Hi Gang,
Just a topic for discussion that is occurring to me more and more these days. I have always considered myself a student of human nature but what I see in the galleries seems to defy that entirely. That being, the number of viewings and comments posted based on the image posted. I can spot no clear pattern to what people who peruse the galleries seem to prefer. Don't get me wrong this is not a whine about people not looking at MY art, the last thing I need is (more) people staring closely at my own stuff and discovering yours truly is a talent less hack :) However, I'm more interested to find out if anyone else has noticed that there seems to be no consistency whatsoever in the type of images favored. Because, many of the renders I see that draw a large number of viewings (and more importantly comments because I know that the thumbnail can sink an image before it's even viewed) seem to defy all the rules for originality or composition. Believe me I didn't sleep through the part of art class in which it was clearly explained that art in and of itself is completely subjective. Some folks find oil paintings of Campbells soup cans to be "inspired" and jars of urine with a crucifix in them "enlightened and provocative". (although not this monkey)... But, there are still formulas that can be applied to most mass appeal art. Not so in the galleries. While yet another render of stiff faeries, swords or a vegetation-less island with a glass sphere floating above it, rockets up the list of viewings and comments it most often seems that several pieces that hit all the marks for composition, inspiration and overall textbook mass appeal get skipped over and fade off into "page 20" oblivion without hardly a courtesy glance. There are a ton of genuinely talented folks who I watch daily get brushed aside before they are ever "discovered". Being all subjective though, my entire viewpoint could be askew and perhaps I need to drink more single malt and hang out with more folks who wear all black while using words like "paradigm" "existentialism" :)
Sure, probably 99% of the folks looking at the posted images are other artists who can be the most critical of viewers, but that being the case it would bring one to the conclusion that those images and abstracts that have all the recognizable traits of "good art" should be singled out for more viewings and comments. Apparently not so.

This post is not meant as a rant, whine or stump. We just have allot of free time during winters in Alaska to spend over-thinking things :) It is just meant to pose a thought for discussion.
Best to you and all of yours on the holidays..

It's not all about art. It's also about skill. Some images that have a very boring concept or boring composition, but are made with much skill and detail get a high rating. And vice versa of course.

I'm not intending to be confrontational or entirely contradictory cybrbeast, but one of websters definitions of art is "skill that is attained by study, practice or observation", so technically (at least to me) it is all about art. So just as much as a skilled plumber is an artist at what he does so is an experinced flyfisher or master painter in whatever medium he chooses. I am certainly not blind to the modelers or detailists art either because I do quite a bit of it myself and am very attuned to the level of concentration and dedication it requires. So, it certainly wasn't my intention to even try and define art (as I pointed out) with the above post, it was more to examine the human factor in interpreting it, in whatever form or composition it may come in, within the context of this site, without excluding any factor, style or skill. Great point nu-be! Had not even considered the "breast factor" of Vicky in renders.. :)

Why do people view what they view? Possibly some effect of looking at things online changes how people choose what to view the most. I know that looking at a thumbnail (even of the whole picture) is a lot different from looking at the full-sized picture (annoying when I have to scroll) which looks even more different than seeing a picture in real life as it is hanging on a wall. I think this causes a different sort of impact on people. Don't forget, the audience here is geared not only to artists, but people who like computers, science fiction and fantasy. This is bound to skew things in a way different from the general population. Just my observations. Lin

You should do a search over in Poser forum for similar topics. :-)

[ one of websters definitions of art is "skill that is attained by study, practice or observation" ] That's me buggered then.

One night while working, my partner and I were talking and the subject matter made it's way to me and eventually to why I get on the computer when I get home at 4:30 in the morning after work. I said that it was because I liked to play a game or to do something on a graphic project that I was working on or something like that. Then I said, I do it because I need the VISUAL STIMULATION. After I realized what I said, I thought about it even more and it was true. Not everything that we look at will appeal to us, but it is that whole "catching your eye" thing. I know I don't look at or comment on EVERY IMAGE, but most I do. If something appeals to me, then I will look at it and make a comment. The other day Zhann posted an imagine she had worked on link - http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=107&Form.ShowMessage=1001168 If you know me, you know abstract isn't really my thing, but something about really "caught my eye". I guess it's just a matter of preference.

