I think we're all being too hard on epilogue. Let the quality of their accepted work speak for itself and humble us: http://www.epilogue.net/cgi/database/art/view.pl?id=42958 http://www.epilogue.net/cgi/database/art/view.pl?id=18759 http://www.epilogue.net/cgi/database/art/view.pl?id=31301 Hell hath no fury like a BFA working at McDonalds with a pillowcase stuffed full of rejection slips from TOR, Baen Books, etc.

err, I can draw better than that. (the last one is really good draftsmanship though) makes me think I should start posting some of my 2d at epilogue G

uhmmm Duanemoody I dont know who you are refering to with the mcdonalds and pillowcases...but I know I have been a professional artist for many years...work in many mediums and have no problem with my art or the ability to market it. believe it or not Epilogue does reject quality art just because they are snotty. epilogue has a very narrow view of what is art and also a HUGE double standard...trust me from what I know alot ALOT of poeple are rosity are not what you are making it sound like.

ok lets give some credit thought where credit is due... http://www.epilogue.net/cgi/database/art/view.pl?id=35894 an excellent dragon. http://www.epilogue.net/cgi/database/art/view.pl?id=16230 that piece is just FLIPPING AMAZING http://www.epilogue.net/cgi/database/art/view.pl?id=3164 another amazing piece.. but out of allllllllllllll those pages in epilogue there is there is patheticly few pieces of poser art. and if you search poser....not all those pieces are what you would call outstanding. it is the double standard.

Ok, I don't know about epilogue or traditional artists, but I do know about the general thoughts from 3d-max and maya "artists" about Poser. Like it's been said here before, these people do not appreciate poser art, because the poser users didn't model the mesh themselves, and at times didn't make the texture and the light and so on and so forth. I understand the appreciation to artists who have that ability to model and texture something all on their own, so I understand where this view is coming from. I asked in a forum maya and 3d-max artists what their opinion was about Poser as a tool not as a 3d program. I gave a link to an image here in Renderosity I thought was an amazing piece of ART (terms of composition, colors, idea, simply beautiful), and they said "no, I wouldn't call it art. What did the artist do? raised her hand a little and put a dog and sky? that's no art". (Nevermind that posing is an art all by itself, IMHO). So I said, "ok, so give me links to works that you consider to be ART." I was given a number of links to things that were done in maya or 3d-max, all very impressive, I have to admit and I wish I could do it too - but all were "showcases" of models. None of them were "images" - a scene with idea and composition and message. So.... what am I trying to say? I guess there's more to "art" then technique. Technique is important, no doubt, and if you don't practice it your "art" will not grow, but you still need something more.

...but here goes: Instead of weeping over what a couple of snobs say, why not simply out-render 'em? Push yourself, your artwork, and rise above and beyond the cross-eyed vicky in a temple thing? For those who have risen above that, rise even higher. The tirck is to make yourself and your medium kick the unholy dog excrement out of anything you've ever done before. Let the folks running Epilogue sit there and get their keyboards sticky over the latest press release from Discreet. If they want to limit themselves, that's not your problem ...is it? you know? This reminds me of the old boot-camp saw told between a Drill Instructor and a Recruit, right after the recuruit started a fist-fight with one of his fellow grunts: DI: "Why did you punch him, dumbass!?" Recruit: "But Sir! He called my mother a whore!" DI: "Well - is she?" Recruit: "No Sir she is NOT!" DI: "Then why the f@ck do you care what he has to say about it!?" -- I'll let everyone think on that for awhile... /P

:) good point. on that maya thing is it like going to an artist that paints in oils...and slamming their picture because they didnt mix the actual paint themselves but bought it at artmart. or they didnt make the brushes to paint with. just the same thing.

I completely agree with Penguinisto here. Plough your own furrow, listen to constructive criticism, improve your art and imagination along with your technical abilities. And bollocks to anyone else who tries to rip into you for the tools you use.

