PDA

View Full Version : Laugh at my horrible art


Bill H.
08-02-2003, 12:13 AM
So occasionally I draw crappy art on the computer. And recently someone wanted to buy some. Sucker every minute they say. So I figured I'd set up a web site and maybe try and get 'em hung up in a coffee shop or two.

So here is the beginning of the site. It's really just a gallery of some right now. www.quoke.com

Please comment. Pukable? or merely distasteful?

You can see I have a high opinion of them. Thanks.

green_bladder
08-02-2003, 01:11 AM
Not too bad (well, better than anything I've ever done). What program are you using? And why the obsession with spheres? ;)

Bill H.
08-02-2003, 01:19 AM
You, sir (it is sir, yes?) are far too kind. And I beg to differ, they're far worse than anything you've ever done.

Program: Paint Shop Pro.

Spheres: Because they're easy. click, drag diagonal, voila, la sphere.

Are there any you particularly detest less than others? or moreso?

Thanks for the kind words.

green_bladder
08-02-2003, 02:04 AM
No, no..I insist mine are quite an eyesore. I don't put them online because I can't afford to refund all the broken monitors that they will induce.

Touched, Sunset 2 (believe it or not) and Colour Paths are the ones I enjoy most.

Orange Skinner
08-02-2003, 02:08 AM
There really not that bad, Bill H! Honest! There were certainly a couple that I thought were a little bland, (if you must have names, Arc, Stars and Planets and Dark Screen didn’t particularly appeal to me) but that’s true of anybody’s artwork. I actually liked Atoms, Join, Green Cell, Fire, and Touched quite a bit.

Oh, and congratulations on the potential buyer.

Shirley Ujest
08-02-2003, 03:27 AM
I like them, not enough to hang on a wall, but I have to say as someone who is paintshop impaired, I'm impressed.

I bet you could sell one on Ebay.

No, really.

yosemite
08-02-2003, 05:02 AM
I think you have a good sense of color. Some of the pieces have less interesting color than other pieces, but overall—good color.

Good color goes a long way. Good color can salvage an otherwise bland piece of art (not that I am calling your work "bland.") I'm just saying, don't underestimate the power of color.

Bill H.
08-02-2003, 05:27 AM
Thanks, Orange Skinner. The Arc one was really a test I ended up keeping; I agree it's kinda bland. I appreciate the negative feedback as much as the positive. Join and Green Cell were the first ones I made.

Thanks for the kind words.

Bill H.
08-02-2003, 06:04 AM
You're too kind, Shirley Ujest. Can you tell me what would make them more to your liking? Too bland? Too esoteric? Too ugly? Be brutal; trust me you won't offend. Do you draw as well?

I hadn't really thought of selling any on Ebay. Thanks for the suggestion.

Bill H.
08-02-2003, 06:43 AM
yosemitebabe, thanks for the compliment. I don't really know formally (or informally) how colors work. Could you tell me which ones have good color and which are less interesting? Also, could you suggest what sort of color changes might improve the less interesting ones?

Thanks.

Mariemarie
08-02-2003, 06:48 AM
My favorites are Arc, Sunset2, Join and Colorpaths. And I like the one about the leaf too.

Do get them hung up in a coffee shop, library, science center, corporate lobby, etc.

Presentation is important. Have them tastefully matted and framed.

Bill H.
08-02-2003, 12:56 PM
Mariemarie, thanks for the encouragement and advice. I did my best matting the ones I sold; hopefully the matt color choice was ok.

Mr. Blue Sky
08-02-2003, 02:28 PM
I like linear, shape-oriented stuff like this.

Some of it reminds me of Omni magazine covers from the 70's.

Sunset 3 looks like it could be a Yes album cover.

astro
08-02-2003, 02:40 PM
Too many notes!

