spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
The Rules of Art..., by spirit on May 22, 2010 1:41:26 GMT 1, It's SUPPOSED to look dated...cheap...tacky.
Nice to see you aiming high...
Anyway, everyone knows that text ALWAYS looks better when you cut it out of paper...
Source: www.artyulia.com/
It's SUPPOSED to look dated...cheap...tacky. Nice to see you aiming high... Anyway, everyone knows that text ALWAYS looks better when you cut it out of paper... Source: www.artyulia.com/
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Banksy prints stolen from Art Republic, by spirit on May 21, 2010 21:25:37 GMT 1, I think what they are getting at Freerange is he comes on here acting like a third party (aka consumer) probably purchases prints from us (consumers/collectors), then jacks the cost of them up in his gallery...thats what they are getting at.
Just for the record, that's not what I was getting at.
I think what they are getting at Freerange is he comes on here acting like a third party (aka consumer) probably purchases prints from us (consumers/collectors), then jacks the cost of them up in his gallery...thats what they are getting at. Just for the record, that's not what I was getting at.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
WTB Banksy Nola Grey Rain $7,500 USD, by spirit on May 21, 2010 15:37:07 GMT 1, Well, the offer looks a bit suspicious because it is such a good one. It is not unrealistic to think that AR might want to tempt the thief out of his hole and this might be a way of doing it. If that were the case, then the offer would be bogus as you would have no intention of actually paying the money, you would just be trying to catch the thief. Under the circumstances, and considering the timing, I think alexnh123 was not being unreasonable to ask the question she initially did - although her follow up comment was perhaps pushing things a little.
You'd be surprised how often people try and manipulate the system by posting under multiple accounts, and it makes sense that people are suspicious of certain kinds of posts.
Well, the offer looks a bit suspicious because it is such a good one. It is not unrealistic to think that AR might want to tempt the thief out of his hole and this might be a way of doing it. If that were the case, then the offer would be bogus as you would have no intention of actually paying the money, you would just be trying to catch the thief. Under the circumstances, and considering the timing, I think alexnh123 was not being unreasonable to ask the question she initially did - although her follow up comment was perhaps pushing things a little.
You'd be surprised how often people try and manipulate the system by posting under multiple accounts, and it makes sense that people are suspicious of certain kinds of posts.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Street Art Book by RomanyWG, by spirit on May 21, 2010 15:16:59 GMT 1, "There's no way way you're getting a quote from us to use on your book cover"
"There's no way way you're getting a quote from us to use on your book cover"
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Banksy prints stolen from Art Republic, by spirit on May 21, 2010 14:48:59 GMT 1, i would say most of you have not met anyone at art republic. They have a great set of helpful, passionate and informative staff who always are happy to help when you go in there. Please dont sit behind a screen judging people, its a nice day... go outside.
I am sure they are all very nice. But that's not the issue here is it?
i would say most of you have not met anyone at art republic. They have a great set of helpful, passionate and informative staff who always are happy to help when you go in there. Please dont sit behind a screen judging people, its a nice day... go outside. I am sure they are all very nice. But that's not the issue here is it?
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
WTB Banksy Nola Grey Rain $7,500 USD, by spirit on May 21, 2010 14:18:44 GMT 1, But can someone please tell me who Mr. Bojangles is?
Haha - the million dollar question! (or perhaps ยฃ15K ish...)
Have a read of this thread...
urbanartassociation.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=53694&page=2#661968
Basically a grey rain Nola got stolen from Art republic. The day after this was made public you came along with a very tempting offer for one. I think some people may have thought you were from Art Republic (like a certain Mr Bojangles appears to be) and your offer was thief bait.
And Sevieray101, I would love to do things through pm but I have not received any offers yet. I have only sent one pm here. That was to alexh123 to find out what she was talking about (the Mr. Bojangles thing). I have not got a reply, or maybe i have and just don't know where I would check for a reply on this site?
To check your PMs, click on the letter icon at the top right of the menu bar - it will be flashing red if you have one.
Best of luck in your search for a Nola...
But can someone please tell me who Mr. Bojangles is? Haha - the million dollar question! (or perhaps ยฃ15K ish...) Have a read of this thread... urbanartassociation.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=53694&page=2#661968Basically a grey rain Nola got stolen from Art republic. The day after this was made public you came along with a very tempting offer for one. I think some people may have thought you were from Art Republic (like a certain Mr Bojangles appears to be) and your offer was thief bait. And Sevieray101, I would love to do things through pm but I have not received any offers yet. I have only sent one pm here. That was to alexh123 to find out what she was talking about (the Mr. Bojangles thing). I have not got a reply, or maybe i have and just don't know where I would check for a reply on this site? To check your PMs, click on the letter icon at the top right of the menu bar - it will be flashing red if you have one. Best of luck in your search for a Nola...
|
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Banksy prints stolen from Art Republic, by spirit on May 21, 2010 13:52:24 GMT 1, It's f***ing outrageous IMO. Can't stick people that manipulate the forum. bojangles should identify him/herself as AR or their representative and behave in a legitimate and respectable manner. A gallery trying to mislead fans on here is not acceptable what are you on about? what have they misled?
