Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 41

Thread: Question on style

  1. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Alice Herring View Post
    I'm confused. It seems to me the OP is actually talking more about design? Especially with the cartoons being mentioned; there have been obvious intentional choices that were made. Everything in Pinocchio is extra thick. IIRC, Tarzan's props are all particularly fussy by making the proportions taller and thinner than actual real life objects. I don't know if just telling someone to draw more from observation (while always excellent advice!) is enough in this case?

    Does it depend on the context because all the objects/characters within the image are designed with the same 'rules' in mind?
    Specifically, I'm referring to character design. Sorry for not being more specific.

    Quote Originally Posted by JFierce View Post
    The only thing I want to throw out there is. For cartoons and something like Adventure time take into account if they were a still image vs animated stories. Adventure Time if I saw a few still images I'd say "Ok that's neat, a bit cutesy" but it wouldn't have nearly the impact, and I highly doubt would become very popular. Same thing with even something as big as Legend of Korra or something where the drawings are actually pretty sweet. Would still be ok, but it's only truly great because of the story and how it's communicated in animation. You get to know the characters and then there's a sort of feeling attached to them.


    Eh I'm ranting. Just pointing out animation isn't quite the same as doing a still life or anything. You can have a bunch of people paint the same thing and every piece will turn out different. You get a studio of animators together they better be able to draw it all the same way based on the characters designs.
    Nice sum-up! And I have to say, I have seen cartoons that don't follow that last part very well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Medusa View Post
    You don't force your art into a certain style. You learn your stuff and let it form naturally.
    Just had to say that, I see a lot of people on Deviantart trying to force it.
    I do try my best to be inspired, but influence isn't all bad either. You can see how Mulan and Hercules (the Disney movies) took influence from their respective cultures, and Mario has always kept his proportions (non-mushroom) the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arshes Nei View Post
    Well, usually when people are trying to ask this, they're trying to look for "Flash and Flare" and haven't drawn enough. I know the OP is talking about characters, but what happened to backgrounds? Animation does not involve "floating character in space" so there is just more than "how can I abstract and symbolize this character design".
    Backgrounds are important too - heck, natural landscapes are some of my favorite things to paint. But most of the concern I've been seeing is over whether or not an artist's humans are drawn well - a frustrating conclusion, but that doesn't change the fact that people judge you by it.
    Last edited by devyni; August 9th, 2012 at 02:07 PM. Reason: Re-read that last part and realized I didn't really respond to the point Arshes Nei was making. Sorry!
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    111
    Thanks
    42
    Thanked 44 Times in 36 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bcarman View Post
    You said art that is not commercially viable is useless. That is a heavy statement and one I believe is completely false. You exclude guys like Van Gogh from the art world all together.

    The idea about bad art goes back to the argument; is there good and bad art or only art and not art? In any case we return to; what is the definition of art? No thanks.
    I don't know , I think the whole idea that Van Gogh's art is only good because he is dead is absurd and even upsetting, my previous employer at the print shop told me something like that and I had to bite my tongue. sure when he was alive his art was considered bad because I think the purpose and outlook on art was different then.
    Today I think some of his art is really good by its own right and definitely something that could sell.

    Again My point was not exclude anything ...I'm not the first guy to say 'bad art' on this thread and bad art is still art and there is a museum for bad art as well, the question is : what is bad art and who are we to decide ? from what I see art that no one really wants, that no one would be willing to buy is considered bad art?
    Personally on an intellectual level I believe bad art is something very subjective that each person decide for themselves: For example In my eyes Abstracts by Kandinsky and Mondrian are good and have value because they are inspiring and aesthetically interesting while abstracts composed of random paint splatters are meaningless and uninteresting.

    As far as the main topic , I think its yet another beginner question thread that can be answered with 'shut-up and draw' or 'go out there and draw' as Elwell already pointed out because style is something that emerges with practice.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to LightandDark For This Useful Post:


  5. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    1,221
    Thanks
    887
    Thanked 1,535 Times in 567 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by LightandDark View Post
    I don't know , I think the whole idea that Van Gogh's art is only good because he is dead is absurd and even upsetting, my previous employer at the print shop told me something like that and I had to bite my tongue. sure when he was alive his art was considered bad because I think the purpose and outlook on art was different then.
    Today I think some of his art is really good by its own right and definitely something that could sell.