capybara
08-02-2003, 03:55 PM
Ok, I bitch about art as a vocation, so I have very traditionalist feedback:
Warning-- I look at pictures a lot and have a lot of opinions. YMMV, and I merely explain my aesthetic response here:
I like the ones with either a bit of a limited palette or an interesting set of complementary colors-- I think on the first page my favorite by far is Hell, because the colors have a kind of unity to them (rather than just including everything in the rainbow) and the composition is more interesting-- the picture plane isn't just filled with a random or overall pattern of objects, but instead there is weight of larger objects to one side, but smaller but complimentarilly colored objects to the other-- smaller but of great visual interest due to the complimentary color-- which balances it out. The one odd-colored circle adds interest and hints at something like a narrative.
Globes could be equally interesting if you reduced the overall effect-- don't be afraid of concentrating interest in particular areas. Otherwise I think it had a sucessful choice and range of colors.
On the second page I like Color Paths the most-- the texture complicates an otherwise bland composition-- many of the pictures on that page don't have much of a . . . visual. . trajectory? Sense of purpose? They follow too simple of a compositional formula but aren't interestingly problematized in any way. Yeah, actually somehow most of the pictures on that page do follow the same formula.
On the third page I prefer Go and Switchplate-- they have a kind of direction but the color schemes are a bit too timid or unchallenging. The 3-d sphere shade effect makes me shudder; I think it's because the 3-d computer graphics effect is imposing a bland kind of depth when you could do so much with the basic shapes like that while still acknowledging the flatness of the picture plane-- the floating in space effect just seems too generic. Like the picture Floating-- if you had reduced the picture to two dimensions without the sphere shading the magenta stripe would have had a kind of intention, but as it is it seems superfluous-- not just questioning the flatness/ depth of the picture but confounding what seems to be the intended 3-d-- it goes past "ambiguous" to "apparently failing." It ends up reminding me too much of the kind of desktop pictures that come with Macs. Pleasant enough, but not terribly interesting. Depends on what your goal is.
So suggestions-- think more about your color ranges and choices, experiment with the possibilities of a flat space for a while (but allowing for an ambiguity of the possibility of depth) and try to carefully place your areas of interest-- avoid all-over patterns but also avoid overly simplistic placements. Play more with textures and problematising your objects' boundaries-- try playing with softer or compromised edges.
Ok, you note you don't have color training-- a couple of ideas. About color theory-- maybe draw yourself a color wheel (I know, totally 1st grade but the review is needed when you get into art)-- the colors that are opposite one another are "complimentary" (i.e. blue and orange, yellow and purple, red and green) and intensify one another when placed in proximity. Analogous colors (next to each other) can tone down or distort each other. Experiment with hoe the colors intensify or distort As far as playing with apparent depth, remember that "warm" colors (yellow, red etc) appear to project while cool (green blue purple) colors appear to recede.
(When matting also keep this all in mind-- when chosing a mat pick a color that brings out an area of interest that might otherwise be overlooked, NOT the dominant color of the image which is already dominant enough. By using a complimentary you can more subtly intensify that dominant color AND bring out details)
There's about 2 1/2 cents.

Shirley Ujest
08-02-2003, 04:01 PM
Bill, I have no drawing talent whatsoever.

Having grown up with a mom who is an artist and a MIL that is one as well, I won't even try. It'd be like batting after Babe Ruth.

However, yosemitebabe (being much more edumacated) than my self in artsy things, nailed it on the head. Your colors are well done.

Personally, I like still lifes and portraits.

XJETGIRLX
08-02-2003, 05:26 PM
Ooooh! I really like go and [/i]green cell[/i]. Space croquet is nifty too!

bittersweet
08-02-2003, 05:49 PM
I liked Touched the best.

Hell made my eyes and tummy ache.

It's amusing to me that you have a rather low opinion of these images, but could still probably make a bit of dough by selling them!

LudditeAndroid
08-02-2003, 08:17 PM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Happy now?

Bill H.
08-03-2003, 02:01 AM
Mr. Blue Sky, thanks for the kind words. I am a child of the 70s; I suppose everything comes from somewhere.

Bill H.
08-03-2003, 02:03 AM
astro, don't quite follow. Do you mean they're too busy? or ??? Thanks for looking.

Bill H.
08-03-2003, 02:41 AM
Wow, capybara, really appreciate the in depth criticism.

Appreciate your comments about Hell and see how I could work that point into Globes. I'll play with that. Also, appreciate the general point about complimentary colors and sizes.

Could you tell me more about what you mean by "(many of the pictures on the second page) aren't interestingly problematized in any way"? Should there be some sort of issue and/or resolution like one would find in a story?

Also, could you tell me more about the formula you see throughout page two? In fact, all of them have a lot of formula to them as far as process of creation. To my eye, all are similar in the use of spheres, bright colors, (hopefully) intereting textures, and generally diagonal layout of things. Is there more formula about?

I see your point about the color schemes of Go and Switch Plate. Go is a simulated picture of a game called Go that's huge in the Eastern world (on par with Chess) but virtually unknown here. So the colors there were pretty much defined for me. But I do agree about Switch Plate; the color is tame.

