Do you consider yourself a painter or a designer?

Join 500,000+ Artists

Its' free and it takes less than 10 seconds!

Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop

View Poll Results: Are you a painter or a designer?

Voters
7. You may not vote on this poll
  • Painter

    3 42.86%
  • Designer

    4 57.14%
Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,569
    Thanks
    362
    Thanked 683 Times in 431 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Do you consider yourself a painter or a designer?

    Painter: someone who is primarily interested in getting various effects from the physical qualities of paint.

    Designer: Harder for me to put this in a sentence: someone who plans out part or all of the form of an art work or some other object.


    I'm aware that a painter is a kind of designer, but here I think the difference is that a designer would be less concerned about the rendering of their drawing/painting and more concerned with the execution of the design, the final image or whatever that their drawing is a plan for, which could be a muppet or a video game.

    I think the distinction is important because it determines the way you go about your work. For example I consider digital "painting" to be a form of video, anyway this gives rise to different "what if" scenarios than if I were to believe that I was a painter, basically a different set of rules. What do you think?

    Sketchbook

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


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Haifa, Israel
    Posts
    4,106
    Thanks
    2,350
    Thanked 2,316 Times in 1,424 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Same difference as between fine art and applied art, illustration vs gallery art, and so on.

    In other words, it's the difference of purpose, and constraints. The working method only has to conform to that.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

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


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,076
    Thanks
    1,516
    Thanked 5,159 Times in 1,706 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Someone who is primarily interested in getting various effects from the physical qualities of paint is also a designer.

    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  

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to kev ferrara For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,569
    Thanks
    362
    Thanked 683 Times in 431 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The designer cares more about how the design works "in game" and less about how it works as a stand alone picture.

    It's really just a difference of whether you only want to make pictures that hang on walls, or if you would rather get involved in and plan out any number of things. In the second case it's possible to plan out the design using photos or the crappiest of scribbles if it communicates what it's supposed to.

    Last edited by armando; April 25th, 2014 at 10:54 PM.
    Sketchbook

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

  8. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,076
    Thanks
    1,516
    Thanked 5,159 Times in 1,706 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Designers do all sorts of things. Most modern artists are/were designers. So countless "stand-alone" pictures are just designs. Some are planned out, some are slapped together. Most interior designers call anything they put on the wall "art" so long as it has a frame or is a singular unit. Almost all of it is design.

    All handmade things are designed before and during their creation. The only issue that distinguishes any particular handmade thing from Art is the nature of its signifying content and the way that content is delivered.

    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  

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,569
    Thanks
    362
    Thanked 683 Times in 431 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    This thread mostly came about by thinking about the difference between painting with paint vs digital painting. There is a set of artists who believe that they are painters and that digital painting is an inferior simulation of paint. I don't agree, to me digital in it's current form, what we see on this site, is all video manipulation and a simulation of anything visible, and it's questionable if what can be done on it can be called art but it's surely design. I think that if more designers get away from trying to simulate a painting they will find that there are a lot of possibilities they are ignoring.

    Sketchbook

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

  10. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,076
    Thanks
    1,516
    Thanked 5,159 Times in 1,706 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Most digital rendering doesn't actually look like paint, if we are sensitive to the medium.

    But there are many things that artists of the past have done with paint that are very effective for creating the illusion of reality. So in duplicating these effects in the new medium in order to produce similar illusions, the new medium takes on qualities associated with paint... Which, in fact, are just universal methods of creating form illusions.

    So all that stuff about digital rendering being "like paint" is a mistake of unconscious association and familiarity.

    I don't know how calling it "video manipulation" gets any closer to nailing down the issue. Collage is collage no matter what medium. Warping is just a method of applying plasticity to ready-made images. (You can do the same thing by pushing clay onto a photo in a newspaper, lifting off a mirror print of the image on the surface of the clay, and then stretching the clay this way and that, warping the image.)

    Forming, collaging, warping... all design.