A representative of a gallery who comes on this forum, posting links to items in their gallery, while not disclosing that they are from that gallery, and giving the impression that they are an independent third party, is misleading people. Particularly when they also have a proper gallery account - why not just be straight up about things and use that?
I really expected more from a supposedly reputable gallery like Art Republic - just goes to show the levels of manipulation that go on in this scene. I also really don't understand why some galleries choose to behave in this way - the risks of getting busted like this far outweigh the gains imo - and people have very long memories.
It's f***ing outrageous IMO. Can't stick people that manipulate the forum. bojangles should identify him/herself as AR or their representative and behave in a legitimate and respectable manner. A gallery trying to mislead fans on here is not acceptable what are you on about? what have they misled? A representative of a gallery who comes on this forum, posting links to items in their gallery, while not disclosing that they are from that gallery, and giving the impression that they are an independent third party, is misleading people. Particularly when they also have a proper gallery account - why not just be straight up about things and use that? I really expected more from a supposedly reputable gallery like Art Republic - just goes to show the levels of manipulation that go on in this scene. I also really don't understand why some galleries choose to behave in this way - the risks of getting busted like this far outweigh the gains imo - and people have very long memories.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Paul Insect Prints for sale, by spirit on May 21, 2010 9:45:07 GMT 1, Glad to see you have the full Price On Application for each print
Glad to see you have the full Price On Application for each print
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
The Rules of Art..., by spirit on May 20, 2010 3:33:26 GMT 1, Let me phrase this better...: 1. Computer-generated text is OBJECTIVELY better than hand-drawn (you've all agreed on that, it's much smoother, much more homogenous, on much smaller scales - it's far closer to the ideal than a human could ever hope to create by hand). ALL your arguments have been about SUBjectivity. 2. Computer-generated text is NOT NECESSARILY better than hand-drawn text SUBJECTIVELY. That all depends on other (subjective) criteria. But, as you can see around you, it does tend to be... If you are arguing either of those things: you are wrong...
OK - my last post on the matter really...
Again, you are trying to pass off your subjective opinion that "Computer-generated text is better than hand-drawn" as objective. That's a totally subjective statement that you cannot prove and I for one don't agree with. How exactly are you defining better? faster? cheaper? more aesthetically pleasing? If the latter then the existence of illuminated manuscripts like I posted at the beginning of our conversation (which you failed to counter with a better looking example of electronic text) not to mention the entire profession of calligraphy proves that your statement cannot be true. The truth is, different types of letterforms have their appropriate uses and any judgement about which is "better" is totally dependent on the context in which they are to be used.
It is usually better to type set a business letter.
It is usually better to hand write a love letter.
Thank you and good night.
Let me phrase this better...: 1. Computer-generated text is OBJECTIVELY better than hand-drawn (you've all agreed on that, it's much smoother, much more homogenous, on much smaller scales - it's far closer to the ideal than a human could ever hope to create by hand). ALL your arguments have been about SUBjectivity. 2. Computer-generated text is NOT NECESSARILY better than hand-drawn text SUBJECTIVELY. That all depends on other (subjective) criteria. But, as you can see around you, it does tend to be... If you are arguing either of those things: you are wrong... OK - my last post on the matter really... Again, you are trying to pass off your subjective opinion that "Computer-generated text is better than hand-drawn" as objective. That's a totally subjective statement that you cannot prove and I for one don't agree with. How exactly are you defining better? faster? cheaper? more aesthetically pleasing? If the latter then the existence of illuminated manuscripts like I posted at the beginning of our conversation (which you failed to counter with a better looking example of electronic text) not to mention the entire profession of calligraphy proves that your statement cannot be true. The truth is, different types of letterforms have their appropriate uses and any judgement about which is "better" is totally dependent on the context in which they are to be used. It is usually better to type set a business letter. It is usually better to hand write a love letter. Thank you and good night.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
The Rules of Art..., by spirit on May 20, 2010 3:13:40 GMT 1, "The idea that letters are supposed to have have straight lines and a nice smooth curves is your opinion only, nothing more." That's what I'm saying: NO, IT'S NOT... Humanity has decided that letter look better when perfect, not me. They decided it millennia ago.
Er....but letters have only been "perfect" (at least electronicall generated) for about the last 50 years, so how can humanity have decided that millennia ago? They were no mechanical or electronic means of producing text at all then...everything was done by hand.
