Sat, Sep 21, 1:06 PM CDT

Renderosity Forums / Fractals



Welcome to the Fractals Forum

Forum Moderators: Deenamic

Fractals F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Aug 27 11:19 am)




Subject: Apoophysis or Art?


  • 1
  • 2
Stephi ( ) posted Wed, 04 January 2006 at 11:31 PM

I'm the one who made the angry comments you are referring to. So far, to date, I have not heard from any of you except for Panny, about what you're griping about as far as bad art is concerned. It's all generalizations about some things that many of you have obviously discussed among yourselves and no one else is privy to. No details. Do you really think that the people who are doing the art that you object to see themselves as being the ones you're upset about? If so, you are incredibly arrogant and naive. If someone is not improving their art, what is that to you? If someone makes art you consider bad art or as 'not art' - what is that to you? Does everyone who makes art have the same skills, gifts, motivations and intentions? Do you know what motivates each person who posts on Renderosity? As far as I know, there is no established protocol for posting here. A person can, if they so desire, post a total of 365 images per year of absolutely anything they choose. So what? Why are you posting here if the images you see here causes you so much distress? As far as Keith's and Rick's distress over painful experiences with marketing their art, I feel very sad because they are both fine and excellent artists. But the fact is, is that what they have experienced is part and parcel of the arts - no matter whether it is visual art, acting, music, writing - rejection, or at least, the seeming experience of it, goes along with the territory. If seeming rejection knocks the props out of one, then it might be better to make other plans. For one thing, a lot of homework in the form of marketing research, and a business plan is a necessity, an absolute must. When you make the decision to sell your art, you're no longer just an artist - you're then a small business proprietor. Like it or not. People are selling their fractal art. You can too. But first, you have to figure out 'why' people should buy your art, because a nickel-ninety five says you can't do that right now. In the meantime, your scatter-gun typographical approach sprays every artist who posts here. It appears to me that the ones you're really angry with are yourselves. If you feel that posts need to go through a selection process before they are displayed, you need to speak with R-osity management. If you feel that some folks shouldn't post here, you need to speak with management. If you feel that persons who make certain kinds of fractal art shouldn't be allowed to post here, you need to speak with management. Or better yet, maybe the lot of you should pool some resources and start a private gallery that is viewable only by invitation or appointment. There's a creative thought for you. As far as your being angry, Tony, so what? You're always angry. My opinion stands, with one addition. The apology should be for apophysis artists, as well as the entire fractal art community. Stephanie


Deagol ( ) posted Thu, 05 January 2006 at 12:28 AM

Stephanie, now that you have brought it over here. Can you please be more specific about what I said that you found so offensive. It's all above, pull down specific things so that we can all be very clear about what you want me to apologize for. I would also like to hear from anyone who agrees with you. By demanding that I apologize to the entire community, you are claiming to speak for the entire community. If I am that far off the mark, where I have offended everyone here, I would really like to hear it from everyone. I don't want to hear anyone speak for anyone else. I don't want to hear from the defenders of the weak and innocent. Have the backbone to speak for yourself. I'll respect you. Don't lump me together anyone else. I speak for myself. If it is the case that I have been that offensive then I will apologize.