Was your 3d comment specific to any particular ones? Frankly, I don't like Floating and agree with your assessment.

Appreciate your overall comments. When you say "Play more with (...) problematising your objects' boundaries-- try playing with softer or compromised edges.", were you referring to objects in the pictures, or the edges of the pictures themselves?

Also appreciate your comment on matting. In fact, I have one matted here in front of me that I can see would've been better with a different colored matt based on your suggestion; I'll play with that.

As I say, very much appreciate all the comments.

Bill H.
08-03-2003, 02:46 AM
Shirley Ujest wrote
Your colors are well done.
Thank you very much.
Personally, I like still lifes and portraits.
The thing is, I do too. And I can't draw those. At all. Not even stick figures. Which is why I feel my stuff is all crap.

Bill H.
08-03-2003, 04:08 PM
Cool, thanks for theoooh, XJETGIRLX. Go is based on a game I like. Appreciate your kind words.

mascaroni
08-04-2003, 07:20 AM
I like them.. Roger Dean meets Magritte.

Maybe you feel that they're crap because you know all the components that are in them and can't see the finished article in the same way as anyone else... I used to make techno/rave records and felt the same way, but now, after a time of not listening to them I can listen to them much more objectively.
Keep it up...
and I'm not being kind, I'm being honest (before you thank me for my kind words)

RTA
08-04-2003, 07:57 AM
There are some images there that have potential if they were actual paintings, but as mere computer printouts they are worth less than the nice frame they'd go in. Please put down the mouse and learn to draw and paint.

Mangetout
08-04-2003, 08:23 AM
I think they are interesting, they remind me (if it isn't an insult) of the sort of art that one sees in large corporate headquarters.

I disagree with RTA; they are worth whatever someone who likes them is prepared to pay. They are not 'mere' anything (any more than a painting is 'mere daubs on canvas') - there is nothing especially magical about physical media, but perhaps RTA's intent was more along the lines of 'do not be content with that which you find easy', in which case I would agree.

ouisey
08-04-2003, 12:39 PM
I don't know anything about art, but I liked your pictures. Atoms was my favorite. I'd prolly hang that one on the wall.

Bill H.
08-04-2003, 07:40 PM
Thanks bittersweet, Touched is also one of my faves; it's the only one hanging in my house. Sorry about the tummy ache from Hell. And thanks for the encouragement on selling them.

Bill H.
08-04-2003, 07:41 PM
Thanks LudditeAndroid, for the first honest criticism.

Bill H.
08-04-2003, 07:44 PM
mascaroni, I appreciate the intros to Roger Dean and Magritte. Hadn't heard of either gentlemen before and after a quick web search I like their stuff. Thanks for the encouragement.

Oh and thanks for the kind words. heh heh.

Zenster
08-04-2003, 08:56 PM
You are following too closely in an avenue commonly used by others. Time pressure may be causing you to hurry past opportunities that might be revealed had you slowed down a bit. Consider distancing yourself from those who preceed you in the field. Such a precautionary measure might serve to reduce any risk of negative impact and simultaneously enhance your perspective. If you back off a little and proceed with more caution alternative paths to your true destination might appear more readily.


What? ... Isn't this the tailgating thread?!?

with withholding
08-04-2003, 10:09 PM
I liked the third page best (newest?) Next time put the new stuff up front.
Rainbow Atom
Arrows and Balls
Switch Plate
GO
All would be decent downloads as rotating wallpaper.
None elaborate enough to want to look at too many days.
My taste would be for either fewer round balls or at least vary the texture a lot more.

Bill H.
08-05-2003, 05:04 AM
Exciting development!

There's a nice restaurant/gallary that I eat at regularly, and I've met the owner a few times. Talked to him today and showed him a brochure I put together and he loves my stuff. (like I say, there's one born every minute). As soon as I can get stuff there, we'll hang it up. Figure I'll put ten together this week. I'm thinking (based on feedback here and from others) that I'll go with these:

Touched
The three Sunsets in one long triple holed frame like thing
Hell
Atoms
Color Paths
Join
Go
Arc
Fire
Leaf Eye

Now I gotta work out sizes, matts and frames. I played with some colors for matts based on advice here, and I put that color as backgrounds behind the pics on the site. Any advice will be appreciated.