Anyway, enough. I'm off to bed. Goodnight.
"The idea that letters are supposed to have have straight lines and a nice smooth curves is your opinion only, nothing more." That's what I'm saying: NO, IT'S NOT... Humanity has decided that letter look better when perfect, not me. They decided it millennia ago. Er....but letters have only been "perfect" (at least electronicall generated) for about the last 50 years, so how can humanity have decided that millennia ago? They were no mechanical or electronic means of producing text at all then...everything was done by hand. Anyway, enough. I'm off to bed. Goodnight.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
The Rules of Art..., by spirit on May 20, 2010 3:05:03 GMT 1, I am however arguing the second part. BY DEFINITION, a straighter line would typically (all things being equal) be better OBjectively, than a less-straight line - because the outside criteria for a good line is that it's straight, above all else. It's not MY criteria. I didn't decide that lines should be straighter than not. The world did.
This is just a ridiculous comment. Lines don't need to be straight. The only kind of line that needs to be straight is a straight line... Would Banksy's "This is where I draw the line" have looked better if it was straight?
Just like the world decided what the alphabet should look like. I'm not saying that text has to look razor sharp - the world is (and has since before computers even existed). However, that being said, IF a painting was painted entirely with rough lines, then, in that case, a straight line WOULDN'T be objectively better, now would it?... My point was that, in general, the objective criteria for text is that it's in a sharp, smooth font (for most intents and purposes). Business letters are typed and not hand-written for just this reason. The human mind associates sharper with professional, and computer-based text is sharper than hand-drawn, simply because we humans have drastic physical limitations...
So finally you seem to have seen some sense. You were wrong to say "Computer generated text is always better" whereas it is fair to say that in some circumstances, computer generated text is more appropriate (business letters for example).
Which brings us nicely back to what is more appropriate for the art...so I'll leave it there.
I reckon you owe me about $500.
I am however arguing the second part. BY DEFINITION, a straighter line would typically (all things being equal) be better OBjectively, than a less-straight line - because the outside criteria for a good line is that it's straight, above all else. It's not MY criteria. I didn't decide that lines should be straighter than not. The world did. This is just a ridiculous comment. Lines don't need to be straight. The only kind of line that needs to be straight is a straight line... Would Banksy's "This is where I draw the line" have looked better if it was straight? Just like the world decided what the alphabet should look like. I'm not saying that text has to look razor sharp - the world is (and has since before computers even existed). However, that being said, IF a painting was painted entirely with rough lines, then, in that case, a straight line WOULDN'T be objectively better, now would it?... My point was that, in general, the objective criteria for text is that it's in a sharp, smooth font (for most intents and purposes). Business letters are typed and not hand-written for just this reason. The human mind associates sharper with professional, and computer-based text is sharper than hand-drawn, simply because we humans have drastic physical limitations... So finally you seem to have seen some sense. You were wrong to say "Computer generated text is always better" whereas it is fair to say that in some circumstances, computer generated text is more appropriate (business letters for example). Which brings us nicely back to what is more appropriate for the art...so I'll leave it there. I reckon you owe me about $500.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
The Rules of Art..., by spirit on May 20, 2010 2:41:55 GMT 1, Objectivity says: 'This is supposed to have straight lines and a nice smooth curve, does the item in question look like this or not?'
No, this is where you are going wrong. You have a preconception and you started your objective example with a subjective statement: "This is supposed to have nice straight lines and a nice smooth curve".
The idea that letters are supposed to have have straight lines and a nice smooth curves is your opinion only, nothing more. It is certainly not a fact. Many people, not too mention the entire calligraphic profession would disagree with you.
An objective statement would be something like "This item which I am putting on the table for you to examine is blue"
Objectivity says: 'This is supposed to have straight lines and a nice smooth curve, does the item in question look like this or not?' No, this is where you are going wrong. You have a preconception and you started your objective example with a subjective statement: "This is supposed to have nice straight lines and a nice smooth curve". The idea that letters are supposed to have have straight lines and a nice smooth curves is your opinion only, nothing more. It is certainly not a fact. Many people, not too mention the entire calligraphic profession would disagree with you. An objective statement would be something like "This item which I am putting on the table for you to examine is blue"
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
The Rules of Art..., by spirit on May 20, 2010 2:34:41 GMT 1, Oh, and just how is a printing press doing anything by hand? Yes, it's not TECHNICALLY electronic - but it sure as heck is mechanical. It's using automated processes to overcome the weaknesses of the human body (isn't that the definition of a computer).
No, it's more like the definition of a machine. You still don't seem to have fully grasped the difference between mechanical and electronic.