SimonKane ( ) posted Thu, 05 January 2006 at 12:46 AM

Hi Stephanie. I don't know how much of what you wrote was directed at me, but I want to clarify what I said in light of your comments, and answer some of your questions. If someone doesn't want to improve their 'art', it's not important to me. Plenty of people make stuff I don't like; that's fine too. Does everyone that makes art have to have the same gifts and skills? Certainly not. The same motivations and intentions? No. Who am I to dictate? Where I feel it becomes my right to comment is when people post their creations to a public site, presumably so that other people (including me) can look at it, and when they allow people to comment on it using a comment box that is provided for us to give "helpful comments for improving this image". You haven't heard from me directly about this because it isn't a huge issue for me: I'm certainly not angry about it. I don't complain about it habitually (if at all). Nor do I discuss this in private with Keith et al. I don't think posts should go through a selection process, precisely because the place is designed for people to give and receive feedback. My niggle is with people that post lots of images, that don't care about improving, and who seemingly are only prepared to accept flattery. Despite the fact that the comments system is supposed to be for giving helpful advice on how to improve the work, most of the comments in the fractal gallery are just of the I-really-like-this kind. There's nothing particularly wrong with that, unless people start jumping on those people that actually use the system to actually give advice or to comment on the general state of what they're seeing posted. And remember, as far as I can see, no-one has been singled out or specifically 'picked on'. No-one is being victimised. If someone posts here, then they do so knowing that I may look at it, and possibly even comment on it. If I think it has little merit, the vast majority of the time I'll pass over it in silence. But surely it's not unreasonable for me to make a general comment about the qualities I think an 'artist' should have every now and again? Anyway, I hope this message isn't coming across as in any way aggressive, because that is not the intention. Best wishes, Simon.


TonyYeboah ( ) posted Thu, 05 January 2006 at 10:54 AM

I welcome him like I welcome cold sores. He's from England, he's angry and he's got Mad Power Disease. Paula Abdul. In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. Douglas Adams. She flays with indignation haughty, The passages she thinks are naughty, but reads them carefully so that, she'll know what to be angry at. Edward Anthony. Anybody can become angry - that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way - that is not within everybody's power and is not easy. Aristotle. Be angry, and yet do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger. Henry Ward Beecher.


Deagol ( ) posted Thu, 05 January 2006 at 2:09 PM

Still waiting. The ebots have gone out and no one has responded to back you up, Stephanie. I just read what I said in both threads and I can see that you were following me closely and stating your opinion in a very reasonable fashion. Why did you turn on me so viciously? What did I say? Again, be specific. Don't lump me together with anyone. If anyone is afraid that I might start a public fight with them for backing Stephanie's demand for a public apology of me, IM me. I'll be gentle, I promise. I really want to know what I did to warrant such a demand.


Lwyland ( ) posted Thu, 05 January 2006 at 2:18 PM

It's such a shame that this discussion even has to take place. I remember when I found Apophysis. I was so excited. I had always loved that type of art, but I didn't know that there was a program out there that actually allowed you to create your own. I am very new to fractals. I just found out about them 3 months ago. Where have I been you might ask? Busy with life and raising four kids. Not a lot of time to get on the computer to search for anything new. I found it by accident when I was looking up a scifi sitcom (Threshold) and it lead me to Electric Sheep. Is it art? I think so. But I like this kind of stuff. My son is an art student in DC. He saw some of my work and had a different view of it, which he politely apologized for although I said that it was alright. They teach the students to think about their art and that each picture must have a meaning that they should try to project in the picture. These, he said, didn't do that so he doesn't consider it art. Each picture I do I have enjoyed doing. If there is someone out there who enjoys looking at them, then that makes me very happy. I do this because it is fun and I love this kind of medium, the computer. I have seen many flames which experienced Apo artists have done. They are beautiful. I strive to perfect my art to be as good, but I know that I am just beginning. Give me an honest opinion. I cannot get better if I do not get suggestions of what I can do to improve the image. I cannot get better if I simply hear that it is good although it does do a lot for ones self confidence. If it has been done before, let me do it and learn, but show me where it has been done before and what I can do to change it to make it a memorable image. If it is bad, don't simply say that it sucks, tell me why you think it is bad. Is the gamma to high? Is the lighting wrong? Is it to dark? Should I have panned into the image at a certain point? Will it hurt my feelings, probably, no-one wants to hear that they stuff isn't good. But that will only last for a short while and then I'll step back to hear the constructive things you have to say, pull up the image and attempt to fix it. I'm joined Renderosity to see what other artist can do with the program. I'm here to meet talented artist and to get any helpful advice I can get. I have downloaded many tutorials in Apo and script writing in the hopes of getting better. Hopefully, in time, I can be as accomplished as many of you. Thanks for listening. Lisa :)


Timbuk2 ( ) posted Thu, 05 January 2006 at 2:28 PM

I must be missing something. "It has been brought to my attention..." - TYeboah. "Now that you have brought it over here..." - Deagol. I am enjoying this thread for the most part, but it would be nice to know what's going on. Can somebody fill me in please.