Yes Penguinisto :) , most of the elites of the 3D community view Poser that way. And the sad thing is that sites like Epilogue.net exists to reinforce this view, and without even bothering to see our works here at Renderosity, they stereotype Poser as a gizmo for creating 'shiny plastic mannequins'. Anyways, if Poser is a whore, then like everyone says, we've got to be better pimps ;P

"It's not art, because it threatens our livelihood." That's what's really at the heart of the whole thing, whether it's Epilogue.net or some deconstructionist artiste snubbing his nose at anything enhanced / colored / painted in Photoshop or in any other way touched by a computer. You'll even find so-called "artistes" who'll decry Vallejo and Giger on the pretext that their work is mainstream pop culture and therefore doesn't "express" anything. However, a big empty square canvas with a couple of triangles to discretely cut the letter "M" is apparently "art." The world of museum-level high art has turned to this kind of empty deconstructionist tripe or other more ludicrous projects (rotting meat dresses, goldfish in blenders... I even remember an article about an overflowing trash can which became an exhibit). The art world is threatened. If society begins to accept the fact that a really talented kid with Photoshop can make "art," then there will be fewer $250,000 paycheques made out to the "artistes." That's what it all boils down to. Chas

I can't draw that well, so I use Poser and Bryce. They are tools just like oilpaint, crayon or pen. I can appreciate both sides of the coin. My way of thinking it's the tools that you use and the way you use them. It is up to the individual whether or not, they like or dislike a bit of artwork. The world is filled with "Know It Alls" and "Wowsers." The tools I use help me get my ideas and imagination happening. If people don't like it, so what, as long as I am getting some enjoyment out of it. Why take the fun out of a already diminishing enjoyable extistence? Got me beat! Mark

Chas, you're so right. I keep telling my engineer for a bf that can't draw a stick figure that he needs to enter his 'artistic' looking collection of electronics in the cellar to an exhibit. of course, I'd rather call it a mess, but if it makes money... g

I agree with Bonni, who said, "Dismissing a tool or even a whole genre utterly out of hand because of some preconceived and poorly researched prejudices is the height of arrogance, as far as I'm concerned." I remember being attacked not too long ago (1989 to be exact) for using a computer to produce print pieces, and being told, "you're not a real artist if you use a computer." I ignored them of course, because I knew what the future was, and fear and ignorance isn't it. It's funny looking back now at just wrong they were. It's more efficient, and even better, graphic design and typography had an explosion of creativity! Photography, video editing, and animation are also undergoing a Renaissance. And now the frontier has moved to the Internet and 3D. I expect this trend to pick up speed. In a few years, we will all wonder how we got along without online art communities like Renderosity, and easy to use 3D programs like Poser. One more point I would like to make. The purpose of art is not to be a masterpiece, overshadowing all other art ever created. If that were true, nobody would ever make art, it would be too scary. Imagine a 2 year old comparing their humble scribbles to Michael Angelo, Monet, or Marvel Comics? I believe art isn't just about an end product. I believe the process of art is extremely valuable too, and good for the soul. It's about creativity, and creativity has many forms: sometimes it's problem solving; sometimes it's inventing a narrative; sometimes it's "connecting the dots" ; sometimes it's visual, motion, or lyrical poetry, and sometimes it's a way to explore a subject, investigate it, and know it. People who think only "good art" has a right to exist, or people who think computer art is not real art, are fools. Nevermind them, and get back to making art. It'll make you feel better. :) bB

Rock on, elgyfu! I'm having a blast too! =) B

To the 'elitist' anti-digital crowd: I am a digital artist. I don't use pencils, paints, inks, canvas, paper, or any other such media. I use pixels. I'm spending less overall on supplies, because I can use my software, my tablet, and my computer over, and over, and over again. Use your paint, it's gone, buy more. Finish that canvas? Buy another one. Brushes wear out? Buy more. My art doesn't hang in traditional galleries. I don't have gaggles of rich snobs hmmm-ing and hahh-ing over the merit of my work. I have regular everyday folks looking over what I love to do, and sometimes taking a print home with them. Can you say the same? I'm doing what I love, and making money. Are you? I appreciate all forms of artistic expression: oils, acrylics, pencil sketches, pen & ink, watercolor, sculpture, and yes, digital. Do you? There is no real art...no real artists. There is art, and there are artists. The medium is irrelevant. If you choose to ignore or belittle any art form, the loss is yours...not mine. "True art makes the viewer do one of three things: think, feel, or remember. If you can do this with your work, you are an artist." - Me David 'ChromeTiger' Hebbe Proud member of the Digital Artist Community