The spacing isn't done by eye - the blocks are cut to the proper sizes, typically by machine. The engraving was once done by hand, not now. The only reason the text is in a straight line is because of extruded metal (even hundreds of years ago), not because the artist thought it was straight or tried to draw a straight line, but because a machine or lathe decided it was straight. That's not doing it by hand - that's using a machine to help. So, unless your printing press was nothing but unique letters, all hand-carved and mounted by hand, you can't claim it was truly hand-done... The whole process of type-setting is using machinery to help produce better looking type.
The spacing was done by eye. It's called kerning and word spacing. When setting metal type you can't just put the letters in next to each other and expect them to look right. Letters require minute adjustments in the space either side of them depending on what letters come before and after. And how do you think they set justified type by hand?
I'm not going to go into details about kerning in letterpress here, this article gives you a good idea of the kind of work involved.
blog.typoretum.co.uk/2009/07/07/kerning-in-letterpress-typesetting/
The whole process of type-setting is using machinery to help produce better looking type.
No. It is to produce more text, faster and cheaper. The point is to disseminate information as quickly and efficiently as possible. The look always comes second to that. Look at the newest form of communication, the web for example - to this day there is still not a standard "built in" way of specifying fonts beyond the 10 or so that most people have installed on their computers. It's coming, but it's taken well over 15 years to get here.
And, yes, fonts can be BASED on hand-written letters - but that doesn't mean that the fonts we use today are ANYTHING like something we can do by hand (ALL the major fonts have straight, fluid curves, down to the microscopic level, that's something the human hand can't do).
Again, all those fonts you refer to were originally drawn by hand. The human hand is capable of incredible things. Yes there will always be minute irregularities, but that's exactly where the beauty is. It's a shame you can't see that.
That 5pt font you speak so highly about... You're missing the point, in that he's not carving each letter, using it once and throwing it away - he's using the same letter he carved to print numerous different letters throughout the book. That's not doing something by hand! That's like saying using a stencil is hand-painting something (yes, a hand might have painted it, but that's not the same thing)! If he carved each letter individually, the book wouldn't look nearly as homogenous (or nearly as good). You are actually making my points for me..
I'm afraid it's you who's missing the point. Sure, he's carving a letter and making a mould in order to make multiple letters from it, but for reasons of efficiency, not beauty. Carving each indidual letter used would be a colossal and pointless waste of time. The point is the SHAPE of those letters are the result of the human hand. Making a mould does not suddenly make all the lines perfectly straight or curved. You may be surprised to learn than when Gutenburg printed his bible, he cut many different slight variations of every letter and used them randomly for the specific purpose of imitating the manuscripts that had come before. He spent a lot of time reproducing those human variations and inconsistencies because he wanted his bible to look like it had been written by a scribe.
Oh, and just how is a printing press doing anything by hand? Yes, it's not TECHNICALLY electronic - but it sure as heck is mechanical. It's using automated processes to overcome the weaknesses of the human body (isn't that the definition of a computer). No, it's more like the definition of a machine. You still don't seem to have fully grasped the difference between mechanical and electronic. The spacing isn't done by eye - the blocks are cut to the proper sizes, typically by machine. The engraving was once done by hand, not now. The only reason the text is in a straight line is because of extruded metal (even hundreds of years ago), not because the artist thought it was straight or tried to draw a straight line, but because a machine or lathe decided it was straight. That's not doing it by hand - that's using a machine to help. So, unless your printing press was nothing but unique letters, all hand-carved and mounted by hand, you can't claim it was truly hand-done... The whole process of type-setting is using machinery to help produce better looking type. The spacing was done by eye. It's called kerning and word spacing. When setting metal type you can't just put the letters in next to each other and expect them to look right. Letters require minute adjustments in the space either side of them depending on what letters come before and after. And how do you think they set justified type by hand? I'm not going to go into details about kerning in letterpress here, this article gives you a good idea of the kind of work involved. blog.typoretum.co.uk/2009/07/07/kerning-in-letterpress-typesetting/The whole process of type-setting is using machinery to help produce better looking type. No. It is to produce more text, faster and cheaper. The point is to disseminate information as quickly and efficiently as possible. The look always comes second to that. Look at the newest form of communication, the web for example - to this day there is still not a standard "built in" way of specifying fonts beyond the 10 or so that most people have installed on their computers. It's coming, but it's taken well over 15 years to get here. And, yes, fonts can be BASED on hand-written letters - but that doesn't mean that the fonts we use today are ANYTHING like something we can do by hand (ALL the major fonts have straight, fluid curves, down to the microscopic level, that's something the human hand can't do). Again, all those fonts you refer to were originally drawn by hand. The human hand is capable of incredible things. Yes there will always be minute irregularities, but that's exactly where the beauty is. It's a shame you can't see that. That 5pt font you speak so highly about... You're missing the point, in that he's not carving each letter, using it once and throwing it away - he's using the same letter he carved to print numerous different letters throughout the book. That's not doing something by hand! That's like saying using a stencil is hand-painting something (yes, a hand might have painted it, but that's not the same thing)! If he carved each letter individually, the book wouldn't look nearly as homogenous (or nearly as good). You are actually making my points for me.. I'm afraid it's you who's missing the point. Sure, he's carving a letter and making a mould in order to make multiple letters from it, but for reasons of efficiency, not beauty. Carving each indidual letter used would be a colossal and pointless waste of time. The point is the SHAPE of those letters are the result of the human hand. Making a mould does not suddenly make all the lines perfectly straight or curved. You may be surprised to learn than when Gutenburg printed his bible, he cut many different slight variations of every letter and used them randomly for the specific purpose of imitating the manuscripts that had come before. He spent a lot of time reproducing those human variations and inconsistencies because he wanted his bible to look like it had been written by a scribe.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
The Rules of Art..., by spirit on May 20, 2010 1:42:06 GMT 1, Re: the illuminated manuscripts... Again, you're talking SUBjectively, not OBjectively. OBjectively, something rough CAN'T be as good as something smooth. Humans like smooth, they prefer it. They also like patterns.