Deagol ( ) posted Thu, 05 January 2006 at 3:21 PM

That's what I am trying to get Stephanie to do. She took a dumped on me on the UF list. It was an unprovoked attack that was attached to something that had a lot of meaning to me. In the attack she demanded that I, and a few others, apologize to the community for what we said here in this forum


undisclosed-designer ( ) posted Thu, 05 January 2006 at 7:38 PM

Hmmm... i don't think that message 52 was directed at you for an apology, Keith, more to Tony or whatever his alias is I am pretty sure though that someone is making a dirty head-game out of this whole thread, and we should reconsidder to think about what we really are doing here at this community; discussing whether something is art, or showing and sharing our creative capabilities to create art. I believe the latter is more appropriate and futhermore be supportive for everyone who wants to improve their pieces of work by those who know the lashes of the whip. For the rest we should just ignore this Tony trying to smear dirt over our whether or not daily creations, people like him don't really fit into this community. If ye just don't like the pieces of work others create, don't look at it then. But i assume you don't like any art other than your own, since you just complain in this thread without any positive outcome.


Rykk ( ) posted Thu, 05 January 2006 at 10:59 PM

Well said, Panny and also Simon. I agree that we should all take a lot more pride in the contents of our art galleries and try to only post our best efforts. It's why I post so infrequently. Most of what I make my dog doesn't even think is very good - lol - and I wouldn't want included in a gallery of images that I might want to show to friends or coworkers. A "masterrpiece" surrounded by dozens of not so good images loses it's luster because the other images set a prevalent tone. A lot like having a really nice house in the middle of a crack neighborhood or something. The run-down houses drag down your property value and people might turn around and leave before they get to your house/great image. Not everything that's in my gallery is something I think a whole lot of now but when I posted them I felt that they were truly "finished" and I'd taken care of every detail I could think of. Or they stay to show change over time in the styles - or I'm just sentimental about some of them :-?). Some have taken over a week to "perfect"(I know - poor word choice but it's bedtime...) and one took a month. Many will sit on my monitors at work for a week just to see if I still like them b4 I upload them. I doubt even VanGogh could post a masterpiece a day, 365 days a year. I think we forget that most of us don't contribute monitarily to this site and that it isn't cheap for Bondware to provide this wonderful service to us all. No - I don't work for them - lol. I seriously can't figure what their angle is business-wise to even do this. Unless they do well with the merchant thingie. Anyhow, I do agree with them about having pride in our galleries. By posting everything one makes every day, habits get formed due to the ceaseless repetition of the same techniques and that could hamper one's growth. I'm assuming we all want to be as good at this stuff as we can be, no? I get into ruts a lot myself with all the images with spheres and I've posted images b4 simply because "it was time" that were really not very good that I deleted. Except the one with my favorite "poopie" comment under it - lol. I hate that pic but keep it just for the great comment my uncle made. :-?) I agree with Panny about the thumbnails that are better compositions ("IMHO" - I'm am allowed to have an opinion, I hope) than the full sized images and all the negative space. I'm sometimes let down after clicking an awesome thumbnail. Lisa - I like your attitude. You sound like someone who is really interested in doing your best and I'm sure you will do great things with fractals. Anyhow, think of it like this: if we all were more selective and picky about our galleries, there'd be fewer new posts to look at each day, commenting would take less time and we'd have more time for the REALLY important stuff - making new fractals and flames! Stephi - you're right on about what it takes to be a "WORKing artist". You have to be a good salesperson and have a sense of how to run a business. It's work, for sure and probably something many are not cut out for - I doubt that I am. I haven't experienced any "pain" in marketing my stuff because I've not figured out the best way to even start yet. I did one art show that really wasn't an art show. It was a science fiction convention. My only painful bit is how to come up with the $$ and time off of work to go to big shows. But as I gain seniority at my new job, I'll have a lot more vacation time saved up if I do that. And I'm in the dark as much as Tim about what's up between you and Keith as well. I gather from Keith's message above that you and he had words on the UF list? I must have missed that - maybe one of the "re: blah blah" ones that I always delete? Or maybe it's not something you guys want aired publicly here? Just curious - it's been a while since I've had the vicarious thrill of eavesdropping on one of the bi-annual JB vs whomever blowups that drove me off 3 years ago when I'd first signed up... lol j/k Rick


