View Full Version : what makes photoshop "art"
Sicka than aidZ
08-28-2005, 09:59 PM
some of my homies think its all just cuttin an pastin...meaning, the pics were taken by someone else
the fonts, backgrounds, all that shit u download to your art program...cats say all yalls basic,...in fact, they say like 75% of your shit is someone elses work, anyone can operate it....
i think hertz is an artist cuz he's got crazy visions, not just pics from album covers
born invincible's ill, str8 up entertaining an shit.
i unno, do u graphic designers consider it art or is it just a fun program that enables you to design marvelous shit using art an pics that werent made by u in the first place.?
cypher born's a fuckin madman too...he's original as fuck.
i know what ya mean, but it would be inpossible for someone to create an image of someone fromscratch, but i make all my own bgs, thats about it.. and when i use renders it is someone elses work so yeh like 50% is other peoples work...
but not allot of people have the skills and eye to make shit look good... i seen alot of cats think they good on ps and they shit is terrible.. jus opinion i spose..
sup with you these days par!
08-28-2005, 10:26 PM
i do my thing.. thats it!! people can say what they want!!
08-28-2005, 10:52 PM
fuck your homies. ask them to do sum shit.
08-28-2005, 10:55 PM
It's all art man, once an image is placed in another context to change peoples perception of it you've gotta call it art IMO, just don'y necessarily make it good art.
Look at a lot of the modern installation art like Tracy Ermin's 'un-made bed', just looks like my bedroom the morning after my girlfriends been out on the razz'.
Some of that probably takes less thought than some of the shittest PS work, but it's still considered high brow art.
I think PS is kinda 'hip hop' just like an Akai MPC is, with 'artists' sampling images the same as 'artists' been doing with music right from the start.
As long as people always try and elevate what they're doing instead of finding one thing that works and flogging it to death, then it's all good IMO.
Thanks for the comment BTW, I might have to have I quote in my sig again.
Sicka than aidZ
08-28-2005, 11:58 PM
yall got better answers than these natives here........they hate on computers period.....always tryin to dis cuz i use the internet.....beats gettin rolled on by some snitches an bagged by the feds. i'd show this to my uncle, but he'll say " bullshit"....he does native american art...i see the art involved, keep rippin it up yo, u too wutage an lucky...yall gettin better. peace
08-29-2005, 12:27 AM
when an artist produces a piece of work, it doesn't matter if somebody doesn't like it. Sometimes, that's the point. Art often exists to provoke a reaction (particularly modern art - whatever that term means nowadays). The reaction is enough - it might be desirable for it to be positive, but it doesn't really matter either way. (I'm being over-general here, and I know it, but bear with me).
"Graphic design, however, is a branch of visual communication in which it is important that the message being communicated is received in the way that was intended. Graphic design is objective, while art is subjective. If a designer produces a sign to direct people to the right place in a building, it has to do the job. Its function is not open to interpretation. Either it works, or it doesn't, and if it doesn't it fails. The rest is decoration. Maybe that's where the art comes in, but if it affects the objective of the sign - it fails
Digital art is art created on a computer in digital (that is, binary) form. The term is usually reserved for art that has been non-trivially modifed by the computer; text data and raw audio and video recordings are not usually considered digital art, in themselves but can be part of a larger project, since the computer is merely the storage medium or tool which is used to create the work.
“Obviously there is an incredibly wide gray area which is why this vein of discussion is brought up so often.”
Sicka than aidZ
08-29-2005, 12:50 AM
naw man,...i was just askin if photoshop is art or not. that post didnt really help^
08-29-2005, 02:11 AM
its not the program its what you do with it, its just a tool , if you wanna create a business card no if you wanna use a tablet and paint digitally yes, in between is grey, a photomanip maybe, a banner using other ppls work i would say no, if its yours and its done for its own sake basically :)
08-30-2005, 09:06 AM
lot of grafitti artists use PS too
Deep thread, this is the best i seen ya make, sicka.. lol
08-30-2005, 12:19 PM
Alot of that is true, I started of with cutting and pasting, sure, playing with blending,filters etc..... That's the way you learn to work with all the functions.
But lately I'm more getting into creating thins of my own by playing around with the pen tool, you realy can do magic with that silly thing.
Once you get the hang of the pen tool, you're on your way creating your OWN stuff.
You can't draw everything with the pen tool tho, well, u can maybe, but akes up lotsa work.
But you can draw your own images with pencil and paper, scan it, and then re-draw it with the pen tool.
I concidered Photoshop as an "editing" shortly after mastering the basics, and it's true, but you can create your own things with it tho.
Adobe Illustrator is more of creating software.
Sicka than aidZ
08-30-2005, 05:22 PM
fuck, i gotta get that shit. whats good wutage...u been gettin better, keep rippin shit up man, 1
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.