There was a time when the "traditional artists" called Picasso's work "crap". Times change. No one likes change. It's uncomfortable and it's threatening. The digital medium makes it possible for a lot of people to create some fairly good imagery, without the benefit of the traditonal tools. This has to be threatening for the 2D purists. There will come a time when digital artists will feel the same way about the next "new medium craze"....whatever it turns out to be :)

The analogies in this thread are slightly off IMO, and are closer to the following:

Brushes, Paint, Oil = Photoshop, Painter, other paint programs
Sculpture = Modelers
Art Direction = Poser, Bryce, Vue, other renderers

It all comes down to the simple concept that most render artists use models/textures from other artists to create their art. Yes, it takes talent to do so (and to do it right), but it's a different talent than drawing or painting from scratch on a canvas or screen. I do both 2D and 3D and I am very conscience of the difference. Especially in 3D where I have to explain to a 2D artist that I didn't create half of the things I used in the picture, where in 2D I don't have to make such a statement, because every pixel is my own.

To me, Epilogue wants to showcase the artists who's talent lies in their hands and the ability to create from scratch using their medium digital or traditional. I admire many artists there, just as I do here. It's just a different place and a different discipline than Rosity showcases. There will always be people wary of rendered art, because of the model sharing, but if you truly love your art, then it shouldn't matter to you what they think or who they choose. In fact, embracing what you see there and learning from that, whether it's your style or artwork specifically will help you be a more rounded artist. I saw a show the other night where a singer told her performing arts teacher, "I don't want to dance, I don't want to act, I just want to sing." The teacher told her, "By learning all of these, your singing will be that much better." It's good advice for artists. The more exposure you have to other artists and genres, the more you can learn and apply to better your own work.

I hope I didn't offend anyone, not my intention. As I've always said, art is everything one creates, but there is always going to be people who hang on to their own particular discipline. It's the way of life.

My 2c
ShadowWind

ShadowWind...exceptionally well said. SWAMP

Congrats to all above on a very witty and well-reasoned thread! One small point - here at R'osity we do have galleries for Poser, Bryce, Vue, etc, and if Epilogue want to have a gallery for traditional media, that is not so very different. And there are societies for watercolourists, etc, on media-based lines. Personally I don't care what media are used, it's the image that counts. And there is NO computer program in the world that will give you instant art with no talent required. Instant pictures, maybe - art, no.

ShadowWind - I agree with every word. :)

I look at it like this your the user of a program skilled at entering commands. The computer is the artist because it does most of the work. the computer does things you can't do by hand, But the computer can't put the stuff together without you either, so I say it's a joint coventure between you and the computer to produce a piece of artwork. So yes it is art.

The computer is the artist because it does most of the work. LOL ... until you model something from scratch 8-)

The computer is the artist because it does most of the work. Hmmm... So if the degree of effort expended is the standard of artistic creativity that would mean that a horse who pulled a plow all day long is more artistic than Rembrandt who merely used a small brush to push a bit of paint around on a canvas. I had no idea that horses were so gifted... you learn something new everyday!

Doesn't that also mean that a paintbrush, paints & canvas are the artist too? An inanimate object cannot be classed as an artist & that includes a computer at least until they perfect AI :)

I used to be a "traditional" artist. That is, I used oils, charcoals, pastels, etc. Painter transformed me to a digital artist, primarily because it was "media without the mess" and I could use the same principles that I used with the other tools. However, once I saw 3D software (back in the DOS 3D Studio days), that was all she wrote. My art took on a whole new dimension (no pun intended). To me, the computer is just another medium that I can use to express my creativity, and it is no different than the other tools that I used to use. The only difference is that the computer allows me to express my creativity in ways I never could have imagined.