Deagol ( ) posted Thu, 05 January 2006 at 11:36 PM

Rick, you were included in the call for an apology, along with me and Tony. I'll send you an e-mail tomorrow. I'm too tired right now. I'm going to do my best to drop this for the sake of the thread. It isn't worth it. My guns are still loaded though if Stephanie wants bring it back up.


Rykk ( ) posted Fri, 06 January 2006 at 9:31 AM

For what??? Oh well - I'll check 2nite when I get home and see which size 11 I stuck in my mouth this time... :-) yeah - if it's something really contentious you're probably right about preserving the thread. Rick


Deagol ( ) posted Fri, 06 January 2006 at 2:06 PM

Attached Link: http://www.geocities.com/astrokeith/paris/louvre.html

Still thinking about this thread. If someone said that they wanted to take watercolors to the next level, could it be done? I think no. It is where it is (but I don't a thing about watercolors so I am probably wrong). Is that true for fractals too? Are they as far as they will go? I think that there is still room for more. For one, fractals are linked to technology and the technology is changing. Maybe the fractal that ends up in The Louvre will be in the room next to the one that has the Mona Lisa in it. That gallery has paintings as big as houses. Maybe it will be a fractal as big as a house. I don't know. I know that I am being wishy washy about this because above I said that fractals have evolved as far as they will go. I have just changed my mind. I think that the search for the lost fractal is still going on. Maybe the fractal in The Louvre will be a flame. It could happen :-)


TonyYeboah ( ) posted Fri, 06 January 2006 at 3:40 PM

The future evolution of fractals is...MojoWorld ;O)


Rykk ( ) posted Fri, 06 January 2006 at 6:33 PM

I think the "technology" for creating discrete fractals is about as far as it will go, at least in terms of the algorithms, shapes and colors are concerned. True, another type of formula than Mandelbrot, Julia and the flame algorithm will probably come along but I'm not sure the shapes it produces will be very drastically different from the myriad shapes available now in the way that, say, Draves' flame algorithm looks different from a Julia. I can't imagine what shape hasn't already potentially been made by the maths available now. I suppose they could be translated in 3 or more dimensions but XD has 3d pretty well covered I think. And there are some - not me - that don't think 3d shapes are "fractal" but that's a nit that doesn't need picked, IMHO, and I really don't care if they are or aren't. And then, artist's would for the most part make spirals, bi-lat's, kaleido's or tiles out of whatever new shapes any new formulas made - lol. Which isn't bad. Years ago I avoided spirals like the plague but I like them a lot now that there are so many different types that can be made with UF or Apo. And can the human eye really discern more than 16.8 million colors? Maybe holographic fractals - like Pricess Leiea(sic) projected in the first Star Wars - might happen some day in the future? That would be pretty nifty, I reckon! I don't think that it is technology, software per-se, or new formulas that will take fractal art to some new or higher "level". You're right that you can't take watercolors or oils to some kind of higher, more technical level. They wouldn't be watercolors anymore then. What I think WILL take fractals to a "higher level" is not some mechanized or computerized innovation but it will be what it has always been: The very HUMAN expression of creativity and incredible skill/expertise in the use of whatever tools they use to make their art. You could outfit a hack like me with solid state, graphite handled, laser guided paint brushes and canvas that costs $1000 per square inch and stick me next to Thomas Kinkaid and he'd still paint my doors off with a broken horse brush and a burlap sack! lol The difference would be completely a human difference in the utter sheer skill from years of HARD practice and, more importantly, the creative vision someone like that has. Somebody like Kinkaid uses pretty much the very same tools, media and pigments that have been around for centuries and used by millions of artists but he (assuming you like his stuff like I do) wields those tools better than 99% of the people who also used those tools. Why? Hard work, natural talent, incessant practice, total attention to detail, love and enthusiasm for his craft, and that "something" visualized in his mind's eye that we call "creativity". The sheer humanness of what he does strikes a chord deep within the human soul. And it will be the same with fractals, I reckon. Somebody will come along so skilled with the software and with such sheer human creativity that they will blow people's minds with the colors, shapes and image composition that they produce. That will be the "next level", IMO. And it could happen 2morrow and might even be someone who just started posting their images here or DVA, ya never know. But, like DaVinci, they probably wouldn't get many comments or make the H20 but they'd keep at it and - again like DaVinci - have their art placed in the Louvre......a few hundred years after they died! lol Rick