This reminds me of a thread in the Art theory forum. http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez ForumID=12424&Form.ShowMessage=744438

Who do you do your Art for? This may sound selfish (I hope) but I do it for me and me alone. True artistry comes from within and not from without. Sure we are influenced by our surroundings, but the passion and the drive we try to express comes from a sometimes dark sometimes beautiful place. Be it a muse, faith, inspiration, depression, sadness or overwhelming joy is why I do what I do and I could care less if I am the only one who enjoys my art. I share what I do in hopes to inspire others to express themselves as much as I have been inspired! One of the best things to remember Watch what everyone else is doing and dont do it. Naked poser women, is not art nor what is popular today be remembered 20 years from now. True art survives and has a way of returning back to classical themes

I agree 100% vile. Art that is created with the intention of pleasing a "target audience" is little better than advertising and in some ways worse. Art done from within is snapshot of the being under the skin. I do hope you did not misinterpret the meaning of the original post as being an attempt to discover the formula to get folks to look at a piece of work. Personally I don't give a @#$% what the formula may be, because like you I do it for myself alone. It is solely meant to examine the nature of the whims of the general "looky-lou" for the sake of discussion only. Seven is correct there are enormous threads in the theory forum about this very topic ,that I would advise anyone to read in a heartbeat, but I thought I would propose the discussion within the belly of the beast...However, I am far too cowardly to pose a topic like this in the poser forum :)for fear of bursting into flames.

And bursting into flames it would be.... I just stay away from the poser forum altogether. There's too much irritation to the eye and the mind. I'm not really bothered at the amount of viewings I get on any given image. Creating something is therapeutic to me and I enjoy sharing the final product. It's a snap shot from my life/mind/vision at that moment in time. I don't mean to offend anyone with my remarks. If I have nothing good or productive to say about an image I tend to keep my thoughts to my self. Although I have nothing to include in what's been written and discussed so far in this and many other related topics, just wanted to support this line of thought. Peace to all, TT.

My most viewed image is that of a test to create a realistic wake for a large ship. It's compositionally decent (following the "golden spiral" rule) It's simple, and it kinda succeeds. Why the hell does/did it get more attention than what I consider far better subject matters?!? I've no clue, other than it's made a good reference for some other artists when the topic of wakes comes up (or so I hope). I think the vast majority of hits that come to the Nekkid Vicki crowd are from boys looking for visual stimulation for... ahem... other activities. I've seen some horrendous NVs out there that have almost ten times the hit that far better, boobless images have. You're right about the sci-fi skew as well. Hands up all here who are actually not a fan of JRR Tolkein, or anything from TSR. Wow, that can be counted on 1 hand..... hmmmmmmmm. As for popular versus good... we must remember the italian composer Scalieri, for if it were not for the movie Amadeus, even fewer people would know his name... while his contemporary, and possible victim Mozart is famous beyond the dreams of Scalieri. Scalieri was very popular in his time while Mozart was harder to appriciate originally, but turned out to be most likely the best composer who ever lived (taste not withstanding.) Cream always rises to the top no matter how homoginized it may be. I've more to say, but I gotta go to work now. IMHO

A quick word in defense of the Naked Vicky, If I may. I work in two main genres, the erotic (published at 'rotica) and what I like to call "Postcards from Places that Never Were", published here. In the erotic work, we all started out doing naked vivki type imagery to explore the aspects of poser. We all start from somewhere! I have made them too. The cool thing is that some people move on and begin to really grow both into more traditional people images and hopefully better erotica. I think I may finally be getting there at times. What I really want to say is a few such are ok for an artist but if thats all they ever do, then perhaps it is ok to slag them. Back to topic, I make my art for me. I use the computer to recreate the visions I see behind my eyes. It is intended for me. The fact that hundreds of others here see fit to look and perhaps to comment is just sooo much icing on my cake! (and appreciated, Thanks to all who have looked and commented!)

