... 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)?
"The tools dont make the artist or illustrator" - that is my point!
I saw many works that are just illustration of authors good thechnic. But also there are works that we can proudly call ART. So what is the difference were they draw/paint or what ever or maid using PC? Both are part of authors' soul, hart, mind....
You are right, Rob. However, frequently there is an opinion that not only computer art in general, - but the vector art in particular is more subordinated to technical systems of copying. For example, - there is an opinion, that the drawing (not auto-trace) photo in a vector, or figure made in other program, is a copying. Think, that the copying - has no relation to creativity. Only to a stage of training. Then, - drawing in a vector - only technical process which is not concerning creativity.
Even creation new of engineering of drawing - not creativity. I disagree with it!
trojza said:Так ли очевидно, что вектор и творчество несовместимы?
trojza said:Неуж-то векторный объект не может ни в коем случае быть, собственно, - предметом искусства и, стало быть искусствоведческого анализа?
trojza said:Насколько свободна и насколько ограничена свобода творчества вектором (простите за тавтологию)?
Hi, Stefan!
Briefly: "Poka" (Good-bye), "Spazibo" (Thank ), "Privet" (Hi), "Zdravstvui" (Hello)
Yours Art Director has missed a question AS the vector illustration is qualitatively made. Probably, - technical component of a professional vector. It is known, that the same picture - the different vector artists - will draw in different vector-technic (mech, vector-only, vector+raster elements, redact-trase or others). Besides each vector artist makes of personal technic of drowning in aesthetic sense. But problem not only in technic of vector drowning, but in an opportunity of self-expression through a vector.
"the tools dont make the artist or illustrator" - very correct point! It seems, in minds of the people till now there is an opinion, that: " the computer itself draws without the one who draws ". And the misunderstanding is based on it.
Probably you are right, accusing medias in infringement of frameworks of art. But we shall not speak about it. If all - art, all - means anything... The borders of art are worthy of separate discussion.
"...because its been made for a special reason..." The great art frequently was made for a special reason. Without dispute!) The large budget is not always directly connected with great art. It is understandable.
You have noticed earlier - a problem connected to idea of copying. Frequently speak, that the vector means of drawing - are only means of copying. Import of an illustration or photo in Corel, drawing her(it)... Whether Always it - only copying? I doubt. 1. Are used of various engineering of drawing; 2. The photo or figure can earlier be made by author of a vector illustration; 3. Any copy is an independent, creative interpretation (if the artist is talented); 4. An opportunity to change a photo or figure during drawing in a vector. It is impossible to overlook(forget) and about main, - creative approach to work of the creative man. It is necessary to remember that such "translation" in technical sense opens new opportunities of self-realization. The art photo of a classical picture - can be an art copy or all the same by work of art? But in a photo we are more limited to technics. Drawing of a photo - absolutely other process! In the end XIX of century were afraid, that the photo kills a portrait. Now art takes a revenge. What you think of it?
Great topic!
I have always compared the process of creating vectors on a computer to the process of printmaking, as in thetraditional process of silkscreen, wood block cut prints and hand engraved plates using a stylus to skrach "lines" to create halftone effects. This type of traditional printmaking process was and is a very "technical" process that none would attempt without much training and practice, unlike cave painting or finger painting.
The two processes are very different of course, one is by hand, the other by mouse or stylus pad. Either way, you still must use eye-hand combination to create both. The VISUAL end results are very identical. Vector art work always has the look and feel of printmaking art work.
As a medium of visual artistic expression I see no difference. As a printmaker or silkscreener you must think like a printmaker, as a vector artist you must also think like a printmaker.
There are many examples of great art using the printmaking process by so many great artists throughout Art History. I'm certain that many of you on this site who have studied Art History have seen the same prints I have.
For anyone to tell you that using digital vectors itself negates any artistic merit only reveals a gaping lack of knowledge on that person's part, otherwise known as "ignorance".