Mangetout
08-05-2003, 05:09 AM
Without wanting to in any way prejudice your creativity, I would consider changing some of the names - the short ones are good, but some of the multi-word ones are too coldly descriptive (IMO, YMMV etc)

Bill H.
08-05-2003, 05:11 AM
RTA, like you I also prefer seeing real paint on real canvas paintings, but the problem is -- I can't do that. Well, perhaps if I spent years I could be mediocre. Or I can do digital art and be mediocre now.

I do appreciate the challenges doing digital art poses. But for me I'm afraid this is the best path. Thanks for the feedback though.

Bill H.
08-05-2003, 05:14 AM
Thanks, Mangetout. Appreciate the encouragement, and validation of digital stuff.

Also thanks for the suggestion to change the names. I'm totally up for this and am not attached to any of the names. Any suggestions?

Bill H.
08-05-2003, 05:17 AM
Thanks ouisey, appreciate the feedback. Funny thing about Atoms, it was a test picture initially and I threw it away, but a couple people liked it and so I included it. And it's turing out to be one of the more popular ones.

Bill H.
08-05-2003, 05:21 AM
Funny stuff, Zenster. Thanks for chiming in and not being too brutal.

Mangetout
08-05-2003, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by Bill H.
Thanks, Mangetout. Appreciate the encouragement, and validation of digital stuff.

Also thanks for the suggestion to change the names. I'm totally up for this and am not attached to any of the names. Any suggestions? Well... (and you must understand that I'm not speaking with any authority or even real relevant experience here)... I'd probably change:
'Green Cell' >> 'Photosynthesis'
'Arrows and Balls' >> 'Conflict' or 'Deadlock'
'Stars & Planets' >> 'Constellation'

That kind of thing, but it is difficult to do this without it sounding pretentious (and I don't claim to have succeeded).

Thing is, if it was me creating them, I'd probably have more of an idea of what the image means to me, even if it is created without specific intent, there would come a point when it starts to look like something and starts to evoke thoughts and feelings; these are what you have to capture and expand upon.

Knowed Out
08-05-2003, 01:35 PM
Since what you do mostly is "spacey" art, I'd think about doing more than just putting multicolored spheres all over the place.

Speaking for myself, I like looking at art that makes me think I'm in another world. Even if it's just a still life portrait of a bowl of fruit. If it looks like fruit that could exist on this planet or any other, I'm down with it.

Touched came closest to that for me. It didn't have defined borders that the viewer can associate with something he is already familiar with. Most of your other pieces had spheres. Everybody knows spheres. Touched was less defined. It gave me more of a sense of being unable to recognize it...I have to venture closer to be able to understand what it is. That conveys a sense of mystery.

When I saw the thumbnail for Rainbow Atom, I thought it was a bird's eye view of a crater at first. The lower left quarter of a crater, that is. Then when I saw the closeup I saw you just stacked more of those grumble grumble spheres. If you had roughened the outline of those spheres and made them irregular objects, made them the same color as the background by making the bottom ones darker and the top ones lighter, it would have looked like a crater on another world to me. The sphere that acts as the nucleus could be made into a pool of bright yellow lava. That version would have led me to speculate why the crater was there, what purpose it served, and what was in the parts that I couldn't see.

One more thing: by sticking to a certain style like that, you are limiting yourself in ways you express yourself. Kind of like the guy who paints velvet Elvises at the flea market. They may be good and people buy them, but he'd be a better artist if he chose to portray other things.

Bill H.
08-05-2003, 04:41 PM
Thanks with withholding. Actually the third page is the stuff that I wasn't as happy with. A few are early ones, a few felt rough. Go in particular is a game I like that noone else here has heard of, and since the picture is very simple, I really didn't expect anyone else to relate to it or like it. Although surprisingly several seem to.

I agree about fewer balls. Thanks.

Bill H.
08-05-2003, 04:53 PM
Mangetout, appreciate the thoughts on new names and I agree. I'll rework several.

Bill H.
08-05-2003, 05:01 PM
Knowed Out, "multicolored spheres all over the place"... "velvet Elvises at the flea market"... Ouch. You tread heavily but you speak the truth.

Funny thing is I really didn't realize there were so many spheres until a couple folks here mentioned it. There are of course; I just didn't back up that far.

Fact is, you're right: none of them are modeled after real things (except the sunset ones and Go), and none of them really look like real things. And they are pretty thematically similar. I'll work on broadening some.

Mangetout
08-05-2003, 05:09 PM
The trick, I think is to ask yourself questions about the pictures; what is the swarm of arrows about to do the the cluster of balls? - are they about to attack('conflict'), or are they poised, curious but hesitant? ('contact'), maybe they represent two complementary items willingly coming together? ('alliance')...

