Page 1 of 2
Von as art......
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 18:35
by 9while9
A
very cool piece of art work featuring Von.
The
rest of the illustrations on this site are also very well done.
Worth a look >
http://www.kyleanderson.com
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 19:31
by Silver_Owl
Very nice that. Reminds me of The Sandman covers.
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 19:40
by James Blast
... but is it art?
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 19:41
by Badlander
Well done indeed. The rest is pretty cool too. A bit of Neil Gaiman, a bit of H.R. Giger, a bit of Cthulhu, a bit of SF... This dude's pretty talented IMHO.
Edit : I nearly missed this one.
Re: Von as art......
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 19:46
by robertzombie
9while9 wrote:A
very cool piece of art work featuring Von.
The
rest of the illustrations on this site are also very well done.
Worth a look >
http://www.kyleanderson.com
That's really cool
anyone got the original picture?
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 19:47
by 9while9
Badlander wrote:Well done indeed. The rest is pretty cool too. A bit of Neil Gaiman, a bit of H.R. Giger, a bit of Cthulhu, a bit of SF... This dude's pretty talented IMHO.
Edit : I nearly missed this one.
Absolutely VanFcukinTastic, IMO......
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 19:48
by 9while9
James Blast wrote:... but is it art?
What
would you call it James?
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 19:51
by Badlander
9while9 wrote:James Blast wrote:... but is it art?
What
would you call it James?
And who cares after all ?
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 19:57
by Dark
I drew Eldritch and David Sylvian in my GCSE Art mock exam.
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/29511992/
The original images were the Stairway To Heaven boot CD and the back sleeve of the "Life In Tokyo (Special Remix)" 7" single. The bottom two were based on Head VI by Francis Bacon (incidentally, that was the basis for the Body Electric sleeve)
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 19:59
by Perki
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 20:02
by James Blast
9while9 wrote:James Blast wrote:... but is it art?
What
would you call it James?
Electronic manipulation, digital manipulation or commercial art.
Don't get me wrong, the pieces are very nice, I just don't think they're art.
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 20:08
by 9while9
James Blast wrote:9while9 wrote:James Blast wrote:... but is it art?
What
would you call it James?
Electronic manipulation, digital manipulation or commercial art.
Don't get me wrong, the pieces are very nice, I just don't think they're art.
That's funny, they are done ( I believe traditionally )
with some digital manipulation.
Your view is
kind of back words James Picasso Blast.
But I'll respect it.
Next!
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 20:30
by Ozpat
Very nice pieces indeed!!!!
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 22:42
by James Blast
9while9 wrote:Next!
is trademarked
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 23:34
by Maisey
I think Gaiman would absolutly love that
Posted: 14 Oct 2006, 23:37
by Maisey
http://www.kyleanderson.com/images/temple_of_love.jpg
based on ToL?
I LOVE Tolkien Art, I'm really into it. And this is good quality origonal Tolkien interpritations.
Posted: 15 Oct 2006, 10:14
by canon docre
James Blast wrote:9while9 wrote:James Blast wrote:... but is it art?
What
would you call it James?
Electronic manipulation, digital manipulation or commercial art.
Don't get me wrong, the pieces are very nice, I just don't think they're art.
seconded. illustrative art maybe?
Posted: 15 Oct 2006, 10:43
by Badlander
How do you define art ?
NB This is an honest question. I'm not asking for an essay on art, but I still find the issue of some interest.
Posted: 15 Oct 2006, 11:33
by canon docre
Badlander wrote:How do you define art ?
NB This is an honest question. I'm not asking for an essay on art, but I still find the issue of some interest.
it's a tricky question and I dont feel competent to judge whether something is art or not.
Personally I have it hard to think of Photoshop-stuff as art, I just don't see a 'genuine artistic expression' in these pics. Nice illustrations and skilful work yes, but I dont see an Artist behind who expresses his own world view through his Art.
To exemplify my point: Some of you said about these pics, they were "well done" or "nice" or even "this dude is pretty talented".
Well, you wouldnt say any of that about a Van Gogh picture f.ex.
Posted: 15 Oct 2006, 13:36
by dinky daisy
Let's go a bit off topic...
it doesn't need to be 'art' but can be 'a piece of art'. There's nothing wrong with 'just a nice image'.
Aart is art if it's meant to be true art.
If someone made it to be concidered as art, it shelters somehow a vision or at least a statement, comment or emotion.
(It's tricky. Take my bike wheel and Duchamps wheel. Two almost similar objects, one is art and the other is trivia. Nice trivia, but still trivia.)
Sometimes, someone makes a photoshop image that contains Matrix elements, phantasy design and Sisters images. If we take a sneak at the rest of the work on the site it's hard to believe we see artist's work, but fantasy driven Tolkien photoshop action instead.
So:
It's not art.
But is it wrong? no. Is it tasteful? up to you.
Off topic:
Vision Thing is art. A Counting Crows album isn't.
Posted: 15 Oct 2006, 16:55
by Petseri
I like the style. It reminds me of a grittier P. Craig Russell, which is a good thing. One thing, though. The way he disappears into a vapor below his torso makes me think that Eldritch is saying "You have freed me from my lamp. I grant you three wishes."
Posted: 15 Oct 2006, 16:58
by Izzy HaveMercy
James Blast wrote:Electronic manipulation, digital manipulation or commercial art.
Don't get me wrong, the pieces are very nice, I just don't think they're art.
That makes FGG 'NOT art' then as well
On the matter, I only follow this statement:
"Good taste is the enemy of art -- T. Capote"
IZ.
Posted: 15 Oct 2006, 17:27
by dinky daisy
But at least FGG sounds interesting, sir. i like it.
probably because the music sounds cinematic and the voice is pretty ok. Reminds me of mr. Psychedelic Richard Butler on an industral opera trip.
Posted: 25 Oct 2006, 20:24
by beatnick138
Posted: 25 Oct 2006, 20:24
by beatnick138
Gaiman isn't the artists on the Sandman covers.
Dave McKean is. Sheesh.
http://www.mckean-art.co.uk/