    Again My point was not exclude anything ...I'm not the first guy to say 'bad art' on this thread and bad art is still art and there is a museum for bad art as well, the question is : what is bad art and who are we to decide ? from what I see art that no one really wants, that no one would be willing to buy is considered bad art?
    Personally on an intellectual level I believe bad art is something very subjective that each person decide for themselves: For example In my eyes Abstracts by Kandinsky and Mondrian are good and have value because they are inspiring and aesthetically interesting while abstracts composed of random paint splatters are meaningless and uninteresting.

    As far as the main topic , I think its yet another beginner question thread that can be answered with 'shut-up and draw' or 'go out there and draw' as Elwell already pointed out because style is something that emerges with practice.
    The what is art thing doesn't matter. That will never be answered. I'm more concerned with the idea that all art that is not commercially viable is useless. You haven't addressed this yet. My example of Van Gogh was not about quality but that was never, in his day, commercially viable. Is it only useful now that we pay millions for it? Are all of the drawings and paintings I do that don't sell useless because they are not commercially viable?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by LightandDark View Post
    I don't know , I think the whole idea that Van Gogh's art is only good because he is dead is absurd and even upsetting, my previous employer at the print shop told me something like that and I had to bite my tongue. sure when he was alive his art was considered bad because I think the purpose and outlook on art was different then.
    Today I think some of his art is really good by its own right and definitely something that could sell.

    Again My point was not exclude anything ...I'm not the first guy to say 'bad art' on this thread and bad art is still art and there is a museum for bad art as well, the question is : what is bad art and who are we to decide ? from what I see art that no one really wants, that no one would be willing to buy is considered bad art?
    Personally on an intellectual level I believe bad art is something very subjective that each person decide for themselves: For example In my eyes Abstracts by Kandinsky and Mondrian are good and have value because they are inspiring and aesthetically interesting while abstracts composed of random paint splatters are meaningless and uninteresting.

    As far as the main topic , I think its yet another beginner question thread that can be answered with 'shut-up and draw' or 'go out there and draw' as Elwell already pointed out because style is something that emerges with practice.
    Is it that obvious that I'm a student? Sorry, this was kind of a sensitive topic to bring up. I'm trying to make sure I avoid the major pitfalls that people can fall into. In retrospect, I probably went about it in a far too generalized way. Art is relative - just interacting with people shows that. What I wanted to know, essentially, wasn't "what makes good art good and bad art bad", but "what about my stylizing is good and bad". I am sorry for any trouble caused because of my vagueness.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  7. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    111
    Thanks
    42
    Thanked 44 Times in 36 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by devyni View Post
    Is it that obvious that I'm a student? Sorry, this was kind of a sensitive topic to bring up. I'm trying to make sure I avoid the major pitfalls that people can fall into. In retrospect, I probably went about it in a far too generalized way. Art is relative - just interacting with people shows that. What I wanted to know, essentially, wasn't "what makes good art good and bad art bad", but "what about my stylizing is good and bad". I am sorry for any trouble caused because of my vagueness.
    You don't have to apologize, I get where you are coming from but thinking too much is also a pitfall.

    I hope you see that your question with "Style: good or bad" is almost the same as asking "Art: good or bad".
    Some people will think its good,
    some will think its bad,
    some will think you need to work more to be able to say you have a style,
    That is the way it is and there is not much you can do about it so you don't need to worry about it at this point.
    Besides if I told you that everyone goes through these conflicts and being confronted with them and resolving them on your own may make you a better artist you wouldn't be so kin to skip out on these by simply adopting someone else's path right?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    737
    Thanks
    477
    Thanked 497 Times in 270 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Arshes Nei View Post
    Well, usually when people are trying to ask this, they're trying to look for "Flash and Flare" and haven't drawn enough.
    Fair enough!

    Quote Originally Posted by Arshes Nei View Post
    I know the OP is talking about characters, but what happened to backgrounds? Animation does not involve "floating character in space" so there is just more than "how can I abstract and symbolize this character design".

    Actually, in animation the character design, prop design, and BG design are generally handled by different people.

    OP, you're still confusing two different things I think. Try not to worry so much about what's good and bad - sometimes you need to fall into those 'pits' in order to see where they are; so continue to learn how to draw, and experiment along the way. If you're not sure about something you've drawn, there is a lovely sub-forum here called critique center & WIP showcase The only major thing you should avoid is limiting your exposure to all kinds of works, and allowing these kinds of concerns to stop you from drawing.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by LightandDark View Post
    You don't have to apologize, I get where you are coming from but thinking too much is also a pitfall.