Aslan of Narnia
08-05-2003, 05:30 PM
The colors were quite vibrant, don't change anything about whatever process you do to create it, however more variety amongst the objects would be nice. After awhile it seems the pictures seem to be small variations on the same theme, no matter how different the landscapes, placement and positioning and atmosphere is.

Experiment with other shapes(squares, triangles), and also try drawing less abstract objects.

All very good works, you could make some money off of them.

Bill H.
08-05-2003, 05:46 PM
Thanks Mangetout. Ironically, that one isn't conflict, contact or alliance, but somewhat sexual. I guess that does make it all of the above though, doesn't it?

Waenara
08-06-2003, 12:20 AM
Like a lot of other people, I really liked Touched. I'd hang a print/poster of that.

I didn't see anyone else mention Smoke, but I also like that one alot. I think it would look good with a slate grey matte, similar to the hint of darker grey in the corner.

I'm just a college student without much money, so most of my "art" is of the ten-dollar-poster variety, but I'd buy prints of both of those.

Mangetout
08-06-2003, 02:28 AM
Ah, I did wonder if it might have been sexual.

I would also recommend doing more 'series' stuff, even if only a few of your experiments see the light of day; 'blue disk' would be particularly suited to experimentation, I think.

don't ask
08-06-2003, 02:59 AM
Don't worry about whether or not you are overusing some motif. I recently attended a course at a corporate institute. On the walls they had paintings by an artist I'd never heard of that were selling for, IIRC, $800-2000. They were all kind of the same - a coloured background with sea creatures in some kind of pattern in the foreground. The sea creatures were various sizes, brightly coloured and often repeated - rough fish shapes, shrimps, diatoms, octopus, coral, starfish etc.

Graphically they were very nice to look at. The technical skill required for the painting seemed minimal when you looked at the actual sea creatures - what made them appealing was the artist's eye for colour and pattern. And although, after looking at several, I ended up thinking "ho hum more of the same" I still liked the ones that had caught my eye and this must be the norm because plenty of them were marked as SOLD.

Good luck.

Bill H.
08-06-2003, 11:35 AM
Aslan of Narnia, thanks for the suggestion to branch out. And thanks for the kind words about the colors and potentially making money with them. Hope you're right.

Bill H.
08-06-2003, 11:39 AM
Waenara, saying "I would buy that" is so much more of a compliment than "I like that". Thanks very much.

Captain Lance Murdoch
08-06-2003, 04:02 PM
No offense Bill H. (nor to anyone else), but I don't care for them.

I find them pretty pedestrian and uninspired. The compositions are dull, the color schemes are bland and the subject matter is cliched. From the OP, it sounds like you sort of felt that way yourself when you created them.

This is not to say you can't sell them. I've seen much worse things in hotels and restaurants. I just don't think they're compelling art.

Yes, yes I know. I'm an art snob.

The big question is do you like them? That's really the most important thing.

TVeblen
08-06-2003, 07:25 PM
Moderator's note:

This thread fits in better at Cafe Society. Moving it on over...

TVeblen,
IMHO mod

Bill H.
08-07-2003, 04:38 AM
Thanks don't ask, appreciate the encouragement. You make it sound like a road to riches. Wanna be my agent?

Bill H.
08-07-2003, 04:47 AM
rogzilla, any specific thoughts on changes or new direction?
The big question is do you like them? That's really the most important thing.
Well, I do like making them. And as a businessman, I'll enjoy this little divergence of marketing and selling them. And I do like them enough to hang them on walls. But clearly the level of talent to make one of mine is far far less than that required to create a Dali or such.

So, to answer your question, I guess I'd say I do like them, but I don't really respect them.

Somnambulist
08-07-2003, 07:19 AM
Originally posted by mascaroni
I like them.. Roger Dean meets Magritte.

Maybe you feel that they're crap because you know all the components that are in them and can't see the finished article in the same way as anyone else... I used to make techno/rave records and felt the same way, but now, after a time of not listening to them I can listen to them much more objectively.
Keep it up...
and I'm not being kind, I'm being honest (before you thank me for my kind words)

I would agree wholeheartedly with mascaroni that it's easy to be over-critical of one's own work when so engrossed in details. Some of my own artwork that I didn't care for much when originally created I have come to like more with time (while others have dated and lost appeal). I would also add that the more you produce the more likely you are to produce something of quality - no artist is perfect and a certain amount of mediocrity is inevitable - but some of your work will stand out.