Especially in 3D where I have to explain to a 2D artist that I didn't create half of the things I used in the picture, where in 2D I don't have to make such a statement, because every pixel is my own. and how is that different than collage in 2d and 3d traditional art? Just because you didn't make half the polygons, has no bearing on how you work with textures and shaders, composition and lighting. People working in collage don't make the bits they collect to put in their work either, and they seem to be called artists all the same... also, sometimes its fun to take a render that you composed, then use it as a base for doing traditional 2d art, drawing what you composed in 3d, using the 3d work like you would use live models in real life. Draw it and submit it, and let them take a bite outta that one.

Don't forget all those Old Masters getting their apprentices to do the backgrounds, the clothes, etc.

There is a theory rather convincing that some of the old masters used optics to cast the image onto the canvas and then they actually traced over that image. Cheating...or a masterful use of the technology of the time? Computers are simply an extension of the mind and the hand. Some people (like me) produce nothing more than jigsaw images (placing a figure here with a background there and details here and there) and other actually manage to produce something that is amazing. It isn't the tools that create the magic. It's the imagination and creativity of a true artist. I'm not of the "everyone is an artist" school...clearly some people have talent and others don't. But it is possible for someone to create art with a computer--I've no doubt of that. And it is equally possible for someone to produce garbage with oils (just let me at a canvas and I can prove that in a nano second). And the other hand, I think a great many people post a lack of effort in the galleries, which only proves the anti-Poser viewpoint.

bijouchat..said..." sometimes its fun to take a render that you composed, then use it as a base for doing traditional 2d art, drawing what you composed in 3d, using the 3d work like you would use live models in real life". Not only do I find that fun,but also relaxing,creative,and very fulfilling. I would really like to find a softwear that would help me with my drawing skills in Painter. Don't know about the "hype"in this ad...but as I read it.. does look promising.....

oh, I have the first Poser one for Mac!! I used it constantly for just what it said in the ad, in fact never replaced it until P4... thanks for the memories :))

You know, I don't remember where it was I saw Poser, I'm thinking it was Comdex or maybe even the Consumer Electronics Show in Orlando, many, many years back when it was Fractal Poser 1 and I thought then, "What is the point?" as I watched the guy open and close the dog's mouth. I wasn't really an artist then, but had dabbled in digital painting somewhat, but I hadn't realized then the uses it could have for being an artist reference, which is still true today.

I haven't really used the 3D programs as 2D references as of yet (though I've done some hybrid pictures with a figure from Poser and a figure in 2D), but it's something I'm interested in trying. I've seen some great examples of such.

dialyn,
I think everyone is an artist in their own way. That's not to say that everyone will be able to make it into the professional art market, but the creation of art is something that anyone with imagination and emotion can do IMO. On the other hand, you never know. Art is based on perception many times, rather than technical. Just look at the sales of art from the elephant that paints...

ShadowWind

ShadowWind, I respectfully disagree. Not everyone is an athelete. Not everyone is a genius. Not everyone is a singer. Not everyone is artist. And that should be okay...we should be able to celebrate what we are without being expected to be what we are not. We live in this ego driven world where everyone is expected to be able to do everything. It's not true. There are true artists, and then there are the others of us who are dabblers. Give the true artists the respect and attention they deserve and celebrate them for the talent and abilities. Don't degrade them by saying they are my equal, because I don't want to be so egocentric as to pretend that. Delusional I'm not. And most of us will only be dabblers. Not everyone is Shakespeare...there was only one. Only one Leonardo da Vinci. Only one Emily Dickenson. Unique, amazing, wonderful, and without equal. Don't diminish them by putting them in a basket with me labled "everyone is an artist." It isn't true. It shouldn't be true. Talent should be recognized. Lack of talent should be acknowledged without penality. I will not build my ego on a false premise. Off this thread. Thanks.

Just look at the sales of art from the elephant that paints... Yeah, and he paints for peanuts!

Dialyn,
And where can I find the test that will let me know if I am an artist, versus a dabbler? Whether you are genius or an athlete is very measurable in real life terms, and are generally not open to interpretation. However, in art there is no test, art is up to the perception of the viewer. If someone, anyone, thinks it's art, then it's art and thus the creator is an artist, whether one likes that brand or not or thinks it's deserved based on their perspective. I've seen so many works at art auctions that I wouldn't give a nickel for sell for $5000 or more, because perhaps in that viewer's eyes, the image speaks to them and therefore is art, at least to them.