    I hope you see that your question with "Style: good or bad" is almost the same as asking "Art: good or bad".
    Some people will think its good,
    some will think its bad,
    some will think you need to work more to be able to say you have a style,
    That is the way it is and there is not much you can do about it so you don't need to worry about it at this point.
    Besides if I told you that everyone goes through these conflicts and being confronted with them and resolving them on your own may make you a better artist you wouldn't be so kin to skip out on these by simply adopting someone else's path right?
    I don't know what you mean by "adopting someone else's path", but I know all about the conflicts you're talking about. I've had them in the past and I've seen other artists criticized for them.
    Last edited by devyni; August 9th, 2012 at 09:05 PM. Reason: Oh my god I just realized how whiny and compliment-fishing that sounded.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    737
    Thanks
    477
    Thanked 497 Times in 270 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by devyni View Post
    I don't know what you mean by "adopting someone else's path", but I know all about the conflicts you're talking about. I've had them in the past and I've seen other artists criticized for them.
    There are always going to be people critical of your work; sometimes in a constructive way, sometimes not so much unfortunately. (bad critiques do exist, and good critiques don't necessarily mean being overly positive.) It also helps you grow - just try not to let it stop you from moving forward.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Alice Herring For This Useful Post:


  12. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    6,802
    Thanks
    2,278
    Thanked 4,258 Times in 2,074 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Alice Herring View Post
    Fair enough!

    Actually, in animation the character design, prop design, and BG design are generally handled by different people.
    Yes I'm well aware of that, but it's still part of a final outcome. It's all part of the production and whether it's handled by different people or not, all of it still has design considerations.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  13. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,794
    Thanks
    372
    Thanked 757 Times in 489 Posts
    Style means "way", a way of doing something. Art-works are built up by manipulating phenomenal facts(the things that we can sense) in certain ways. You can depend on about 99% of people responding to your art-images in a predictable manner.
    It is generally valid to say that a vertical line has a kind of strength, a horizontal has a kind of restfullness, the positive and negative diagonals have a kind of dynamism. These are the facts that we can depend on. A style of using only verticals and horizontals will look static, that is because restfulness + rigid strength = immovable. A style of using only diagonals will look dynamic since dynamics look dynamic. A style that uses these facts to produce pedictable effects on the minds of viewers is a true style. A false style isn't based in fact but on fiction, bogus theories invented in the deluded minds of their authors. You can't work with what doesn't exist.
    Sketchbook

    "Beliefs are rules for action"
    "Knowledge is proven in action."
    "It's use is it's meaning."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to armando For This Useful Post:


  15. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,082
    Thanks
    1,529
    Thanked 5,197 Times in 1,728 Posts
    Verily,

    A false style in art (any art) is an attempt to fool the viewer that the facts and the truths of the matter at hand have been sufficiently analyzed and cogently synthesized as form for proper presentation. In an argument, a false style shows itself most readily where some canned bit of rhetoric has been baldly substituted in the rightful place of a more studious and cleverly prepared reflection, the latter clearly entailing a far greater difficulty of attainment than the sophistry proffered in the event.

    Kevin Winfield Chester Ferrara III
    4th Earl of Aesthetics
    Derbybaconshire, Quince
    At least Icarus tried!


    My Process: Dead Rider Graphic Novel (Dark Horse Comics) plus oil paintings, pencils and other goodies:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...d.php?t=101106

    My "Smilechild" Music. Plus a medley of Commercial Music Cues and a Folksy Jingle!:
    http://www.myspace.com/kevferrara
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  16. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,028
    Thanks
    1,349
    Thanked 1,950 Times in 776 Posts
    From Gegarin's point of view
    http://www.chrisbennettartist.co.uk/
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  17. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    1,221
    Thanks
    887
    Thanked 1,535 Times in 567 Posts
    Can I call you Chester, please?
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Art: Tekkonkinkreet style mapping question
    By Sharkcellar in forum ART: ANIMATION and MOTION GRAPHICS (Archive)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: August 5th, 2010, 01:31 AM
  2. Art: building mechs, armored core style (and a question)
    By FourTonMantis in forum SKETCHUP™
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: July 3rd, 2009, 02:52 AM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: October 8th, 2008, 04:25 PM
  4. Style type question?
    By NOOSE in forum Artist Lounge
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 3rd, 2003, 03:23 AM
  5. Style question
    By Phait in forum Artist Lounge
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 25th, 2003, 10:40 PM

Members who have read this thread: 1

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • 424,149 Artists
  • 3,599,276 Artist Posts
  • 32,941 Sketchbooks
  • 54 New Art Jobs
Art Workshop Discount Inside

Developed Actively by vBSocial.com
SpringOfSea's Sketchbook