I do like one or two of your pieces as they are now and I believe they are significantly better than a lot of overpriced trash that I constantly see on corporate walls (my current employer no exception) - even if only decoratively (which at this stage seems your objective). Keep experimenting!

capybara I read your criticism with interest - (while avoiding a hi-jack) would you care to look at some other work?

Somnambulist
08-07-2003, 07:30 AM
Originally posted by mascaroni
I like them.. Roger Dean meets Magritte.

Maybe you feel that they're crap because you know all the components that are in them and can't see the finished article in the same way as anyone else... I used to make techno/rave records and felt the same way, but now, after a time of not listening to them I can listen to them much more objectively.
Keep it up...
and I'm not being kind, I'm being honest (before you thank me for my kind words)

I would agree wholeheartedly with mascaroni that it's easy to be over-critical of one's own work when so engrossed in details. Some of my own artwork that I didn't care for much when originally created I have come to like more with time (while others have dated and lost appeal). I would also add that the more you produce the more likely you are to produce something of quality - no artist is perfect and a certain amount of mediocrity is inevitable - but some of your work will stand out.

I do like one or two of your pieces as they are now and I believe they are significantly better than a lot of overpriced trash that I constantly see on corporate walls (my current employer no exception) - even if only decoratively (which at this stage seems your objective). Keep experimenting!

capybara I read your criticism with interest - (while avoiding a hi-jack) would you care to look at some other work?

Bill H.
08-07-2003, 05:27 PM
Somnambulist wrote
I would agree wholeheartedly with mascaroni that it's easy to be over-critical of one's own work when so engrossed in details. Some of my own artwork that I didn't care for much when originally created I have come to like more with time (while others have dated and lost appeal). I would also add that the more you produce the more likely you are to produce something of quality - no artist is perfect and a certain amount of mediocrity is inevitable - but some of your work will stand out.
Yes, I agree and appreciate the encouragement.

I do like one or two of your pieces as they are now and I believe they are significantly better than a lot of overpriced trash that I constantly see on corporate walls (my current employer no exception) - even if only decoratively (which at this stage seems your objective). Keep experimenting!
Thank you very much. Could you tell me which ones in particular you liked, and also which you didn't? One of the main reasons I'm asking (and appreciate very much the feedback) is that I'm framing several for this exhibit, and have to decide which ones. I have a tentative list, but I seem to be changing it each day.

LookitMe
08-07-2003, 05:50 PM
Sorry, I can't laugh at your art because these aren't horrible, Bill H. I actually like them. In fact, I will bookmark your site so that I can check back periodically to see if you've added more.

Thanks for sharing these.

LudditeAndroid
08-07-2003, 05:51 PM
I've sold my own art before. Not anywhere near as difficult as I thought it would be, but it had the unexpected side effect of greatly lowering my enjoyment of painting, so I quit selling. I don't want to be painting something I'm passionate then start thinking, "If I keep going with this color scheme and subject it won't sell as well as one with this color scheme and subject. Oh, and cats, cat paintings sell well maybe I should add a cat." Started to feel like Thomas fucking Kincade. Unacceptable. I stopped selling, and have a pile of paintings under my work desk to prove it. But they're in my style. Anyway, I was only making $3 to $18 an hour profit on most of them. Not work hating myself or despising the work over.

If I had to, I would recommend Stars and Planets, Color Paths, and Go. Well, to be brutally honest, I'd recommend you also physically paint or draw something. If you only do digital art, it may be harder to be taken seriously. People might start thinking "He does everything on computers because he doesn't have the talent for any other medium."

Bill H.
08-07-2003, 06:11 PM
LookitMe wrote
Sorry, I can't laugh at your art because these aren't horrible, Bill H. I actually like them. In fact, I will bookmark your site so that I can check back periodically to see if you've added more.

Thanks for sharing these.
Thanks Mom.

Bill H.
08-07-2003, 06:12 PM
No, sincerely I do thank you LookitMe. Any in particular strike your fancy?

LookitMe
08-07-2003, 06:35 PM
Originally posted by Bill H.
LookitMe wrote

Thanks Mom.

You're welcome, son. Did you remember to clean your room and take out the trash?


Love,
Mom

;)

LookitMe
08-07-2003, 06:37 PM
Originally posted by Bill H.
No, sincerely I do thank you LookitMe. Any in particular strike your fancy?