Rykk ( ) posted Fri, 06 January 2006 at 6:45 PM

Oh yeah - and I think whatever "next level" does come along might be the result of the combination/composition of multiple fractals and software platforms. If one can make 100 possible shapes on a single fractal or layer and in a single software platform, just think of the sheer number of theoretically possible images possible with just 10 layers. 100 to the 10th power - that's a BUNCH! Rick


Deagol ( ) posted Sat, 07 January 2006 at 12:36 AM

Rick, you make too much sense. You're right, it will be a human. Technology will impact the search for the lost fractal by making that search more efficient. As computers and software become faster, we'll be able to find it faster. That's what I referring to when I was talking about creating an image as big as a house. I suppose it could be done now and you're probably the only person on earth with the patients to do it :-) but I'll need a faster computer.


thomas998 ( ) posted Sun, 08 January 2006 at 1:06 PM

Rykk, I don't think Thomas Kincaid would paint your doors off. Thomas might have one of his sweatshop workers paint your doors off. But even mentioning Thomas Kincaid in a forumn about art is pretty weird...


Rykk ( ) posted Sun, 08 January 2006 at 2:04 PM

Tom - I was just using Kinkaid as an example of an accomplished artist that most know the name of. As to the sweatshop thing, I never heard of that. Though I HAVE seen $800 giclee canvas prints that had paint or clear thick stuff added to them to make them LOOK like real paintings. Maybe these are the "sweatshop workers"? That isn't good!...."IMO".... :-) As to mentioning him in the same context as "art" - well that's a subjective thing based on OPINION, I reckon. I, personally, think his stuff is really pretty but that doesn't mean it appeals or HAS or SHOULD to appeal to another person. Which is a normal thing - "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder", as the saying goes. Where trouble starts is when one person is offended because another person likes something that they don't. Something in there about ego, I reckon. It's like saying, "brussels sprouts are great" instead of the best, IMHO, way to say it which would be "I like brussels sprouts", I think. One way maybe subtly insinuates that some other person's fave veggie ISN'T great and the other way merely states that brussels sprouts are great - FOR ME - which doesn't have the same connotation as the first staement. Waxing philosophical, I think of the billions of people killed needlessly (IMO) in wars because the populaces were stirred up because one side didn't look or maybe think like the other "nation". (read a thing somewhere in the Bible where God said "all nations are vanity" or something like that) We may be our "brother's keeper" but we certainly don't need to be our neighbor's keeper and should worry about keeping ourselves and our own families straight. But, then again, the wars have always been because one nation's rich people wanted the stuff of the other nation's rich people and things like appearance, religion and life-styles are just tools to stir up people so they can have someone to beat up on and "de-humanize", forget their own plight, and so the rich folks of that country can keep their power and protect us poor folks from the "evildoerssss". There is nothing "holy" nor "civil" about war, IMHO....and it really doesn't get my "boxers in a bunch" - lol - if someone else hates "brussels sprouts" or loves them or burns them in a pogrom as long as I can have some for dinner every now and then. In the immortal words of George Thoroughgood - "...it don't confront me none..." LOL - sorry, this is getting WAY off the thread and not even about art so I'll shut up. And, it's all just my "opinion" anyhow. Sunday....:-) Rick


undisclosed-designer ( ) posted Mon, 09 January 2006 at 8:49 AM · edited Mon, 09 January 2006 at 8:50 AM