Well you failed the challenge...
And I'm not sure you really understand what subjectively and objectively mean.
How can either rough or smooth be "good"? They are just adjectives. Either can be preferable depending on the context - I think most people would prefer rough sand paper to smooth. Some girls like smooth men, and some like a bit of rough.
So, that manuscript LOOKS GREAT as it is, however, that's not to say that it wouldn't look slightly better if the text was slightly more homogenous. In fact, the very reason WHY you think it looks so good - is PRECISELY because the text is so homogenous! Because it looks so much like a computer did it!...
Now those statements really are subjective...
The reason it looks so good is because it is the result of many hours of work by a highly skilled craftsman. Do you really not see beauty of the hand in this work? You really think making it all straight and with perfect curves would improve it? You think it looks like it was done on a computer?
so much for the scale-breaking IQ.
Re: the illuminated manuscripts... Again, you're talking SUBjectively, not OBjectively. OBjectively, something rough CAN'T be as good as something smooth. Humans like smooth, they prefer it. They also like patterns. Well you failed the challenge... And I'm not sure you really understand what subjectively and objectively mean. How can either rough or smooth be "good"? They are just adjectives. Either can be preferable depending on the context - I think most people would prefer rough sand paper to smooth. Some girls like smooth men, and some like a bit of rough. So, that manuscript LOOKS GREAT as it is, however, that's not to say that it wouldn't look slightly better if the text was slightly more homogenous. In fact, the very reason WHY you think it looks so good - is PRECISELY because the text is so homogenous! Because it looks so much like a computer did it!... Now those statements really are subjective... The reason it looks so good is because it is the result of many hours of work by a highly skilled craftsman. Do you really not see beauty of the hand in this work? You really think making it all straight and with perfect curves would improve it? You think it looks like it was done on a computer? so much for the scale-breaking IQ.
|
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
The Rules of Art..., by spirit on May 20, 2010 0:39:36 GMT 1, they are more beautiful than anything ever printed or digitally produced, without a doubt. And the pics you posted are of good ones, but certainly not the most exquisite. c
very true mate - I was in a bit of a rush... please feel free to post some better ones.
they are more beautiful than anything ever printed or digitally produced, without a doubt. And the pics you posted are of good ones, but certainly not the most exquisite. c very true mate - I was in a bit of a rush... please feel free to post some better ones.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
The Rules of Art..., by spirit on May 20, 2010 0:26:55 GMT 1, OK....
While the piece you have posted is not to my taste, I completely defend your right to make whatever art you like, in whatever way you like, using whatever methods you like. I have no problem with the idea of digital art at all.
However, I am going to take issue with some of the comments you have made on typography, that being what I do for a living and I like a good argument
"Text ALWAYS looks better when done by computer" "text DOES always look better when electronic - that wasn't a statement of subjectivity, it was a statement of fact"
This is just so wrong, It's hard to know where to begin...
So I'll start with a challenge as that's what you did. Please find me some computer generated text that "looks better" than this...
Should be a pretty easy one for you as text ALWAYS looks better when done by computer right?
"That's why EVERY artist that does text does massive 8 inch high text - because humans CAN'T do smaller text that looks right (well, not without going through a ridiculous amount of hastle anyways)."
Humans can do small text that looks right, but for the most part we've forgotten/lost the skills required to do it. Check out the work of Christopher Plantin for example who was working in Antwerp in the mid 16th century. This guy was cutting 5pt italic type, into steel punches, often by candle light and in reverse of course. Here's his famous Polyglot bible, in Hebrew, Latin, Greek, Syriac and Aramaic from 1572.