I like them all, but if I had to choose any, I'd pick Sunset 1. Very soothing.

I also like Arrows and Balls. Reminds me almost of MC Escher's style.

capybara
08-07-2003, 06:57 PM
Sorry to get back so late.
I meant the boundaries of objects in the pictures-- you know, play with textures and the relationship between the objects and the space around them. And, yeah, what I meant by formula was "large sphere in this corner, smaller sphere in the opposite corner"-- a number of them follow that composition.
A couple of artists you might look at that do non-objective geometric things like this are Kandinsky (his later stuff) and Hans Arp. Miro also. Might give you some ideas of what more complicated compositions might look like.
Somnambulist: Uh, sure? Maybe I should start the "ask the snob who's looked at too much art!" thread. . . no. "I'm not an artist but I play one on TV." Warning: All my input is very academic, as you've noticed.

elfkin477
08-07-2003, 07:15 PM
I like them Bill. I'm just learning how to do collages ( seriously, I got a program two days ago and I've made two so far for my fics -->http://www.geocities.com/mulderscreek/beyond.html I need to change the text color on the first one) but beyond making skins and textures for The Sims, my skills with computer art are quite limited. So are a lot of people's.

Your art would make interesting computer wallpaper. Maybe you can bundle these and a few more on a cdr, and sell them for $2-3 a disk on ebay while you wait for more serious buyers? Probably not, but it's a thought.

joshmaker
08-07-2003, 07:28 PM
Here is an idea that might be interesting with your style of work:

How about finding real world textures such as leathers, stone surfaces, tree bark, etc, and putting them into the computer with a scanner or digital camera then using them to make your art.

I think the combination of real world textures with abstract shapes might make for an interesting composition.

Bill H.
08-08-2003, 02:25 AM
Thanks very much, LookitMe.

Bill H.
08-08-2003, 02:29 AM
Thanks, elfkin477. I love yours, and it's given me some ideas to play with. Also, I like the idea of offering them as wallpapers. Appreciate the feedback.

Somnambulist
08-08-2003, 05:37 AM
Originally posted by Bill H.

Thank you very much. Could you tell me which ones in particular you liked, and also which you didn't? One of the main reasons I'm asking (and appreciate very much the feedback) is that I'm framing several for this exhibit, and have to decide which ones. I have a tentative list, but I seem to be changing it each day. [/B]

Like others, I like ‘Touched’ (and it’s growing on me the more times I look at it), which has a vibrancy to it… I also like ‘Synthesis’ and ‘Space Croquet’ (not sure about the title though!). The one that is really sticking in my mind, and I’m not quite sure why, is ‘Arrows & Balls’ – oddly, it flips between emotions for me sometimes calming, sometimes menacing…

Some of the others seem a little contrived maybe (or formulaic as capybara describes them) – ‘Links’, ‘Topo Disk’, the ‘Sunsets’, leave me a bit flat.


capybara ...you can view some of my work on www.danleighton.com - some of it is definitely a bit dated now but was fairly popular 15 years ago. To avoid hi-jacking this thread, perhaps you could forward your critique via email from the site? Tks

fessie
08-08-2003, 09:33 AM
I'm one of those annoying art snobs, so I try to keep my mouth shut if I don't have anything nice to say. Here I can open my mouth b/c I do find your art interesting. I've definitely seen much "worse" stuff in galleries (and people sometimes buy it, too).

I think your textures are fun, and you generally do a pretty good job of filling the page, or making use of your space. Your compositions are simple, but they have balance. Vivid art is really popular, it's great that you work in saturated colors if that's what turns you on.

Here are my suggestions:

1. Keep exploring and experimenting - without worrying about whether or not people will like it. It takes time to discover your voice and listen to it. Don't be trapped by your success - that's the down side to making money too soon - you don't want to become a "Johnny One-Note".

2. Go to museums. I love Capybara's suggestion of Kandinsky. Pollock did some neat textures, though his palette isn't nearly as bright as yours. I was thinking Rothko might give you some ideas about color/space/depth issues. Since you're working in an electronic medium your colors will tend to be flat if you don't watch it. You really need to see the art in person, reproductions just aren't the same.

3. Read Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain by Betty Edwards, and do the exercises. If you don't think you can draw, that's probably because you never had a decent teacher. Really.

Good luck, and keep creating! The world needs more artists!