Grin - did I mention that I have a terminal sweet tooth!

It does seem to be the artists are often not fully appreciated until they are dead.

A quick word of complaint about the Naked Vicky. I don't object to erotica, heck, I am friends with someone who makes part of their living that way. But I, innocent waif that I am, don't always want to look at naked or semi-naked people. This is part of why I don't tend to look at the galleries. Call me a prude if you like, but I have my reasons. I do my best to choose what I view according to my own personal taste, and certainly everyone here in Bryce is very good about announcing nudity, which I greatly appreciate. What I object to is when I can't get away from it. Here I can choose (mostly) what to look at and if I choose to look, I don't complain. I don't bother with the poser gallery mostly because I would have to look at too many naked people if I ever wanted to give feedback or read some of the topics. I realize this is my own personal thing, but I am trying to make the point that the choice to use nudity also causes people not to look at your work. I don't think all artists consider this when they are making their choices. Lin

You know, being dead before you become famous really screws with your ability to collect royalties. Sigh, guess my progeny will be well taken care of. Thppt!

I kind of wonder about the overwhelming amount of fantasy & sci-fi based imagery 'round here, whether it's "naked Vicki in a Temple' or 'fantasy landscape w/ futuristic spacecraft'. Just because an artist works with a computer rather than traditional media, does that necessarily pigeonhole him/her as some lonely, Dungeons & Dragons playin', Star Trek watchin', overweight, Cheetos-munchin', pathetic loser who can only get laid by his/her own hand (not that there's necessarily anything wrong with that...)? Personally, I love the occasional creative piece with a sci-fi or fantasy theme and I realize that good art, whatever your personal definition of GOOD is, is rarely dependant upon subject matter, but... I for one would love to see some realistic cityscapes, character studies of 'real' people (gang-bangers, office drones, hookers, cops, soldiers, whatever) historical-themed art, etc. I've noticed that artists who go against the grain, content-wise, are few and far between in the realm of CG art.

Well if you look at my gallery I think I've run the gambit on content except Naked Vicky. :) I got into 3D art because I went to Spacebattles.com and saw some great movie clips done by people with home computers. Something I've always wanted to do but never could afford the equipment. Now I have a nice comp and was able to afford Bryce which is a good program. I still haven't managed to make a movie yet only test animations and learning the program. My art is an expression of what I've always wanted to see on the screen and to be able to animate it is icing on the cake. I try not to let how many views or comments that get posted get to me. Some hardly have any at all, others haven't even reached 200 yet, but I'm happy with them. They are a far cry from some on this site (Rohi, hobbit, rochr just to name a few).

Chris Foss and Roger Dean are what got me going in SF and Fantasy works (pen and ink) way back. Bryce 2 and Poser started me into the 3d as a more accurate way to express my images and gave me much better colour. I think the preponderance of SF and Fantasy imagery is due to the well I can't just take a picture so... factor. (True for me anyway)

Al, that's cause you're the metaball master. ;c) You're carving yourself a reputation (at least in my mind) in doing some stellar work with metaball models. I should take a class from you or something. As for personal satisfaction of art... my cubicle is quickly becoming covered with my work. My co-workers have given me more than enough "wows" to make up for lack of comments or views.