What you call hassle, type designers would call skill and patience. Sure it's easy to bash it out quick with a computer, and anyone can do it, but there's not necessarily any craft or skill involved. You do realise that all those computer fonts you use were initially hand drawn by type designers right?
"Oh, and how is the old way of typesetting NOT electronic??? Sure, they may not have used computers, but ALL the typesetting was done with the aid of machinery (kerning, spacing, fonts were all homogenous, spacers, the perfectly horizontal tracks the letters went into, etc...). Heck, hot metal involved making basically a stamp and using that over and over again in a printing press! That sounds a hell of a lot closer to a computer than to hand-painting...."
Well, put simply, it wasn't electronic, because it didn't use electricity. And you shouldn't confuse the industrial revolution with the electronic one. The technology level of printing with moveable metal type which was basically in use in one form or another from around 1450 to 1950, is far closer to printing with woodcuts than it is to computers.
The fact is,over the last 500 years, text has got faster and cheaper to produce, but that has generally been at the expense of it's beauty. Every technological development from Gutenburg's bible to electronic typesetting and digital printing has been about how can we print more, faster, and for less cost. Beauty and "look" has always played second fiddle to these economic factors.
It can be argued that desktop publishing was the worst thing to ever happen to the "look" of Typography. Before that, type setting was a highly skilled job carried out by master craftsmen. Now anyone with a copy of Creative suite can do it, and most do it very badly.
The development of lithographic printing has also meant that text has turned from a tactile 3d medium into a flat 2D medium. Previous methods of printing relied on pressure and created "impression" in the page. Beautifully letterpressed pages are wonderful to hold and touch - you don't get that with "modern" printing.
"And, despite what you think, text does look better when it's sharp! Otherwise, IT'S NOT A GOOD REPRESENTATION of what it's supposed to represent! Again, you might prefer wavy text - but, that's NOT PROPER TEXT! It's wrong. It might look good to you, but it's still wrong. It's not the way it's supposed to look (despite whatever you might think subjectively). It's wrong. "
I'm afraid this comment just has me shaking my head again in it's total wrongness. When you say "otherwise it's not a good representation of what it's supposed to represent", what exactly do you think it's supposed to represent? It's are supposed to represent writing!. Writing is the art of expressing language by letters or other marks. Letters are a system of representing language through graphic means. Letters were signs that were originally scratched on rocks, carved on shells, dug from wax and drawn in the sand with sticks. Any mark that successfully communicates a letter, and by extension writing and language and meaning to another person, has performed it's representational task.
It's arguable when humans first started writing, but It is thought that the first true alphabetic writing appeared around 2000 BC. But according to you, no text created before the invention of electronic typesetting was "proper text"?. It was all "wrong". It was "not the way it was supposed to look" And it is only in the last 50 years or so, of that 4000 year history of letters, that letters have started to look right. Rightโฆ
"Text has straight lines and perfect curves WHEN DRAWN PROPERLY. Text looks better when drawn properly (otherwise books, tv shows and newspapers would use hand-crafted type). It still may look good when drawn by hand - but it doesn't look RIGHTโฆ"
While the logical mind may love them, the human eye hates straight lines and perfect curves. With the exception of some fine geometric display faces, very few fonts tend to be made up of straight lines and curves. Geometric fonts designed "mathematically" like this tend to be unpleasant on the eye and difficult to read. The majority of fonts in use these days, both serif and sans serif faces, tend to have humanist roots - i.e. they are based on hand written letterforms with organic calligraphic shapes. It is these very human, hand drawn characteristics that make them look "right".