Attached Link: http://ericgrohemurals.com/

lol maybe ask Eric Grohe to paint your doors? Or better even the whole building you live *BIG SMILE*

Harmen

Message edited on: 01/09/2006 08:50


Deagol ( ) posted Mon, 09 January 2006 at 1:44 PM

Yes, I have seen his stuff before. Good idea! :))


Deagol ( ) posted Mon, 09 January 2006 at 1:56 PM

Kinkaid is all about marketing. He only ever builds one image. He's like an apo user... Stay calm, I'm kidding ;) Is marketing all that it comes down to? It has to be a big part of it, but I am having a hard time accepting that marketing is all that matters.


Timbuk2 ( ) posted Mon, 09 January 2006 at 3:31 PM

It probably is getting tiresome, me drawing parallels with the music biz, but the commercial aspect of the art world has some similarities. We all know that some pop music acts are simply marketing driven. Some producer decides another girl-band (for example) can sell. So he brings a group of good looking, semi (at least) talented singer/dancers together, decides on a marketing strategy (sex seems always to be a good gamble) and either composes a song himself (if he can) or finds some studio musician to put together something that has a decent 'hook'. And there you go -- the next big seller may have hit the scene. On the other hand there are some pop music artists (and I have no qualms about using this term) who truly make wonderful music, and do so for many years. Examples: Becker and Fagan (Steely Dan), Peter Gabriel (Genesis, etc), Sting (The Police, etc), Paul McCartney (The Beatles, etc), and so on. Commercial? Well, yeah to a certain extent. A marketing ploy? Maybe at first. But they all produce well executed, thoughtful, and I will say beautiful pieces of music that the broad public can appreciate. And, most importantly for this discussion, they are extremely successful at it. This parallels what we're talking about here. The commerciality of an artist can be looked at on a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being the little puppy with the big sad eyes and 10 being purely artisticly driven -- Van Gogh perhaps?. It's a very subjective thing, and I put Kinkaid at around 3. That is not to say he isn't good at it, he's obviously technically very good. But his work is not going to challenge anyone or make a bold statement about anything. He is singularly trying to sell stuff. And I don't have a problem with that. The point of this post is to try to put this issue into perspective. I think we can learn something from him, even if we don't particularly want to emulate his fixation on making a big business out of it. To get into the public eye many of the pop artists got their start at least partially by clever marketing. The image of Hendrix picking with his teeth and burning is guitar on stage at Monterey comes to mind. A publicity stunt for sure, but that's what people talked about when they went home. Very clever I'd say. What we need is a fractal artist who can pick with his teeth. ;) And I nominate Keith. Start practicing man!


Deagol ( ) posted Mon, 09 January 2006 at 3:42 PM

I've already tried that. My family doesn't appreciate the mess that I make out of the screen, keyboard and mouse. It doesn't taste all that good either :))


TonyYeboah ( ) posted Sun, 15 January 2006 at 7:26 AM

The End...