Bill H.
08-08-2003, 02:13 PM
joshmaker, I like the way you think, and in fact many of the pieces do have textures from real world things, but deeply buried. For example, Sunset 1 has a wood grain that goes through it (the dark horizontal lines). Leaf Eye and Color Paths have a leaf in them. In fact, they are really variations of each other. If you look close you can see the leaf veins are the same, and many other similarities. Dark screen uses -- you guesed it! -- a screen door. The same leaf is in the background of Arrows and Balls.

But I think your point is to really bring those textures out front, and I think that's a great idea. I'll play with that.

Any particulars you liked or didn't like?

Thanks.

grayhairedmomma
08-08-2003, 04:24 PM
Bill H., have you thought about printing these on canvas to add a little more depth and substance to them?

For the ones you're hanging in the restaurant, it might be more visually interesting to print maybe 9 of them on canvas, not frame them but mount them on ... I don't know the name but it's basically a square frame that the canvas stretches over...then grouping the pictures together in a 3 x 3 arrangement. Not under glass though - that makes it more up close and personal. I think that would relieve the mundaneness of seeing the same types of images all over a restaurant and give them more of an impact and mystery as if they're all supposed to connect somehow.

Also - if you want to try your hand at painting you could trace the shapes of one of your drawings onto canvas and try a paint-by numbersish thing just to see how the texture of the paint and cloth affects the feeling of your drawings.

all of the above is said as someone who is not an artist, but definitely enjoys it. I love GO, btw.

Bill H.
08-09-2003, 12:40 AM
Somnambulist, you are incredibly talented. I really like your work.

Thanks for the compliments and specific comments. Also, which one did you mean by "Links" that you weren't fond of; I think the name was a typo.

Bill H.
08-09-2003, 03:04 AM
Thanks for the in-depth comments, fessie. Also thanks for the suggestions. I have been meaning to read "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" and havne't found time, but I will. And thanks for the encouragement.

Are there any you like and dislike more than others?

ProjectOmega
08-09-2003, 03:25 AM
No offense, Bill, but honestly, most of those look like the canned graphics you get with the Geocities page generator. Sort of like a "Fisher Price has a manbaby with MSPaint" motif. Not my taste at all.

Bill H.
08-09-2003, 02:13 PM
Funny you should mention that, mornea. This morning I went around to a few galaries to get ideas for matting, and saw giclees (which is art printed by a computer printer, i.e. what I have) that were done on canvas. And not only were they on canvas, but the canvas (including the painting) was wrapped around a thick frame, perhaps 2" thick. So not only was the picture on canvas, but the picture continued on the sides of the picture. I hadn't seen that before; it was a very cool effect.

Problem is, I can print on nice paper for under a buck a sheet, and do it at home. To print on canvas is very expensive and has to be ordered. So, I won't do that for this exhibit, but definitely I'd like to try that for a future copy.

I like your idea of grouping too. Although, I'm thinking of making 2 or 3 pieces that sort of go together. For this exhibit, I framed 3 sunset pictures (the last 2 on the website, and another first one that's more matching of those two) in one frame. It looks pretty cool.

Also, thanks for the suggestion to try painting based on a copy of one of them. Sounds like a great idea.

And finally, thanks for the kind words on Go.

Bill H.
08-10-2003, 07:06 AM
ProjectOmega, thanks for playing; no offense taken. Any suggestions for improvements?

Somnambulist
08-11-2003, 04:26 AM
Originally posted by Bill H.
Somnambulist, you are incredibly talented. I really like your work.

Thanks for the compliments and specific comments. Also, which one did you mean by "Links" that you weren't fond of; I think the name was a typo.

...and thank you for the returned compliment Bill!

I actually meant 'Join' not 'Links'... some part of the artisitc side of my brain clearly did a sub-conscious translation, sorry. I was paying attention, honestly!

mornea, the square frame the the canvas stretches over is, rather uninspiringly, called a stretcher.

Bill H, as a tip, if you are going to try this, it's probably worth getting someone to show you how to stretch a canvas first. It is quite easy to mess up, and the stretcher can warp badly if not done correctly.

Bill H.
08-11-2003, 02:50 PM
Somnambulist wrote
Bill H, as a tip, if you are going to try this, it's probably worth getting someone to show you how to stretch a canvas first. It is quite easy to mess up, and the stretcher can warp badly if not done correctly.
Thanks. As it turns out, many many years ago, I did stretch some of my own canvases for painting, so I am familiar with how tough that is. When I do it, I'll be sure to get some help for the first few.

Thanks again.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.