I believe it is the difference between "Art" and "Illustration." I would characterize most of what appears in the gallery as Illustration, an attempt to an imagined thing, place, person etc. in a realistic way. My definition of Art (meaning the visual arts) would be that which tries to convey a story, stimulate thinking or bring about an emotional responce. I think of computer generated images in much the same way as airbrush illustrations, a medium that is most useful for rendering ideas in a realistic way. Looking at illustrations one is generally looking for technical skill, or images that are hyper-real. Being computer users, in my opionion, makes us most likely to be illustrators and we look through the galleries with that intent. "Art" on the other hand typically doesn't bennifit from a quick glance. It's "message" may require a careful study, not likely to show up in a thumbnail. This is why I tend to look for high quality illustrations here and Renderosity. If I'm looking at Art then I'm more likely on a website devoted to a particular artist whose work I enjoy. -Rhettro

well, i have a few "nekkid" vickis in my gallery. i also have a bird, and renders of the stuff that i model. i think this place has really changed over the course of the last year. 2 years ago, there were even naked vicki pics that inspired me, because they were well crafted. i think the galleries have moved on. this site has become dedicated to the hard-core hobbyists with plenty of credit cards, and, many friends that they can "turn on" to this "art" site. well, in particular, i speak of the poser part of this community. what i see in the poser gallery, this past year, is not creating....it is a display of "toys". and, r'osity eats it up...gold in the coffers 'n all. so, we get alot of "blech". a few years back, i worked from home, and had the time to belong to a number of graphic "lists". i did the themes for about 4 of them on aol back in the days. i cannot get it out of my head, that this place has become a giant internet "list" for housewives who got poser. i see the same stuff....out of box...poser equivalent to using psp "tubes" to make art, by the same people, getting oohs and ahhs and "jaw-droppin' fantastic image...YOU ARE A TRUE ARTIST" comments..by the same little group. and, and, and...they dedicate them to one another...just like the "tags" in the old days of the lists. and, the ptb, consider it "Fair Play" to get 40 of your offsite, online buddies, to sign up here, and consistently vote you into the hot 20. so, i make my little models. if i get 2 or 3 comments i'm so happy i wet my pants. this is, after all, renderosity...where it's "all about the ART" doncha know? raph.com is an interesting site for just looking...and, enjoying the galleries...and, poserpros has nice gallery, and great conversation. i am so sad at the way this place has changed. pop...pop...Poppi!!!

I only have Poser3 and thus no Vicki to pose nude :-( I agree about doing your art for yourself. I don't see how you could do it otherwise and keep your sanity in check because you'll never please everyone. It's much easier to please yourself (uh, no pun).

The difference between good art and bad art reminds me of a gag I once heard (I think it was Mel Brooks, and I'm paraphrasing here.) The difference between tragedy and comedy: Tragedy is when I get a papercut on my finger. Comedy is when someone else falls in a hole and dies. How you perceive life is all about YOU. In my case, to me good art is art I like, bad art is art I don't like. I hope I don't make anyone mad here for saying this, but except for a few people who are open-minded and energetic (most of them are Bryce Forum regulars, by the way, by and large very helpful and friendly), the people here at Renderosity have looked at so many pictures that they are somewhat jaded. So few comments and most of them are negative. I suggest that you try posting some of your best pics at 3D Commune. It is a smaller site, but the viewers there are 90% positive in their ratings and comments. The same pics I have posted in the Bryce gallery here have gotten better responses in general in 3D Commune's Bryce gallery. Don't leave Renderosity, I still love this site, and hope to continue to contribute something here. But try a different site, it can help put things in perspective. I just no longer worry about it so much.

I am sort of getting the impression that 'Rosity (or maybe just Bryce and Poser) is mostly where hobbyists hang out. If this is true, then where do professional artists (people who actually make money free-lancing or working for a company making graphics/illustrations) hang out? Or do they just not hang out anywhere? I'm just curious because it seems that there are some people who nearly everyone agrees is talented, whether or not they ever make a dime from their work, and other people that make a living in the graphics world, but nobody knows who they are, and perhaps what they create is not considered to be quality work. I've had at least one anecdote where one artist who wasn't as talented as another was able to sell his work because the other artist simply wouldn't or couldn't meet the deadline. What does adding money to the mix do to the question of good and bad art? Lin

Hobbyest for me! I used to do graphic arts for commercial job printing through high scholl and university. Enjoyed it a great deal, but came to the realization that at the end of the day, I didn't really feel like doing my artwork. So now I work as an engineer in the helicopter biz (enjoy that too!) and do my artwork, when I want, how I want as a hobby. Much happier now that my head is not going to explode with idea overpressure. (grin)

me fuhrgot the speelchucker! (sorry)

Imcarnadine, that is what worries me. i'd love to get into the business but I'm afraid then it will lose the fun of creating.

