CompuServe Thread

Gayle, >> ask our dealer… ;-0 Is he the Pooh with a Ponytail by the name of Paul? <BG> >> I always like Monet – but I sure was sick of haystacks… << >> Here's an incediary comment… << Actually I thought you might have taken the "Brave Guy" part of my message as incendiary. <g> I'm glad you didn't. Shows you know me well enough. 🙂 I guess Bears understand each other. Which makes sense, otherwise they wouldn't procreate. (now how's that for provocative?) <G> >> I always like Monet – but I sure was sick of haystacks… << I'm thinking that must have been was a Dutch painter but his name escapes me for the moment. I think it might have been Bosch but I confuse him with the guy that does the demonic scenes. I don't care for haystacks either. Monet may have done them as well but I have a large volume of his works and no haystacks so I'm assuming you must have seen the other one who was I believe one of the Dutch Masters. A precursor to the Impressionists. Growing up I was strongly discouraged from the arts, so I'd go and hang out at little galleries in Sausalito and the Cannery etc. I learned alot about "contemporary" artists, who made a good living at it. So I don't find your comment "he'd be out of business" – incendiary, in the least, rather I find it disheartening and profound. The trash that was vogue for the time, typically seagulls over the bay or "endangered species" which in itself is not a bad topic, but like seagulls very gimmicky, was produced with an appauling production style method. One artist I spoke with confessed he could do at least six a day all variations on a simple theme. That's not art. <G> And I'm not going to claim I do art either, although I hope it does have some artistic merit. I'll think about your comment more but I'd have to agree that Monet might be in trouble today if he couldn't produce works fast enough. However it does seem to me that "artistic genius" would adapt to the times. No proof of course and there are plenty of examples of talented people who for one reason or another got passed over, because of the times, opportunity or some other obscure reason. So notoriety and acclaim are as much a function of the circumstances as the talent which one brings to the subject. Plenty of examples of fairly untalented people making it big as well. <g> Andy Warhol comes to mind, although he certainly had a talent for self promotion, much of which came from coddling the already famous. <G> Da Vinci was undoubtebly a true genius for all time. He would have done well regardless, unless of course the arts where banned or people felt threatened by his enormous amount of talent… which has happened periodically. That's where I keep my sights and it keeps me fairly humble if not frustrated. 🙂 Two other favorites are Degas and Vermeer. Vermeer is a very interesting painter not only for his work but for the technique which he is believed to have used. Some suspect that his studio was actually like the inside of a pin-hole camera, which would recieve a reversed image projected into his studio from an adjoining room. His paintings would then have had to have been created upside down, although it is quite possible that there was a lens in the wall which reveresed the image. Although there is no evidence to suggest that this done. The technology was available, but was probably not incorporated. Vermeers works were very photorealistic and of course the technique appeals the techno/artist in me. Anyway, please excuse my indulgence in this topic, periodically I have to remind my self what its all about, as in this medium we seem so far removed from it all. A friend of mine several years ago gave up animation and went back to oil painting as a hobby, though he was a professional animator at the time. He said he liked and needed the tactile immediacy of oils and CG was too much of a compromise. His disturbing comments run through my thoughts from time to time… I'd be most interested to hear your perspective on this if you have any feelings about it one way or another. For me this is my medium, though I vacilate in frustration between paint and animation. I can emphathize with the enthusiasm that people are expressing for meshpaint as I think indirectly its all part of the same need to have more direct contact, though personally I feel that I would be frustrated with it as well. This is no slight on meshpaint either, but more the fact that the tools with which we already have to paint, which are quite extensive, all have the same limitation; indirect accessibility. I'm glad someone is doing it but with 6 + paint packages already, I think I know what the problem is. <G> Someone recently mentioned VR goggles and gloves for modeling… Now I find that idea rather sexy, though realistically it all comes back to the same thing. The closer we get to simulating reality, the more apparent the gap becomes. I found the scene in Lawn Mower man with the two bodies intertwining the grand paradox as a result. On a certain level we want to be able to meld together, which is the appeal of the scene, but we can no more meld together than we can meld with our canvas. The closest we can get is through a sense of touch and resistance. John

Gayle, >> Braver than you could possibly imagine <g>, ask our dealer… << I've been known to go where angels fear to tread so that doesn't scare me none. <g> It is an entertaining thought though I didn't expect you to take me up on it. 🙂 My grandfather grew up in Highland Park but don't hold that against me, and my sister has spent time in Chicago and loved it for its museums etc. For my part I've been through O'Hare en route from Europe which is the extent of it. Not a good reason to be in Chicago. <g> I gather that Pooh with the Ponytail, named Paul is your dealer. <g> Can you say Peter Piper Picked a Peck of Pickled Peppers real fast? Yes its true, I don't miss much and was sorely tempted to jump in, but thought better of it. I'd asked Paul a question about installing the Ill Pro in a P90 and didn't get a response, that coupled with the mood of the moment didn't exactly lend itself to me being a wise guy. <BG> >> Odilon Redon, Prince of Dreams << Now I'm tracking, seems like a very interesting artist. Unfortuneately our public library system is horrible. Something to do with the climate and what people do when they live here. Reading books is not one of them. <g> We do have a library exchange program and its also quite probable that UCSD has it. This weekend I'll take a juant up there. I'm not sure I'd do this normally but he does sound like a very interesting artist so thankyou for passing the reference along. >> I did get to see the big Monet exhibit a few years ago ( but I sure was sick of haystacks… << I have a couple of volumes of his work but didn't notice a predominance of haystacks. There is one Flemish artist, that did the Harvest, Bosch I think, but that's all I recall on that subject. >> if he were alive today, he'd be out of business… same subject with 6 different lighting conditions can be done in Photoshop". << Well, when one considers the curious circumstances, which are as much a factor as talent, that makes it possible to be a successful artist, it kinda hard to say whether that is true or not. I get your point, but then one doesn't know how much farther he could have gone, with the current state of technology; whether he would have the resources and whether he would have stayed with landscapes as his subject… to a degree I think its as much a fluke as it is talent, whether one gets recognition for ones work. I can think of an associate of mine who works like a maniac, and who is doing some very cutting edge work with 3DS, and yet gets very little recognition. Monet like Picasso are the exceptions, many like Van Gogh, struggled and struggled and never really got the recognition until after they were dead. I've seen a rather ominous trend in this regard with "hot shot" painters in New York who rapidly burn out and subsequently die. Some because of AIDS for sure but some under rather more mysterious circumstances. Not an incentive to get too famous too fast for sure. <G> So in direct answer, I think the right talent at the right time along with a twist of lemon (must be cocktail time) determines whether or not one might be in or out of business. I think on the whole this is true although I suspect Da Vinci would have excelled in almost any society, in any culture. But then we're talking about a giant amoung giants. As far as Redon's work goes, I'm most curious to check it out. And especially curious to see whether his style is transatory or might actually last. Like him, I got a late start as well, although a relatively early start in animation. I'm picking up speed but there are so many other factors, haven't really cemented my style yet either, but my feeling on that is a slow burn is better than a fast one, especially if I want to stick around awhile. <g> How about you, where are you pushing this drive of yours? And where do you think its going? Or does it matter? ( I ask because I think I'm going to be doing this as long as I'm breathing, have sight and can afford to, nothing else really matters.) Some have suggested its just a fad, not for me, although there may be such a predominance of it that I'd have to do something else to make a living, there again depending on talent and circumstance. John