OK.... While the piece you have posted is not to my taste, I completely defend your right to make whatever art you like, in whatever way you like, using whatever methods you like. I have no problem with the idea of digital art at all. However, I am going to take issue with some of the comments you have made on typography, that being what I do for a living and I like a good argument "Text ALWAYS looks better when done by computer" "text DOES always look better when electronic - that wasn't a statement of subjectivity, it was a statement of fact" This is just so wrong, It's hard to know where to begin... So I'll start with a challenge as that's what you did. Please find me some computer generated text that "looks better" than this... Should be a pretty easy one for you as text ALWAYS looks better when done by computer right? "That's why EVERY artist that does text does massive 8 inch high text - because humans CAN'T do smaller text that looks right (well, not without going through a ridiculous amount of hastle anyways)." Humans can do small text that looks right, but for the most part we've forgotten/lost the skills required to do it. Check out the work of Christopher Plantin for example who was working in Antwerp in the mid 16th century. This guy was cutting 5pt italic type, into steel punches, often by candle light and in reverse of course. Here's his famous Polyglot bible, in Hebrew, Latin, Greek, Syriac and Aramaic from 1572. What you call hassle, type designers would call skill and patience. Sure it's easy to bash it out quick with a computer, and anyone can do it, but there's not necessarily any craft or skill involved. You do realise that all those computer fonts you use were initially hand drawn by type designers right? "Oh, and how is the old way of typesetting NOT electronic??? Sure, they may not have used computers, but ALL the typesetting was done with the aid of machinery (kerning, spacing, fonts were all homogenous, spacers, the perfectly horizontal tracks the letters went into, etc...). Heck, hot metal involved making basically a stamp and using that over and over again in a printing press! That sounds a hell of a lot closer to a computer than to hand-painting...." Well, put simply, it wasn't electronic, because it didn't use electricity. And you shouldn't confuse the industrial revolution with the electronic one. The technology level of printing with moveable metal type which was basically in use in one form or another from around 1450 to 1950, is far closer to printing with woodcuts than it is to computers. The fact is,over the last 500 years, text has got faster and cheaper to produce, but that has generally been at the expense of it's beauty. Every technological development from Gutenburg's bible to electronic typesetting and digital printing has been about how can we print more, faster, and for less cost. Beauty and "look" has always played second fiddle to these economic factors. It can be argued that desktop publishing was the worst thing to ever happen to the "look" of Typography. Before that, type setting was a highly skilled job carried out by master craftsmen. Now anyone with a copy of Creative suite can do it, and most do it very badly. The development of lithographic printing has also meant that text has turned from a tactile 3d medium into a flat 2D medium. Previous methods of printing relied on pressure and created "impression" in the page. Beautifully letterpressed pages are wonderful to hold and touch - you don't get that with "modern" printing. "And, despite what you think, text does look better when it's sharp! Otherwise, IT'S NOT A GOOD REPRESENTATION of what it's supposed to represent! Again, you might prefer wavy text - but, that's NOT PROPER TEXT! It's wrong. It might look good to you, but it's still wrong. It's not the way it's supposed to look (despite whatever you might think subjectively). It's wrong. " I'm afraid this comment just has me shaking my head again in it's total wrongness. When you say "otherwise it's not a good representation of what it's supposed to represent", what exactly do you think it's supposed to represent? It's are supposed to represent writing!. Writing is the art of expressing language by letters or other marks. Letters are a system of representing language through graphic means. Letters were signs that were originally scratched on rocks, carved on shells, dug from wax and drawn in the sand with sticks. Any mark that successfully communicates a letter, and by extension writing and language and meaning to another person, has performed it's representational task. It's arguable when humans first started writing, but It is thought that the first true alphabetic writing appeared around 2000 BC. But according to you, no text created before the invention of electronic typesetting was "proper text"?. It was all "wrong". It was "not the way it was supposed to look" And it is only in the last 50 years or so, of that 4000 year history of letters, that letters have started to look right. Rightโฆ "Text has straight lines and perfect curves WHEN DRAWN PROPERLY. Text looks better when drawn properly (otherwise books, tv shows and newspapers would use hand-crafted type). It still may look good when drawn by hand - but it doesn't look RIGHTโฆ" While the logical mind may love them, the human eye hates straight lines and perfect curves. With the exception of some fine geometric display faces, very few fonts tend to be made up of straight lines and curves. Geometric fonts designed "mathematically" like this tend to be unpleasant on the eye and difficult to read. The majority of fonts in use these days, both serif and sans serif faces, tend to have humanist roots - i.e. they are based on hand written letterforms with organic calligraphic shapes. It is these very human, hand drawn characteristics that make them look "right".
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Banksy Film Credits, by spirit on May 19, 2010 13:43:45 GMT 1, 2 blokes called Adam and 2 called Simon - coincidence? I don't think so...
2 blokes called Adam and 2 called Simon - coincidence? I don't think so...
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Banksy prints stolen from Art Republic, by spirit on May 19, 2010 11:50:04 GMT 1, but if you can't get hold of a ninja outfit, or feel it's just not "you", then some people find this sort of garb works quite well too... (without the caption though for obvious reasons.)
but if you can't get hold of a ninja outfit, or feel it's just not "you", then some people find this sort of garb works quite well too... (without the caption though for obvious reasons.)
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Banksy prints stolen from Art Republic, by spirit on May 19, 2010 11:39:46 GMT 1, and here's what he looks like at night...
and here's what he looks like at night...
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Banksy prints stolen from Art Republic, by spirit on May 19, 2010 11:33:11 GMT 1, man in a white tracksuit - not the most discreet robbing outfit is it? AS IS PUTTING STREET ART UP IN FLUORESCENT WORK MENS JACKETS. PEGGY IS WONDERING WHAT A DISCREET ROBBING OUTFIT CONSISTS OF?
something like this perhaps...
man in a white tracksuit - not the most discreet robbing outfit is it? AS IS PUTTING STREET ART UP IN FLUORESCENT WORK MENS JACKETS. PEGGY IS WONDERING WHAT A DISCREET ROBBING OUTFIT CONSISTS OF? something like this perhaps...