BTW, for every DaVinci, there were hundreds of equally talented artists who didn't get any press to become famous, but we don't hear about those guys.

Don't get me wrong, I don't have any delusions that my work is at the same technical level as many other artists such as j-art, Hobbit, racin-jason, lemonjim, to name a few. I just think that artists come in many forms and styles and that to create art is something that everyone can do. I think those that we drool over for their talent and artistic ability are Master Artists and I fully agree that not everyone (and even a very few) can reach that status, so no I don't think just calling someone an artist is belittling to those who are more advanced at the craft.

ShadowWind

PS: Did you know that Charles Schultz of Peanuts fame was told by Disney that he wasn't talented and should give it up. If he listened to the advice of those who thought he was untalented as a cartoonist, we wouldn't have Snoopy to enjoy today.

The Grand Ole' Opry told Elvis to go back to the farm...

Untalented in art is a perception, and one never knows with training whether one will get better and surpass his/her so called critics...

the key word is craft, not art. Most of what I do is actually craft, and can be learned by nearly anyone given enough effort applied. some of the most celebrated art through human history, we know not the names of the craftsmen. Stroll through an Egyptian or Greek antiquities exhibit and realise their art is also craft, learnable crafts, like metalworking, painting, pottery, and stone sculpture. The 'talent' was actually taught, passed down through generations, and generally adhered to a set official style.

" PS: Did you know that Charles Schultz of Peanuts fame was told by Disney that he wasn't talented and should give it up. If he listened to the advice of those who thought he was untalented as a cartoonist, we wouldn't have Snoopy to enjoy today. The Grand Ole' Opry told Elvis to go back to the farm..." Here's another one for you along the same line "Can't sing, can't act, dances a little" the person this being trashed by those 7 words was Fred Astair. It was true that he was a poor singer and only a fair actor but man, could he dance! :-)

If anyone's curious, I tried Epilogue, and submitted 4 pics, all of which clearly had "Poser and Photoshop" in the image description. 3 were accepted right away, and one was turned down, citing composition. Granted, those pics are a little more complex, but there seemed to be no second thoughts about how they were made. (If anyone's curious, those 4 pics also appear in my gallery here at http://www.renderosity.com/gallery.ez?ByArtist=Yes&Artist=Chas -- they're "Past Lives," "Cybele," "That Midsummer Night's Dream" and the rejected one was "Arcana"). And ShadowWind wrote: "I've seen so many works at art auctions that I wouldn't give a nickel for sell for $5000 or more, because perhaps in that viewer's eyes, the image speaks to them and therefore is art, at least to them." I've also seen folks shell out $5000 for art not because they appreciate it as art, but because they want the prestige of being able to say that they "get it" (even if they don't). Take care; Chas

surfing through poser rosity freestuff i found this artist webpage/gallery of 3d art.... http://www.gordanadesign.com/3dgallery.htm meanwhile i went to epilog.. theere is some good art, but well in some genres like manga, they often are below the usual fanartist standard in such kind of communauty or artists :) anyway epilog is good in itself but i sens too much arrogance and narrowmindly attitude :(

