... сам вектор как искусство... векторное искусство, искусство в векторе - в любых сочетаниях смысла.
Вот получил тут на одном сайте мнение, довольно часто встречающееся, мол, цитирую: "весь вектор какой видел, включая Японцев, - творчеством не незовёш. Скорее - технический рисунок". Правда, известный господин, высказавший его, предпочел его сразу удалить, возможно, посчитав высказывание своего мнения уводящим в сторону от содержания топика (и правильно сделал. между прочим).
Я в курсе, что проблема поднималась не раз, но, к сожалению, - по моим личным наблюдениям каждый раз скатывалась, как это часто бывает в рунете, - мерянию бицепсами, замыливанию доводов, каким-то - ни к селу ни к городу - взаимным упрекам, основанным, подчастую, на личных обидах и простой человеческой зависти. Отсего, - создаю тему тут.
Несколько вопросов для затравки:
Так ли очевидно, что вектор и творчество несовместимы?
Неуж-то векторный объект не может ни в коем случае быть, собственно, - предметом искусства и, стало быть искусствоведческого анализа?
Насколько свободна и насколько ограничена свобода творчества вектором (простите за тавтологию)?
Hi trojza!
I have no idea what you posted, but I'm sure it was interesting! I just LOVE that there is an international aspect to this forum! We don't get much opportunity to chat with people from Russia here.
Rob
Hi, Rob
Internet - interpreters help us!Problem of clause -, how the vector as art is submitted. Whether there is a vector - art?There is an opinion, that the vector is only technical figure no more that. This opinion frequently meets.
I ask:Vector and creativity are incompatible?
The vector object can be a subject of art and whether can be analyzed as art.
In a vector there can be freedom of creativity, whether or not?
Questions eternal, but interesting
I shall be very glad, if you will be in this clause, Rob. Because at Russian same problem in the international dialogue)
I think I understand your reply (wish I spoke Russian). For my part, I think art is art. If it's vector or paint. When I started doing my illustrations on the computer I realized that drawing is in one's head and not in one's hand.
I used to do all my illustration work in watercolor and pen and ink. I found that it didn't matter what the medium is, it's all the same.
I have a love of rock art (carvings on rock by ancient people... there are some photographic examples in my gallery). Even though these are carved in rock by primitive people, they are still art (in my opinion). Art is art!
Hi guys,My Russian is as bad as yours Rob. I can say "Paka" and "spaziba" (Hello) but probably spelled it wrong I whent to a meeting here in Stockholm, Sweden, some years ago to meet, and show my portfolio to an Art Director at a Ad Agency. He said he didnt need vector illustration, because that anybody could make. He made them himself. So he looked at my drawings and mixed media images instead.I strongly believe he was wrong. So wrong. Bcause the tools dont make the artist or illustrator. Period.Art is an expression of thoughts, ideas, emotions, and so on. Tools are just tools to make art and illustration. Period. Well thats my opinion anyway. And just because there are great computer tools to make images with, it doesnt mean that "everyone" can make art and illustration. We now borders the Marcel Duchamp quote "All is Art" and the conceptual art scene, where everything goes as art. But for me its also a question of intent in creating that makes something art. I dont beleive everything is art. I actually wrote an article partly about that for a Swedish art magazine in 1995. During that time a lot of art in the art world, (well the western world art scene anyway) was about body parts, fluids, extrements and more. At the same time the media opinion at that time, (mid 90´s) was: "Painting is dead". And now, today, painting IS art again... Infantile media people. Art has it´s own "in fashion" mechanics as well, for sure.
So for me YES, vector images can be art.Can illustration be art?YES! But thats another thread or issue I guess. Many times we see a lot of absolutly great imagery, art, but its labeled as illustration, because its been made for a special reason, illustrating a subject matter in a book, movie, newspaper, or to show how to put together a IKEA furniture. And so on. At the same time all great painters and sculptures through history have been making art for the Kings, Pope´s, and so, making art for a special purpose. Mozart made great music still revered by billions of people through history until today, and it was many times comissioned by someone.Yes Vector can be art, and illustration can be art. I say can be. Not necesarily.
There is always that discussion going on, that have sprung up because of the ability to scan a photograph, import it, and then copy that photo in the computer. Or to alter an image in the computer. But that has been done through history as well. Light table anyone . Or square templates, drawing on top of a drawing a set of squares, to make it easier to take that small image and make it scalable when in a larger format. (A 1 centimeter square becomes a 1 meter square.)Question can be asked instead because of this: is a person who really DONT know how to draw with a pen on paper, and who copy a photograph or drawing, using for example a vector program or bitmap program (like coreldraw and photo-paint), can that person say they are artist´s? If they only copy?We use the technique of copying and draw other masters work, like sculptures and paintings, to learn our selves, its one of the ways to learn. But those imagery and copies should they be considered art? or great Illustration?Artist´s and illustrators are to me equal amount of artists. Its only the media and reason for which an illustration or an artist work that makes it become an art piece or illustration piece. Its all ART!