    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  

  11. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,569
    Thanks
    362
    Thanked 683 Times in 431 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    "Most digital rendering doesn't actually look like paint, if we are sensitive to the medium." Yes, but a large percentage of the people working at it are trying to create a simulation of paint, and are more concerned with how the image stands by itself and not with how the design will work "in game". This is very noticeable in some of the old CHOW's, there are many cases of weak designs winning on the merit of the dazzling painterly effect of the image. I use the phrase "in game" just as a reference to my own biased interest in video games. "video manipulation" is a reference to this same bias, manipulation of the onscreen video by coding, getting effects that aren't a part of painting and I don't think can be described as art.
    For example no one would confuse this with a painting but it is a designed video image, a simulation of a turning 3d object:
    Name:  Mech.gif
Views: 109
Size:  322.2 KB

    Sketchbook

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

  12. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    1,459
    Thanks
    201
    Thanked 524 Times in 293 Posts
    Follows
    1
    Following
    0
    I've been leaning more towards illustration than concept design in the last year or so. Mainly because there are more jobs at the entry level in illustration than there are in design (at least tha has been my experience)... and because I'm still not fluent in any 3D software, which just about all full-time concept designers seem to be nowadays (with a a few notable exceptions).

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  13. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    California/Singapore
    Posts
    492
    Thanks
    49
    Thanked 269 Times in 173 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    anyway this gives rise to different "what if" scenarios than if I were to believe that I was a painter, basically a different set of rules. What do you think?
    If you're talking about in a working sense, I don't agree they're really that different. It depends on the project and what it calls for, which would be constrained by time/money/all that other stuff. If you got a commission from MTG for instance you would still be designing a lot of things and then executing them in a painting, but you wouldn't necessarily have the luxury of focusing just on the design as you would if you were working in-house on an IP or something.

    Long story short let the project you're working on decide your approach and be both things as and when you need to.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  14. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,076
    Thanks
    1,516
    Thanked 5,159 Times in 1,706 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    there are many cases of weak designs winning on the merit of the dazzling painterly effect of the image. I use the phrase "in game" just as a reference to my own biased interest in video games. "video manipulation" is a reference to this same bias, manipulation of the onscreen video by coding, getting effects that aren't a part of painting and I don't think can be described as art.
    Let me expedite this conversation you are having with yourself:

    Art obviously requires designing.

    Yet not all designs are Art.

    Therefore there are qualities to Art that are in addition to its design.

    Find out what those additional qualities are, and you have understood the nature of Art.

    Here's a helpful hint: Not everything that is called Art will fit into the same definition. Because some of what is called Art is specifically created to confuse or even destroy the possibility of defining Art. Such art should be ignored.

    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  

  15. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,569
    Thanks
    362
    Thanked 683 Times in 431 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Forget most of what I've written so far I didn't do a good job of explaining.

    Are you primarily interested in being a painter, someone who makes physical paintings to hang on walls, someone who likes to paint with real paint from life?

    Are you primarily interested in concept designing, designing the characters and objects and the world that those things inhabit.

    There's going to be a difference in values and of approach between the two groups. The first group will tend to value physicality and permanence, the second will tend to value novelty. I also expect someone who values paintings to spend a few thousand dollars buying paintings per year.

    Last edited by armando; April 27th, 2014 at 06:30 PM.
    Sketchbook

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

  16. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,076
    Thanks
    1,516
    Thanked 5,159 Times in 1,706 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Do you use a paintbrush or a computer? This is the question you're interested in?

    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  

  17. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,569
    Thanks
    362
    Thanked 683 Times in 431 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    So your saying that a screen displaying a digital painting has the same dollar value as a physical painting?

    That wasn't a serious question. I'm interested in people's attitudes towards the medium they use and also their attitude to their job. Computer graphics are significantly different than painting, and a concept design isn't something for hanging on a wall.
    There is a big difference in how people value these things http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...-out-by-talent

    Quote Originally Posted by dpaint View Post
    ". There is not one person on this site or anywhere working in games or Entertainment that will be remembered in 50 years. Its all disposable crap compared to the good art in museums around the world. That especially applies to people doing digital which is even more disposable than the traditional crap being made now.

    And just to prove how useless this navel gazing is, tell me who did the most comic book covers in the 1940's in America? See, you don't know. why? Because as good as that person was for their time period and the jobs they got, they made disposable crap that was tied to that era and is all but worthless now. And that is still better than the digital work (I can't even call it art because it isn't)being made today because it at least was a physical thing being made.".


    Sketchbook

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

Members who have read this thread: 52

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
  •  
Register

Developed Actively by vBSocial.com
The Art Department
SpringOfSea's Sketchbook