I posted one of my images, "Getting The Hell Out," over at digitalart.org. Here's a comment I just got:

Very impressive work!
But it's IMPOSSIBLE to make it only with bryce software unless you import a picture into bryce. And to import a picture is very easy than to
Build the image by yourself. Anyway it's beautiful..

By the way, I marked "Bryce" as my software and didn't include Paintshop Pro since I did very minimal postwork: a slight painted effect and color change.

I checked out this guy's gallery, and he actually has some Bryce images in it. They're newbie-looking abstracts.

Here's my reply send in an IM:

Thanks for the comment on "Getting The Hell Out." But you are wrong, I didn't use a "picture." Those are models I imported into Bryce, arranged, and then textured and rendered. If you're wondering if I modelled the characters, no I did not. The main one is from Poser, and the skull and head are from a model site.

Doug

The reason I bring this up (besides it pissing me off lol) is that Striving also got a similar comment there on one of his images awhile back, from another member. This mental midget balked at the imported objects, and just assumed that you throw your objects into the scene and bryce does all the work. HA! If he only knew. I suppose to get respect from these type of people you have to make your characters and objects and then render it in 3dsmax. I don't get it. Isn't art just art??

Anyway, beware if you submit to digitalart.org.

Doug

Hi sweetie.. What name do you go under at DA?

Thanks for the note Doug...(they were abused children) ;)

Attached Link: http://digitalart.org/artwork.php?ID=32165

ICM: LOL

Another way of looking at it, is that because this guy couldn't get interesting or realistic effects in his own Bryce work (the one interior image in his gallery proves my point -- he apparently spent hours on it, but it has a long way to go), he (wrongly) assumes that no one can achieve interesting lighting effects or good quality modeling using Bryce. You know the type ... those who can't do (and can't teach)become critics.

Thanks Doug...have added a comment there. :-) hugs

reminds me of another Package, whose fandom eschew any postwork whatsoever, I wouldn't sweat it..it's the picture that counts.

Thanks, dear! hugs back. Ricky, I think that indoor pic was done in 3dsmax. I wonder if he made all the models? Or if they are pictures :-/

His indoor pic is remencient of a scene I saw on the net during halloween. No..I don't mean that its terrible. I mean the type of furniture, the staircase,the arrangement of the furniture, the doors..etc.. just can't pinpoint it right now. Suffering from raging CRS today. sigh

Ooops, you are right, it is 3DS Max. So I'm even less impressed with it. But, if you look at the stuff he has done in Bryce, it looks like there is little or nothing actually modeled in Bryce ... or modeled at all. He seems to mostly stick up 2D images and then render them. Look at "Next Generation" ... there is no feeling of depth. It looks like two planes. I don't think his work is terrible either ... but like I said he's got a long way to go before it's good. And, I don't see any particular skill evidenced in his Bryce works. So, consider the source. I always do exactly what you did ... when someone either gives me effusive praise or a really nasty comment ... and I don't know who they are, I check out their gallery. If they haven't done anything I would give a second look at, then I discount their opinion to a certain extent. (And we all know, I'm not above asking people here if they agree with a comment posted about my work.) On the other hand, if someone whose work I really admire posts a comment that makes me rethink my work or try a different approach to something ... man, that's GOLD!! So, are you impressed with this guy's modeling skills (in any medium) or his Brycing?? If not, then treat his comment as what it is ... the ramblings of an ignorant individual. He'll either come to learn that Bryce is much more than imported pictures ... or he'll remain ignorant. That's his problem, not yours.