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Banksy prints stolen from Art Republic, by spirit on May 19, 2010 10:43:14 GMT 1, man in a white tracksuit - not the most discreet robbing outfit is it?
man in a white tracksuit - not the most discreet robbing outfit is it?
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Dolk (Teddy Riot) and Miss Bugs For Sale, by spirit on May 19, 2010 10:08:51 GMT 1,
source: CNN
source: CNN
|
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
my NBG arrived :) pictures, by spirit on May 11, 2010 16:32:36 GMT 1, Great job! I really want this print. I kick myself daily for not queuing for it!!
I kick my wife daily for not letting me go and queue for it...
Great job! I really want this print. I kick myself daily for not queuing for it!! I kick my wife daily for not letting me go and queue for it...
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Banksy in Detroit, by spirit on May 11, 2010 11:42:52 GMT 1,
Another example of Banksy at his best. Not just making the location/environment an integral part of the piece, but as someone mentioned on another forum yesterday with regards to the "Take That!" tree piece, and the "You concrete me" piece, he just sees art where other people don't. This is what makes him a genius imo.
Another example of Banksy at his best. Not just making the location/environment an integral part of the piece, but as someone mentioned on another forum yesterday with regards to the "Take That!" tree piece, and the "You concrete me" piece, he just sees art where other people don't. This is what makes him a genius imo.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
WTB:VERY LITTLE HELPS, by spirit on May 11, 2010 10:14:19 GMT 1, yea agree, my post should have read...... might as well cut out the middle man and save close to a grand!
Think he'd be unlikely to get one for ยฃ2K on here - wasn't someone offering 2.3 fairly recently (without any immediate biters) - but he may have got lucky in the end...
Agree it's the best recent print - prefer it to Nola. Good luck.
yea agree, my post should have read...... might as well cut out the middle man and save close to a grand! Think he'd be unlikely to get one for ยฃ2K on here - wasn't someone offering 2.3 fairly recently (without any immediate biters) - but he may have got lucky in the end... Agree it's the best recent print - prefer it to Nola. Good luck.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Bridget Riley ๐ฌ๐ง Print Release โข Show News โข Art For Sale, by spirit on May 10, 2010 16:30:19 GMT 1, What kind of budget do you have? I saw a couple from the early seventies at the London Art fair priced at 4.5K and 7K - much nicer than the recent prints imo. Unfortunately I can't remember which galleries had them...
I'll look them up in the catalogue raisonne tonight.
What kind of budget do you have? I saw a couple from the early seventies at the London Art fair priced at 4.5K and 7K - much nicer than the recent prints imo. Unfortunately I can't remember which galleries had them...
I'll look them up in the catalogue raisonne tonight.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Mr Brainwash 'ICONS REMIX' Show - May 9th, by spirit on May 10, 2010 14:39:49 GMT 1, Any chance of you posting a pic of your Picasso? oh if i must.
I seem to remember that being generated by an online "make your own Picasso" widget...
Any chance of you posting a pic of your Picasso? oh if i must. I seem to remember that being generated by an online "make your own Picasso" widget...
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Mr Brainwash 'ICONS REMIX' Show - May 9th, by spirit on May 10, 2010 13:41:04 GMT 1, 1. a picasso 2. mr brainwash
Any chance of you posting a pic of your Picasso?
1. a picasso 2. mr brainwash Any chance of you posting a pic of your Picasso?
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
pdf file size deduction help, by spirit on May 10, 2010 13:28:35 GMT 1, If you want to reduce the filesize of a PDF, you need Acrobat Pro (Reader won't do it)
If you've got Pro, go to Document > Reduce File Size
If you haven't PM me and I may be able to sort it out for you.
If you want to reduce the filesize of a PDF, you need Acrobat Pro (Reader won't do it)
If you've got Pro, go to Document > Reduce File Size
If you haven't PM me and I may be able to sort it out for you.
|
|
spirit
Junior Member
Posts โข 2,956
Likes โข 516
August 2007
|
Mr Brainwash 'ICONS REMIX' Show - May 9th, by spirit on May 9, 2010 15:40:00 GMT 1, People are just bitter because they have not just missed the boat - they are in a dingy with a broken paddle and a puncture.
Meanwhile you're feeling all smug in your 3rd class cabin on the Titanic...
People are just bitter because they have not just missed the boat - they are in a dingy with a broken paddle and a puncture. Meanwhile you're feeling all smug in your 3rd class cabin on the Titanic...
|
|