Deagol ( ) posted Sun, 15 January 2006 at 11:06 PM

Not quite the end. I have been there and done that on Deviantart and I want to share my impressions. I like the interface, journal/blog and format for the messages and comments. The format of the site is very good. I can see why it has become so popular. On any given day the fractal gallery looks like a nicely rendered random batch with a few spiral scripts thrown in. I know, there are a lot of beginners there and I am cool with that, but that place is beyond a lot. It's mostly. Someone left a comment on one of my images, welcoming me and saying that the average age is about 15. At the time I thought that they were kidding. Then I saw that one of the moderators for the fractal gallery is 18. I'm sure he's a talented kid, even if he is younger than both of my children. I am not saying that having all of those kids there is good or bad. I just don't think that I fit there. I'm a grandpa. This place has a range of experience and thankfully the gallery isn't all flames. There you would be hard pressed to find an XD image. On a good day the UF images are probably about 1 in 50. I was intrigued by a comment that someone left on a simple UF image. They asked if the artist had to write a script to come up with the image - as in, apo script. That bothered me a little because it's an indicator that the newcomers believe that apo is all there is, but we have already talked about that.


Rykk ( ) posted Mon, 16 January 2006 at 8:22 AM

Yeah, I tried DVA too. I was ticked over the allowance of wholesale image theft ("fraud") that was able to skate by here and played with the idea of pulling up stakes completely. I ended up staying to try to get the fractal gallery some respect and wait for the AOY thingie to be decided. Would have let the whole group down if I'd bailed. Anyhow, I ended up staying here and protecting myself from "artists" like that by watermarking all of the images that I expect to offer as prints. I hope it hasn't bothered anyone but in lieu of events it was the only way to protect my stuff. Here's my take on DVA. I think the overall quality of images sent to that site daily - by the tens of thousands! - is sorely lacking in a big way. If you browse the images sent in daily, 80 out of 100 are either not too good or some adolescent sending in provocative digi-photos of themselves. That got REAL old quick. As to the Daily Deviation thing - like you, I got one too. Almost the first day I started posting there. (I posted nothing the first 2 years I had a logon) I was really psyched and proceeded to fire what I considered the 30-40 best shots in my "arsenal" into a wall of relative indifference. Not very encouraging. But they weren't flames - not sure that matters, they might just suck - lol. As to the "game", it is really much worse than here, IMO. At DVA, the software even tells you when someone has "voted" for your pic by adding it to their "favorites" list. These faves are added up to put together a sort of Hot 7 (or 6 or 8?) list for that week. MUCH more opportunity for "vote swapping" there. There's one guy in particular who comments almost every image while upping anywhere from 3 to 6 images day, EVERY day since I started there in like July. No pride or selectiveness at all. And flames rule there. Anything other than a flame is pretty much ignored as being not part of the clique. And the fractal page is also almost totally ignored by the admins at DVA, as witnessed by the VERY few Daily Deviations awarded to anyone at all from the fractals page. I think that the level of art at Rendo exceeds that at DVA by a good bit especially on the fractal page and we seem to get the "cream of the crop" here as far as flames go, too. The only thing DVA is about is quantity and they are proud of it as witnessed by their counter that updates in real time. I've farted around with opening a prints account there but a few things worry me. Will they be honest about how many sold? And more likely - will ANY ever be bought? It IS the internet, their clientele is typically as monetarily challenged as me (means broke! lol) and there is just such a huge amount of stuff available yours can get lost easily in the crowd. They do have a very competitive price on canvas ("fine art" giclee, I think) prints that is pretty attractive even if just printing for yourself. Of course people carped about it because - as with all quality goods - it's isn't "cheap". Anyhow, that's just my take (read opinion) and I could be wrong. I think we have it better here at Rendo than we think, sometimes. Just browse the "All and All" page. Everyting is pretty much artistic, even the worst Poser "t&a" at least looks somewhat polished even if it isn't maybe your taste. And, as I said, ---IHMO---, the overall level of fractals and flames here is better, too. Rick


h00nta ( ) posted Mon, 16 January 2006 at 9:07 AM

Well said, those are exactly the reasons that I stopped going visiting that site, you're bang on about the amount of poorly executed images and woeful navigation. There's a much better attitude to art from the members here, who are also know what they're talking about, and who give quality advice in the forums.


