you have to agonize over the lighting, generally you would go for a 3 point light setup as a photographer does but you also have to deal with radiosity and caustics

then there is the camera position, the field of view, the depth of field

throw in motion blur, frame rate, image size, anti alias.........

bloody hell ..it would be easier to paint the thing !!!!

[YvetteKuhns]

I do like to do totally abstract stuff now and again but i much prefer to have a "real" image ( well my computer generated real image !!) as the starting point. making a good 3d image is easy..making a great 3d image is the hard part

I agree. I liked your picture, because it looked real AND it had a fresh concept and perspective. Anyone could replicate the scene, but not everyone would have thought of the concept.

I like fractals, colors and surreal or abstract images as well. Sometimes images cause a reaction and you just think to yourself - there is something about this I like. I enjoyed all images, because they were all different. It would be boring if everyone did the SAME thing.

[paulselhi]

One of the things i love about terragen is that the terrains are created using abstract fractal formulas, ok yes you can make a terrain from a satellite image or even paint a relief map, but it is much more pleasing to see the mountains, valleys and lakes emerge from these abstract fractal formulas

even without textures they look great add the textures and define a water level and well...realisim !!

[YvetteKuhns]

I wish I had time to play with the graphics programs. I have been swamped with web site design and programming. When I take a break from that, I am doing housework!

I will just keep checking out your wonderful images. You always make nice images. :)

[BerksWebGuy]

Oyy...the conversation I sparked.

In simple text...I can make an abstract piece of 'art' with photoshop in 10 minutes. I can come no where close to making a 'real world' object in 3 hours.

Just from my perspective...which is narrow :D

[YvetteKuhns]

I agree with you on this, Berks. It is quicker to create something abstract than to match a "real" image, unless you have a picture in your mind that you want to duplicate and have trouble doing so.

[paulselhi]

edit - ( can't delete)sorry i edited this out, it was not bad just..well i should have asked first :D

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by paulselhi
.. a chimp can express itself with abstract art,

A chimp can not make art. Art is an expression of the HUMAN experience. Great art tells us something about what it means to be HUMAN.

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by paulselhi
Then again art apreciation is also dynamic,

Art is a discipline, just like medicine, math or music. What makes great art has not changed in a 100,000 years.

[BerksWebGuy]

Originally posted by Wyndra
Great art tells us something about what it means to be HUMAN.

But who is to tell us what 'great art' is. Some harvard art professor? Or an art gallery owner? A chimp?

Maybe thats why VanGo was so amazing...turning real to abstract.

[paulselhi]

why should art be seen as only being made by humans ?

1. i challange you to define what is art and what is not art

2. If as i believe we cannot define art and also we cannot definatively state why or for what exact reason an animal does such and such an act i put to you that we cannot say that an animal is incapable of art

3. if we encountered alien civilisations i think you would agree that there would be liitle suprize if we discovered that they had a history of art. If aliens could have art why should humans be the sole practioners on earth

4. Who is to say that the choreographed dances of ballerinas is any more an art form than the synchronized swimmimg of wales or dolphins

5. if some one can pile a load of bricks up and it is accepted as art by major museums then if a chimp puts a load of kids blocks in a pile then why can this not be art. If the chimp observes his creation then he is appreciating it, if he appreciates it then it is art

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by paulselhi
what we percieve as great one day may be banal another day


"We" as contemporary society rarely value what is best. Trendy, slick and that which is popular with the lowest common denominator are what we proliferate in mass.

Great art stands on its own. A thousand years into the future it will speak to those who want to know what it meant to be human in our time.

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by paulselhi
4. Who is to say that the choreographed dances of ballerinas is any more an art form than the synchronized swimmimg of wales or dolphins

Art by definition is just that, ARTIFICE.

Nature is not artifice, it is natural.

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by paulselhi
1. i challange you to define what is art and what is not art

A ketchup bottle label is not art.

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by YvetteKuhns
All art has value

Not if you include ketchup bottle labels.

[paulselhi]

Originally posted by Wyndra
A ketchup bottle label is not art.

tell that to mr warhol

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by paulselhi
some one can pile a load of bricks up and it is accepted as art by major museums

But is it good art? Or will it be one of those trendy, slick, banal items that in a hundred years people will look back and say, "Wasn't that bizarre?" or perhaps, "What people would do for attention back then!"

[BerksWebGuy]

I think we're tunneling through concrete with nothing but sand-shovels on this one :D

[paulselhi]

Originally posted by Wyndra
Art by definition is just that, ARTIFICE.

Nature is not artifice, it is natural.

the antics of dolphins or for that matter any animal purely having fun are not always simply to be described simply as a behaviour pattern. Natural yes, but then so is painting

am animal will peform a manoevour sometimes for the sheer fun of it, why can this not be seen as art ? a ballerina does it for show yes, but her moves are as much art when she does them alone as to an audience

many pets "play the fool" for an audience, this is pure comedy and as such it is art !!!

[paulselhi]

Originally posted by Wyndra
But is it good art? Or will it be one of those trendy, slick, banal items that in a hundred years people will look back and say, "Wasn't that bizarre?" or perhaps, "What people would do for attention back then!"

really..who has the right to say this is good art that is bad art ?

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by paulselhi
tell that to mr warhol

The label as an OBJECT is not art.

The label appropriated as subject matter for a message about what life was like in the sixties is.

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by paulselhi
her moves are as much art when she does them alone as to an audience

Art without an audience is therapy or masturbation.

[paulselhi]

Originally posted by Wyndra
The label as an OBJECT is not art.

The label appropriated as subject matter for a message about what life was like in the sixties is.

i disagree a label is defiantely designed and therefore is art, unless you argue that a graphic designer is not an artist.

In fact i have seen many lablels that rival much of what i have seen masquerading as great art

Art without an audience is therapy or masturbation How seminal !! have you been speaking to mirzabah lately he seems to have aquired a fixation on gonads and masturabation..see his posts on NASA in general chit chat :D

[Wyndra]

Originally posted by BerksWebGuy
who is to tell us what 'great art' is.

Great art does not turn into wallpaper after two weeks. It speaks to you always.

who has the right to say this is good art that is bad art ?

Those who live long after us. Will they give a damn, or not....