well abotu posing and such take photography, it is called an "art"... But does the photograph MADE the woman model that poe frotn of him ? no, parents of her made her yet no one will complain abotu him not being a good photograph or artists as he uses a model he did not made. so for people in 3d communauty shunnign people that annot do modelling or texturing, i say that NO ONE can master ALL skills needed at once. Many modellers are talented but unable to do good postwork and use of a paint software, many peopel make stunning realistic textures without always being able to 3d modelling a full human body. Now for the person using someone's else 3d human body, and someone else's realistic texture, there is still much artistic work to make, such as ligthing, pose, and postwork Also why would people only wanting to try to share what they have in mind to be able to do what someone took 10 years to master ? Art is abotu feelign and imaginations. You cannot even graba pencil and ake decent strokes? that does not mean you have no feelings or imagination to share and communicate to others. As long as it took you to learn or practice any specal skill related to the art medium you use, as long as it required you to think and to try to express your feelings and to comunicate what your imagination made in your head, it is art IF you manage to have people getting same feeling. I saw photographs or poser artists who could totally change a picture/scene only by ligthing. And what to say abotu all those japanese poser hobbyists or artists that manage to make so many postworkless renders to look so good ? I refer to it as such a person: i began stopping only looking in awe to other works (many artists here impress me, and most of the others please me much too). I started from nothing. Once upon a time i tried to draw with pencils, tried to learn. I was unable to, and now also my hand is crippled so i will never be able to try it again. So i had to resort at describing my feelings and ideas to a friend of mine who was drawing very good and we made a perfect team. A few months ago i took the first step: i began to try out a paint software for the first time in my life (i sometime used some cropping/rescalling and basic operations but no compositing, no drawing, no layer etc). I began to ake soem textures but of course i was unsatisfied and i saw many peopel here making stunnign textures, but i try to learn at my own pace/speed. Then i saw that a GOOD poser render (not even a postworked image) needed MORE than simply click "Render" and wait :) So i began to look for tutorials about lighting, bumpmapping, materials, and such. After that i also had some need that made me learn about depth cue, morph targets and so on. I know i will never be a 3d modellist, because i use poser as a hobby, already have things to do irl for my job and such. I also know that as my needs as an hobbyist requires me to do most of my things myself except 3d models and that what i need , i never found it on artist's marketplaes or free contributions (very narrow needs), i cannot rely on anyone, i have to learn all at once many skills, all by myself. I think many good artists here are specialised in 2 or 3 aspects, mostly postworking (still unable to do it, want to learn) but they sure use other's work for things they do not master and cannot spare/afford the time to learn it by themselves, else they would not be as good in their part. So i have, as always, to be a jack of all trade, in a superficial and low end level, but that's life. Yet even with crude skills, i have "ideas" and i managed to please peopel with my art, and mostly to put down my feelings or ideas/itenntions on a picture. Dont matter if it is superb as many peopel here, what matters to me is that people looking my art feels what i felt making/imaginating it. and as someone told here (shadowind i think), what is painfull when you show digital assisted art to people not into it, you hear the painful question "wow you did this yourself ?" and so you have to painfully explain that you did not model the character yourself polygon by polygon.. so what did you do ? you have to explain that you not always made the texture to... "so what did you do ?" and then you are totally sad :( But of course computer is not the artist, it is a tool. How many peopel can make complex math operations by head ? so for digital artists. So of course the computer take care of many com^plex things, but things we couldn't do all by ourselves from scratch, but the computer wouldn't be able to make it without us too :) I never saw a computer to make its own 3d mesh, texture, pose it light it, postwork it, render it without anyone ! (maybe in the future) want an analogy with music industry ? What are DJ's ? they take samples, existing tuns and songs, and computers and mahines, and they mix it up... They are labelled ARTISTS, and became more famous, gain more glory that the artists who composed the tunes they used. I do not tel there is no talent at mixing parts, in fact, DJing is like ooking, of course you did not make the ingredients but the final dish is yours, yet it is less simple if you ask me. So if a DJ who use other's tunes/songs is labelled as a CREATOR, an ARTIST and his name become more famous, or put more forwards than the artist who created the tune he used, then why wouldnt we call people using meshes, textures and such and computers, to produce pictures, Artists ? Nowadays, for youths, the only artist is the dj, composers of the ripped off tunes are only "ingredients", without name for most people... Think about that ! Here at least we give credit to people we use the materials from and they are praised for their legitimate work. 3d/computer rt is less hyppocrit than most traditionnal arts such as music, photography and such ! sorry for the long post, i cannto connect often nowadays and did not want to put 3 or 3 replies in the threads as i could not :( (excuse also my poor english and my typos...)

"Don't diminish them by putting them in a basket with me labled "everyone is an artist."

I've yet to see someone claim that "everyone is an artist". The exact quote was:
"I think everyone is an artist in their own way."

Does something have to hang on a wall for it to be considered art or it's creator artistic? Before digital came along for me, I considered myself artistic in that I am always creating something. From my own crochet patterns to my jewelry, I consider myself an artist and it has little to do with my gallery here. I don't paint but I've proven I can. I personally choose digital over painting but I combine all my talents when I consider myself an artist.