Quote from Doug: "I don't get it. Isn't art just art??" It is art if you simply post it with an optional title name. But once you mention the software that was used, you have to mention ALL the software that was used. Because it is no longer art then, but a procedure. So others then want to know how much work you put into it as far as which models you made and which ones you simply downloaded or bought. Art becomes the process then of using the software to make the image rather than the image itself. And how well you use that art is what's being judged by others. I personally think that if PhotoShop is used AT ALL on a Bryce render (other than adding a signature or copyright), that it becomes a PhotoShop image and should be posted as such without mentioning Bryce. End of story. www.shonner.com

Attached Link: http://www.gfxartist.com/community/member_gallery/41431

Shonner, I completely disagree with you on the issue of postwork making a Bryce render something other than a Bryce render. By using two separate Bryce renders and using them as separate layers in PSP, I saved myself several hundred hours of render time today. Could I have left the image to render in Bryce for several months and had a nice pure Bryce image with the same lighting? Sure, but I would have missed out on the challenge. That said, I don't consider the image a PSP image, because I could not have created it just using PSP. Without Bryce, the image would never have existed. So, I don't think of it as anything but a Bryce image. Going even further, what about materials?? If an object has a material created in PSP or Photoshop, then does it cease to be a Bryce image?? The artist certainly didn't create the picture based material in Bryce ... I remember having this discussion more than once on this forum -- originally taking the position that if it wasn't 100% modeled in Bryce, it wasn't really a Bryce image -- and I came to the conclusion that my view was wrong. Bryce is a tool, not a religion.

"Bryce is a tool, not a religion. " Flak looks at the heretic verrrrry closely.....

The heretic blows a big ol' wet raspberry at Flak

Shonner: I disagree completely. "End of story." Uh, no. With that logic, Rochr, Alvin and Hobbit aren't creating art, they are just following a procedure. If you're doing a TON of postwork, maybe your image should be in the Mixed Medium Gallery (in fact, I posted one there last night). But to not call it art is ridiculous IMHO. As far as I'm concerned, it's the final image that matters. Ricky: "Bryce is a tool, not a religion." I like that quote :-) And yes, I know you always have to look at the source. It still irks me though LOL... Ardiva: Some people just seem to have something against Bryce. I didn't even know that site existed. Looks like I won't be posting there!

• Flak starts building the bonfire.... * ;)

the heretic, who weighs MUCH more than the average duck, is secure in the knowledge that she cannot burn [see thread concerning rusty things, wood, ducks and burning of witches ... or heretics] ... and wafts another sloppy raspberry in Flak's general direction.

That thread got way to confusing way too fast for my puny brain lol. I think I'll still try to burn ya (would hate to waste all the polygons in that bonfire and the effort in the postworked smoke), but then just be disappointed if/when you don't burn ;)

i agree with ricky. because he cant do very well with his art, he probably assumes that no one else can do any better. lol, id like to read what the guy's final remarks about your picture are after you sent him that reply.

Prepare to be disappointed, Concord (Flak), for there are not sufficient polygons in your universe to burn my very un-duck-like self. And, armed as I am with the Holy Handgrenade of Antioch, and counting as I am to three, having pulled the Blessed Pin ... I fear thee not. Now ... Monty Python .... THERE'S A RELIGION!!

Uh Oh!! ouch

Ocddoug, I went, I looked, I left a comment and rating....the guy's a pinhead, just ignore him....

"I suppose to get respect from these type of people you have to make your characters and objects and then render it in 3dsmax." Doug, you don't need the respect of boneheads like that. They don't even respect themselves.

Well from what I've seen there and from the comments on my own work in Bryce that I've uploaded to them ("Kilia"), it seems that if you don't do Poser and 3dsmax, you are not a 3D person. Please correct me it I'm wrong?

Tjohn!! I just saw your Monopoly posting!! Fabulous!! And I love the playing piece you put on Park Place. What a great way to sneak in your logo character.

Hmm I don't like their format and to tell the truth what a great place to rant about it a rival artist community. :P No offense ocddoug I am just say'n

I think Zhann's got the right sentiment about the whole thing. Heh, RM, I'm not too sure about that - I got lots and lots and lots of polygons over here... Holy Hand grenades...nah, I was always an Orac, Zen, Liberator kind of guy (Blakes 7).

