Art Dump

Ham ham!

 

Looks an awful lot like Biscuit Olivia from the manga called "Baki son of Ogre"....

 

Derpydope.

Spoiler: 3D Knight

Spoiler: 3D Archer

Working on builder.

 

All you did was emboss the sprites. How about turning the pixel art into voxel(3d cubes) art?

 

Yes, was planning to do it and make a scene. That was just a preview of the model.

 

Well eggnogg, people call everything art, even a dot painted in the middle of a canvas.

 

Reminds me of a text i saw online... "Earth without art is just eh......" :D

 

I'm not bashing the simplicity of his work. I was pointing out that he didn't really do much himself, he just extruded the sprites. Also, the fact that it looks as though it required very little skill or effort on his part makes it quite unappealing to me. That's just me though; it's similar to how I pretty much despise when people use Photoshop to add silly overlays and effects to their 'self-portrait' photos, even though it only took a single click of the mouse to pull it off.

 

No I agree with you, I'm just saying art nowadays is nothing but a joke. Personally I learned that the hard way from my art class, when I painted a water color painting of an ocean view with a floating boat house while my friends who just bull shit a bunch of abstracts got better marks because they used every color on the palette.

 

Well I don't know about it being "bullshit". Art has become something commonplace, and a lot more people agree that art can be anything and that it's not just a craft. Like games, music, and other forms of media; creating stuff and getting it known is so much easier. This means that there's going to be a lot of exploitation of the market, but it also gives people a chance who might not have had one otherwise.

And in response to what you said about art class; I only half agree. I started taking visual art in 10th grade, and starting out I was irritated as to how convoluted and irrelevant everything seemed; we'd be doing more theory and research than actual making. I used to think that this was done so that Visual Art satisfied the criteria for being an authority and tertiary subject, but I've changed my mind and I don't think it's as simple as that. By showing that it very much is a theoretical and academic subject, art study has become more respected and 'useful'.

Also, the entire system of education beyond an elementary level is a process of weeding out the successful people from the regulars, and getting everyone into the workforce. Art falls under this ruling too. In visual art at a tertiary level, there's no messing around. Someone may be amazingly skilled at painting or drawing, but that's just a technique. Techniques are things that any person can learn and master, but going beyond the process of creating art and seriously thinking about relating meaning and to your work, and showing how creative you are is what academic art is really about.

TL;DR - anyone is capable of mastering a technique, but going beyond that and being truly creative by synthesising meaning with art is evidence of a person's ability to exploit the medium, and further art as a whole.

 

However, technique and innate meaning are inconceivable relatives in the very structures of art. The problem is, people think they could "bullshit" themselves and tip the scale to either the creative side or the technical side. The fact is, people tend to form blunt euphemisms to back up their artistic stance if they can not unify both aspects at the same time. For example, contemporary art is one of those factors that allows artists to simply abuse the use of colors while forgetting the meaning. I've been to many art museums where I see nothing but splattered blobs, it's a shame to see such works receiving such glory while the artist claims there is a meaning. Yes I agree with you at the fact that anyone can just sow the seeds of art, but the problem is, how is the wheat able to grow if they aren't sowing they aren't sowing it in right places?

The answer is simple, they pack soil in areas that don't satisfy the quality. Maybe anyone can draw a box, but if someone can draw something in that box and puts meaning in it, it exceeds it's contemporaries and becomes "real" art. There is a reason why we separate arts into contemporary and non-contemporary, and I believe most people who think arts like abstracts and irrelevant blobs are superior are mostly ignorant about the beauty in more complex formations.


TL;DR - Anyone can bullshit meaning into anything, but the idea is to exceed the contemporaries of art and strengthen the meaning by excelling in technique and this is tenet that's often exploited in the wrong way leaving the talented artists who unify meaning and creation ignored.

 

Oh yes, I agree. There is a lot of bad art, and my favourite art is typically non-contemporary. Like I said; the freedom which has been given to artists leaves room for both the good and the bad, but allows the good to shine (but also the shit). People will always abuse a system, but it goes both ways. It's simply up to you as a viewer to choose and support the good art, and up to you as an artist to produce the good art.

I for one believe that art should always be aesthetically appealing. There is no excuse to making an ugly piece, despite the time, effort, meaning and even technique behind it. My artistic motif is that I strive to make my artworks interesting in some regard, or 'cool' as it were. I strive to produce art that is stimulating and new. I also believe that art can be meaningful, but does not necessarily have to be; it's just that the distinction between good and great art is if it has meaning (not 'meaning' as it is commonly used, necessarily, but emotion, atmosphere and all of that as well).

 

That certain page was awful lot like my reference picture. Baki series are the best source for exaggerated muscle anatomy references.

 

Generally I too love exaggerated anatomy, it seems that an average male muscular body looks rather boring..

 

Some isometric Quake Live fanart

 

This:

And this:

 

I'm kinda ganking KAG's design to make a (donationware when I get rid of the KAG stuff) baby's first c++ game


The problem is that I can't think of a good design for the zombies, can someone help me out with that?

 

A visual design?



I'll make a proper design when I have time with colour etc if you want.

 

Oh that was just a diagram I made for someone. The plan is to make it so you can place 32x32 tiles with 64x64 player/zombie sprites or maybe something more intuitive than blocks if I get to doing that.