 |
Aug 10, 2006 - 08:02 PM |
|
 |
end justifys the means? |
|
|
ok, it's probably not that elaborate. my plans on taking over the world is at a halt now.
i recently have this urge to draw and write in hopes to get my works published. while the goal is far from my reach at the moment. my search and organizations for my ideas, tools, mediums and materials reminded me of a conversation i had with a fellow animator while back.
we both started out to be 'doddlists'. went our separate ways after graduation and he became an 3D animator. sometimes, i find, that when in a profession of any sort, there seemed to be an invisible social status between the pros and those who are not in the profession.
for example (this opinion does not represent the opinion of the whole), to illustrate my point, two people interested in photography might be using disposible cameras. However, one of the person goes professional and begins go dispise disposible cameras (dispite the possible advantages to it) <- now, you just replace the cameras with another item.
applying to the drawing and fine arts, my friend thinks that many of the things should start out from scratch, constructed out of one's own. so programs such as poser , bryce 3D are programs for beginners, inferiror, cheating and are taboo NOT to be used. (many of the artists in the industry shared the thought). now, i of course agrees with the idea. however, does that mean that it is forbidden, becomming one of the steel untold use-it-and-burn-forever-in-noob-h*ll-rules of animation?
i admit that i may not be an good genius artist that can draw the vision in my mind. (or write for that matter), however, i am fairly visual and would be able to make the scene if given the right tools. i have trouble with prespective, and lines and lighting arrangements. yet, when i open a 3D program (maya) and set things up with primitive objects, it will help me to visualize BETTER and be able put it down on paper. extending it FURTHER, if i am able to use such programs (with real humans, mountains, objects, etc) to set up a scene (although such actions might result in that the set up scene is not simimilar to the of my mind), screen capture it and then draw it on paper. Would this action be considered as an inferior as oppose to those artists that just sit down and begin their rough skething, inking and colouring?
how different is that to having those wooden maniquin or thousands of thumbnails of sceneries photos stashed at one's desk?
yes, in the end i do believe that i have to NOT rely on any of these tools. an artist need to know prespective, and lines, and shapes...
i guess i am fairly baffled at how twisted the standards can be. twisted standards, not expectations. i EXPECTED the expecattions to be high.
of course, the process does not need to be revealed. does it? i hid in my studio and continue to draw... do i actually have to say that i drank 2 boxes of greentea, went to the bath room 10 times over the lasat few days and banged my head on the table?
and when..when..(if) i did accomplish my task in a comic with great success.... now, some geek found out that i used the tools rather than drawing them out of the blue. i am positive that the praise will all be gone and exchanged with look downs and distaste.
is this similiar to having a great meal infront of you smells and tastes good.. while not knowing that the food has been dropped on the floor before?
....to be continued?
---
just a note: posers and bryce are such programs that you have already premade materials (such as human figures and mountains) that you can place them in a scene, set them up, and you'll have a completed 3D picture. it took away the 'tedious' 3D modeling of a figure from a cube block.
what about dreamweaver/flash as oppose to an HTML programmer?
| Currently Playing: nothing |
|
|
|
|
|
<- not me.. 
not attached to it, but a resting place)