If you're artistic, you're artistic and no one can tell you that because it's not oils or pastels that it doesn't count.

FYI, the first "art" was the "art of war." It could be said that cooking is an art, dancing is an art, parenthood is an art, etc. etc. If we're going to try to define art and / or justify the generalization that "everyone is an artist" in some way, we're never going to agree. There's just too many divergent possibilities for which cases can be made. I suppose that there are a few people out there who are physical and mental vegetables who, quite honestly, don't or can't excel at anything -- so a blanket generalization like that can't hold up, anyway. But as for the general possibilities, they range as far as our imaginations, so that argument is a little more than any of us can chew. Might want to save ourselves the frustration and give that tangent a rest. Take care; Chas

My point is that artistic people are drawn to digital art. :)

I mistrust generalizations and sweeping statements that try to be democratic by including everyone at all levels of aptitude and ability under the same label. Perhaps the distinction is small, but I don't consider everyone here an artist nor do I think everything on the gallery is art just because it is posted. That's a personal bias, I guess. I like to celebrate talent but the title of artist is sullied when false awards are given to people who haven't earned them. And since I don't pretend to be an artist, I guess I'm less offended by being denied the title than other people would be. And frankly, because we are so frivalous with labling everything art, we prove to people that are scornful of digital art that we aren't serious about our graphics--the rating of excellent or great is applied to mediocre work and that gives weight to their point that there is no art in the digital area. I don't agree with that. I think there are artists among us. But everyone of us an artist? No, that's ridiculous...it makes art common and uninteresting as every trash can becomes an art piece because every person who creates a trashcan is an artist (a wonderful technician that person may be, and there may be artistic trashcans, but every trashcan is not art nor is every creator of a trashcan an artist). Are should be something that excites...that we can be amazed to discover because someone shows us a new way of seeing something. To say that every copier of someone else's graphics is an artist is to say every photocopy machine is an artist. That's it. The ebot turn off didn't work. Trying again.

From Epilogue's Guidelines: "Comic-style artwork is acceptable, however artwork with speech/thought bubbles, etc., will not be accepted." In other words, if Roy Lichtenstein had ever submitted to their site, he would have been rejected.

turning off ebots never work, though it can't hurt to uncheck it. Just doesn't seem to work for me. however, if you click on the link to the friggin ebot you do get, you will get more of them. Dunno why but that's how it works. if you do not want to see anymore of the conversation, the easiest thing I find to do... is highlight the ebot response and hit the delete key without ever following the link to see what is here. Every time I have done that I have never gotten another ebot... as the software seems to be triggered by following the link again. I've tested it several times and it definitely appears to be the case. For example, there are three responses here from when I got my last ebot on this thread. I only got one ebot. I am sure I will get another ebot for the replies (if any) to my post. But guess what... I'm going to hit the delete key on that ebot and not read anymore of this thread, and enjoy no more ebots as I won't come look again at it. Do the same, don't complain. :)

to be fair........point #15 of the Epilogue.net Art Guidelines says : ___"Poser, Bryce and other software - Artwork created in these programs must be of exceptional quality to be approved." ___BVH began this thread by implying that Poser images were NOT allowed period. Tsk tsk. Nonetheless, I should hope ALL their accepted artwork would be of exceptional quality. And at the very least Epilogue.net recognizes that software programs DO create Artwork, according to the above guideline. Also keep in mind that 'other software' must necessarily include Photoshop, Maya, Lightwave, and more. Lastly, OF COURSE THEIR DECISIONS ARE ARBITRARY! When all is said and done, the images will be accepted or rejected based on the whims of the judge(s). How else does one make determinations concerning something as transient as 'art'?

It's all well and good because art comes from within and not from the mouths of others.

*My mother said to me, 'If you become a soldier, you'll be a general; if you become a monk, you'll end up as the pope.' Instead, I became a painter and wound up as Picasso.
--Pablo Picasso

Every child is an artist, the problem is how to remain an artist once he grows up.
--Pablo Picasso*

A very famous and well known artist whos work doesn't interest me a bit but I love those two quotes. :)

And just to show how art "really is" in the eyes of the beholder: Pablo Picasso is one of my all time favorite artists. :)