Thanks, Tjohn. Vile, I agree :-)

Thanks Ricky. :^)

Art, shmart,.........whatever it takes to do the job. If it's 80% Bryce,......post it in the Bryce gallery,......if you're having pangs of guilt,........post it elsewhere. Personally, most of my images are about 75% Bryce and 25 - 30% postwork(Blasphemer !). It's a great piece Doug,.......we could always have the guy iced. Just kidding !

shonner, you do disapoint me. i have just got a guy at work into bryce, he used to muck around in C4D and strata (now there's a POS if i ever met one!). i am yet to see anything he's done, but i'll be sure to point him here for c&c when he does. anyway the point is, he loves bryce now and can't imagine who would slag it off. mind you he is a bit naive in that respect... er... back to random bloke slagging, in his picture entitled "insects fighting" or something, he has a scorpion model. scorpions are members of the archnid family. THEY ARE SPIDERS NOT INSECTS!!!!!!!!!!!! John

Un-constrictive critique is all too easy online. People can hide behind a screen name and fling out whatever thoughts they want to from the comfort of basic anonimity, which makes it all the easier for some to comment without really thinking, as they would in real life. Best advice, ignore them. Yes, easier said then done, but search for your inner sholin monk and find peace, lol. ---------- *Bryce Postwork - If it is rendered in Bryce, them it is Bryce, but if the postwork outeighs the original render, time to start looking at uploading to the "mixed medium" gallery. Hobbit does. Most postwork is contrast, brightness, color levels, compositing of various renders, adding of flares, glares, and glow, etc, etc. Any of this does not detract that it is a Bryce render or CD4, or 3DSmax, etc. ---------- Shonner I would mention one thing, your theory pitfalls in one important way(imo); You say - "But once you mention the software that was used, you have to mention ALL the software that was used. Then you state - "I personally think that if PhotoShop is used AT ALL on a Bryce render, that it becomes a PhotoShop image and should be posted as such without mentioning Bryce. Well...then you aren't mentioning ALL the software then...;o) ---------- Take heart Doug, you are in a group of Brycers that I can see would make an artistic statement in their work no matter what program you were using. You style is unmistakable, and I believe so is your talent, seriously. AgentSmith

Sorry to hear Doug, but IMO you should take it as a positive comment. After all, this all shows how good your knowledge of Bryce really is. People with doubts exists everywhere, not only at Digitalart. Try 3Dlinks... :) Ive posted several images at Digitalart as well, and have only got good comments so far.

Yep Doug. Let them say what they want. You can hold your head up high and walk away. All the demeaning comments really amount to is a feeling of being inferior or less accomplished. So in their minds they need to bring themselves up to your level. The only way they can do this is to cut down your work. If you accomplished what you set out to do... then job well done. We know your work and he doesn't. lol We also know what Bryce can do and that there is stuff we don't know about Bryce yet. In knowing that it gives us more incentive to push the limits. You do nice work. So let this guy wallow in his narrow mindedness. Keep on Brycin' buddy. 8) Wade

heh..I actually modelled the Holy Handgrenade..perhaps I should use it soon..;) sheesh..I guess I'll just state now that I used either Win NT 4, Windows Me, Windows 2000 (depending on which Wings 3d I'm using uh..2 '17's and an '18'..;), Graphic Workshop Professional, and Explorer (to transfer files from C to A, I have an 'airwall' between my rendering machine and the missus' Internet machine..;) Oh, and several dll's were used in the transfers using cut and paste, but I don't know the procedure calls..;)
Oh, and I think Renderosity uses Apache Server (there's a web site that will tell you all sorts of details, last I checked, 'rosity had about 5 servers or so..;) Am I covered now?..;)

Lol @ Pakled. 8)

Personally, I get irritated about this whole "is it a Bryce image or a Poser image or a Photoshop image or mixed media" business. It's a computer-generated image, darn it! As art, only the image counts. It doesn't matter a row of beans what % was what software. That's a matter of mild technical interest to technically-minded people, and not a basis for categorisation.

