Challenges of the week give artists the opportunity to create new and fantastic art based on a weekly theme set by the challenge moderators. They are also a great place to develop core skills.
Being featured on ConceptArt.org can get your artwork viewed by millions of artists a month including big industry leaders.
|Color and Light||1.1||Do Assignment|
|Color and Light||1.2||Do Assignment||1.3 | 1.4|
|Illusion of Space and Atmosphere||1||Do Assignment|
|Personal Art||1.1||Do Assignment|
I posted a small test that I was performing as a school project to ask the SAME intellectual question with no right or wrong answer to a group of "technical" people, "gaming" people and "artsie" people. There was enought posts from each group to form a basis for a conclusion.
You may be interested to see how you all responded with respect to each other (same question at top of each post):
We graded each as follows:
Gaming = A- (Good suggestions, logical, deepest thought process)
Technical = B+ (Good suggestions, logical, some silliness)
Artsie = D (Very poor suggestions, nitpicking, little to no thought process)
Thanks for participating, the gamers win...
We artsy people are artsy people because we don't introduce new technology, we draw it. We're years ahead of you.
Edited - really, how stupid is this? How about i come to your school and ask you, out of the blue, "Well, what do you think a new propulsion engine could look like?" while you're goofing off with your friends? And if you don't take a piece of paper, sit down and figure out how this "Propulsion" engine i wanted from you works, but some other kid said "Eh, it could look like this, i saw something about it on Star Trek" i'm going to give you a piece of paper to take home to your parents! It says "Propulsion engine test: D Student did not come up with a satisfying answer to my stupid ass question". How very scientific of you!
Here's a piece of paper. You are an idiot.
Last edited by John; July 7th, 2005 at 04:08 PM.
I'm appealing to the International Olympics Committee.
I self-published a book on the fundamentals of drawing from life.
wow, gamers rule...
I didn't label anybody...
If you disagree with the results please specify why?
Also, an internet forum is one of the best places because of the anonymity. No one feels pressured, no forced biasing and anyone can answer honestly and at their own pace...
Originally Posted by rhualaThere was enought posts from each group to form a basis for a conclusion.
Haha, you're cool, man...i counted 8 (different) members for this forum and 4 (different) members for the gamers forum replying to your "test"-threads (haha)...not many to form a basis for a conclusion regarding that there are thousands of members on each forum
I don't say this, because i am wondering about the results or whatever, it's just funny how you try to appear like a scientist
Ok.There was not. 200 would be a minimum to form a basis for a somewhat precise conclusion.There was enought posts from each group to form a basis for a conclusion.
Not exactly. If you have some idea of communication theory, to communication three parts are vital: a sender of information, a recipient of information, and a canal of information. To ensure good communication, the three should work together.Also, an internet forum is one of the best places because of the anonymity. No one feels pressured, no forced biasing and anyone can answer honestly and at their own pace...
Sender: Same message to three different recipients. Expects a best case of a scientific explanation to a speculative question.
Canal: The internet. People expect any kind of message from the internet, 99% of which are not to be taken seriously.
Recipients: Anybody, anyone at all! And what's more, these people expect different things from the forum they go to. So they will all recieve a different message in the end. To us, the question was "Someone we don't know (we know usernames around here and come to these forums often)" wants to ask us a question we don't care about (we're artists, not technicians).
So there's another factor in communications theory about distortion of the original message and stuff like that, but i think i'll leave it at that because i already cared waaay to much.
But, if you look at this you see that there is theoretically no link between the question you asked and the answers you got. The connection is arbitrary. Chances are, if you did a scientific test, it might prove that most answer's you'd get are random. The original intention of the question is lost in translation and the reaction is entirely up to the person who is supposed to answer, his perception of the forum, his general mood, the time he has on his hands ... it might as well be up to the weather astrology and sacks of rice in china.
Last edited by John; July 7th, 2005 at 04:31 PM.
Sorry to confuse you, I stated I was a student.I don't say this, because i am wondering about the results or whatever, it's just funny how you try to appear like a scientist
As for the amount of samples, yes the more samples the more accurate the results but this wasn't a scientific study and was time dependant not sample dependant. I basicaly left it open for close to a day...
The forum shows a grouping of people with a common specific interest...
I'm sorry if you feel the test was not completely fair as I did not try to trick anyone in any way...
ps. no statistical analysis or study can be 100% correct, it's just a study - it is what it is...
Last edited by rhuala; July 7th, 2005 at 06:10 PM.
what's the basis for your grading system?
other than that...it's a mixed bag...I know artists who are great at technical stuff, technicians who are great at games, gamers who are great at art, and every other combination.
Who's to say that your results aren't totally cross contaminated?
..also, there are way too many factors to consider here. The ages of the posters who responded; the social concern of those who responded; the seriousness of those that responded.
...and then the forums themselves.
I've been a member of a decent number of forums here on the interweb, and if there's any glaring factor that's worth noting, it's that different forums all have different attitudes....the flavour of the forum has a huge effect on the favourability of the responses.
Encouragement keeps me swimming , even in the undertow of disappointment.
i guess those people from the technical forum look like this:
how about this for a response
You are also assuming (incorrectly, at that) that the participants in the various forums were of a like age group/intelligence level for the length of time (oooh, almost a full day!) this "test" was available for participation...
You also incorrectly assume that there is NO crossover between groups, like say, for instance an artiste who just so happens to have degrees in Computers, Networking, and Laser Technology...and occasionally tests games. Gee, depending on the time of day and the forum, that individual could "skew" your hypothesis all to hell and back...
Stupid hypothetical situation, simply because if you had the marvelous vehicle to escape Earth's atmosphere, all you would then have to do would be broadcast radio, tv, or broadband wireless signals "introducing" the technology. By utilizing your orbit to broadcast world-wide, you eliminate being cheated out of anything, and since you are outside Earth's atmosphere, your chances of being killed are kind of minimized...
I mean Hitler's televised speech to the German Masses was the first video broadcast from this planet, and it is still travelling outwards into space as we speak...
Change is Inevitable, Growth is Optional
I am The Choosen One!
Jason sez: Draw more from Life!
On the interweb correcting someones spelling isnt nitpicking its called being a smartarse inorder to make u the poster look like a retarted noob.
Now, being a techie, gamer, and and artist, I can say that the most important conclusion was in favor of us here at CA: we were funnier.
And there are a lot of valid remarks above which explain why your conclusions aren't based on good scientific principles, sampling size being the main drawback. Being a student is no excuse for poor science when you tout your findings as some sort of revelation.