I'd like to get deep into the business too, but I worry about getting a steady income out of it. Lin

Attached Link: http://www.rsprunger.com/

Attached Link: http://www.portfolios.com/profile.wga?MyUrl=reedsprunger

To be a successful freelance artist in any field requires you to be a successful salesman, marketer, promoter, and accountant first. Finding someone who has those qualities to work for you is nigh impossible... for they're already doing it for themselves.

lsstrout & Aldaron,
I am an illustrator/graphic designer working primarily in the print industry, and I say 'look into it!". It's a fact that you end up doing mountains of grunt work that isn't the least bit satisfying from an artistic point of view, but every once in a while you get carte blanche from a client to "use your own creativity, you're the artist not me" and create something fantastic...and you get paid for it! When I come home 'artistically unfulfilled' I can always be self-indulgent and create whatever my imagination dictates. There are few greater joys for a creative person than getting paid to create, and it sure beats the hell out of working in a plastics factory, selling furniture, telemarketing, hanging sheetrock or working as a restaurant cook (all jobs my Art Degree helped me obtain).

jettboy- very good point. I suppose that I have shifted that feeling to my work in helicopter design. Perhaps of a different nature of product but still the great feeling of a good design achieved and fulfilling a customers expectations. As I ultimately pointed out, it is an individual decision.

Attached Link: http://www.winjones.com

Nice little site! Interesting work too - both yours and his.

Thanks for the links, those were lovely images. Encouraging to see people making a living at this sort of work. I actually have a high tolerance for grunt work - providing someone isn't standing over my shoulder while doing it or making more work than necessary. Granted both those things do happen. I think part of what appeals to me is ending up with something that I can show to other people and say 'Look at what I did' and occasionally get an 'Oh I like that' sort of reaction. People are less impressed with processing payments, word processing or packing orders (no matter how good I am at those things). Lin

The one thing I've hated about being a commercial graphic artist is someone thinking that they're a better designer and I'm just their instrument. Mostly because they're terrible designers that want you to make their crappy designs into masterpieces for none of the credit. These are usually the same people that turn around and say "well that wasn't so hard after watching you do it, I know I can do better... you're fired." I want people who hire me because they can't for whattever reasons and let me go at it. There's a book out that I saw this quote on advertising that I love: "The wealthiest client can afford to force an agency to change and edit the project till they get the agency's worst work. The poorest clients sadly have to accept the best work the agency can provide."

mboncher, oh man is that true! I've lost track of the number of times that I'm talking to a client, nodding at their sage suggestions and aesthetic insights as they effectively ruin my beautiful work, and thinking to myself "where did you get your art degree from, assface?! I've been doing this twelve years and won four Addys, how 'bout you?! Piss off and let me do my job!"

Having done a little commission type oil and acrylic work in my spare time (not my day job), normally in the pet and children portrait area, I got out of it because again and again I would show clients some of my work and tell them, "This is my style, this is the way I work, and if you are not impressed with it, if you do not want your painting done in this style, you do not want me to be your artist. I always told them I would collect a $20 deposit that would become part of the final cost of the painting, and was non-refundable if they decided to reject the final painting, even had a legal contract stating as such, which I required them to sign, and they would STILL try to weasel their deposit back out of me if they rejected the final painting. Also, I would have some potential clients bring in a picture of a painting and say, "I want it in this style." I would always say, "Then you will have to contact the artist that painted that and see if you can get them to do it for you. I'm an artist, not an impressionist. This wasn't the majority of clients, you understand, but there were enough like that wasting my time, that it made it difficult to make any money in my spare time, so I gave up. I plan to give it another shot after retiring, though, when I can dedicate myself to it full time.