Phantast, I think it has some validity if for no other reason than it gives someone learning about the tools an idea about what can and can't be done with any one program. If someone tells me that it's 100% Bryce, then I see how far Bryce can be pushed. If I see that several different programs were used, and I like the effect they produced, then I look into that. Categorization is wonderful when applied as a learning tool. Before computers, it was a no brainer ... no one would try to pass off a piece of sculpture as an oil painting. Today, however, it can be hard to tell a photo from a Bryce render (with some artists) and it's great when they tell you what parts are what. The artwork is much more than the process behind it, but how nice it is when you get a chance to peek at the process and learn something from it. Found something in mixed media today ... Tazzie Trees ... a photographic and Vue composite. I never would have thought about trying something like that, and if it had just been posted as a Vue image, I would have wondered why I wasn't able to get the same results as this artist. (By the way, ocddoug, saw your Ford in there too, love it.) As a matter of fact, I managed to miss that there was a Mixed Media category. I'm going to move a few of my posts over there -- where they should be.

I agree Phantast, and Pakled you made an excellent funny. Think that would work with the Posers as well? :-)

I could probably go off for pages about this subject but ill try to make my point simple...... Art is art, it doesn't matter how you got there. Now examples meant for learning purposes are different you may need to describe how you made the material and what post work you did, or where you modeled it and how you rendered it at what level etc....... all right i think thats all i need to say cause if you any further i may just rant on for days, and im not in the mood for that, nor is this forum....

im a little late, and i kinda skimmed through the replies, but I personally think art is in the motives--i mean, if someone glues a bunch of scrap metal together, for the soul purpose of wanting to create, and for others to see their creation than i think it is art,not neccesarily the art i would prefer, but if they glue a bunch of metal together, then decide, hey this looks cool--i think 'll call it art, i dont think it is truly art. And i dont think it matters what mediums you use, or which you give main credit to--i mean really, why does it matter? but, i could be wrong. doug, your defintley an artist in my book, so dont let anyone get you down because they doubt your ability.

Ok, I frequently bring Poser figures into Bryce, because, let's face it, Poser rendering stinks. So it is Poser or is it Bryce? Also, if I do a decent amount of postwork, but the majority of the image owes it's origin to Bryce, then it's Bryce, I consider. There are a zillion things I can't do in Bryce that I can do with a Photoshop brushstroke or two. Waitaminnut... it's none of those things! It's pixels! Doug, ignore the lousy comments. Opinions are like @-holes, everybody has one, and some opinions are closer to the forementioned orifice. Oh, and it's an awesome image, regardless of how it was made or the purists judge it.

Whichever one you want! I personally always post in the Bryce gallery, just cause I like everyone there, ya know? I enjoy the community. As far as which gallery it should go into, I think usually it's the intent of the image. if you're trying to combine Bryce with a digital photo, it's not a mixed medium because the focus isn't really on the photo, it's on putting the Bryce work into the photo. However, I do also think that if you have combined photos with your Bryce, you should mention that you did that, so people don't get mad at you thinking you're trying to pull off a photo as Bryce, but hey, whatever you want! As the wise old man used to say, "It's a whole year later than it was a year ago! "

Unless you work at IBM, then pixels are 'pels'..;)
Actually, though I've had Poser as long as Bryce, I have never posted in there, because 1) despite the 'nudity' flag, there's a lot of bare stuff in there..and 2) you think we're bad about postwork..;) I should try it some day. I think Poser is one of the best character object generators for Bryce around today..;)
Remember, no matter where you go, there you are
-Buckaroo Banzai, and..Mad Max, Beyond Thunderdome..;)

Ricky: I'd like to introduce you to some friends of mine......they call themselves 'THE SPANISH INQUISITION' !!! (And they say you can't make optical illusions in 3d....blah!)

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!! (Cardinal Biggles ... is that YOU??)

You always create great work Doug, and the guy who commented, and those like him, are just displaying digital snobbery. The finished image is what matters, not the tools you used to get there, although discussing the techniques used in getting there has it's merits. 8) Also I think he's just jealous. 8) Catlin HUGS