Stephi ( ) posted Mon, 16 January 2006 at 3:26 PM · edited Mon, 16 January 2006 at 3:29 PM

There are young ones both at deviantart and here at R'osity. An adult would fit equally well at both sites; if not only as a mentor, but especially as an inspiration. It isn't possible to look at an image and make a determination of the artist's age. The young ones are the future and they will be the ones to take fractals and digital art to the next level. As a grandmother myself, I'm not going to underestimate those young, quick, imaginative minds, and I see nothing wrong with hanging out in both places. A true masterpiece may not be in my stars for the future, but it may be for some of them. My screenname at DA is flowervine. Stephanie

Message edited on: 01/16/2006 15:29


Deagol ( ) posted Mon, 16 January 2006 at 8:34 PM

Rick, I've never looked at the daily images. I'm amazed. Every page has 2 or 3 images of a kid trying to look hot, or emotional. They look like the same pictures that show up on My Space, which is the big hangout for teenagers. I am much more comfortable here. You know, old people have more money than teenagers do. Rendo should figure out a way to capitalize on that ;-)


Rykk ( ) posted Mon, 16 January 2006 at 9:13 PM

Personally, I didn't say anything about the ages of the fractallists at DVA - just the people sending in all the photos of themselves at DVA. You're right - it is the younger fractallists who will take this artform to "new levels". And of course there nothing wrong with "hanging out" at both places - how could there be??? That said, my thing is that I just don't have time to do both places - I've not even been around HERE very much lately, except to put my foot in my mouth in this forum :-) - and I didn't find the place to be substantially different in the way things "worked" than here nor any more about art and less about "community" than most other digital art sites. I'm not saying whether that's a good thing or a bad thing - it's just how I saw it. Just a different group of people to fit into. There did seem to be a lot more contact between the numerous admins there and the general populace but they are a bigger operation because they charge for subscription and offer the print service, etc. I reckon that's because they can pay their admins (I don't think ours get paid but I could be wrong) and they have those all-points messages that show up in your community messages page every month. I reckon it's the same here but you have to go to the Frontpage and forums rather than them sending messages to you. Six of one.... Anyhow, I just wasn't bowled over by the place after the newness wore off but maybe I'm just spoiled by being here for so long and like my "comfort zone" - lol Rick


Rykk ( ) posted Mon, 16 January 2006 at 10:21 PM

Keith - yeah, I got in BIG trouble for looking thru that page, so I just stuck to the fractals page after a short bit- lol. j/k There was some great stuff in the Daily Deviation page but I never found any of those by looking thru the main page. Maybe a page/gallery I never found? But they were 99.99% of the time not fractals so I was bummed a bit by that. Did you ever hear of anyone who ever sold any decent sized prints there? I never got anyone to really admit whether or not they sold any - or even one. That sort of dampened my enthusiasm as well. I reckon maybe that sounds a little "mercenary" but, as I think of it, I've never seen an artshow, festival nor many galleries where all - or most all - of the pieces weren't for sale and there wasn't some sort of First Place, Second Place, Best of Show thing going on. Reckon that's just the nature of the beast... Rick


Deagol ( ) posted Mon, 16 January 2006 at 11:03 PM

Attached Link: http://alyn.deviantart.com/

This person is Nick's counterpart on DA. Nick, do you think that you might be able to do something with your hair? :-))


Rykk ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 8:45 AM

Nick has hair????????? (I'll get banned 4 that 4 sure! lol)


Deagol ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 9:18 AM

I'm figuring that that young man is the reason that there are so many hot babes posting there pictures there. It could help drum up some business here ;-) If I put up a picture of me the hot babes would run for cover. :?)


Rykk ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 11:36 AM

Same here - sigh, I used to be a "hunk"......now I'm a CHUNK! LOL


TonyYeboah ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 11:58 AM

I just spent 15 minutes trying to shake my head like that and learned two things... 1. My hair is too short. 2. My brain hurts. Someone call an ambu... THUMP


Rykk ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 1:27 PM

Uh oh! "Paging Doctor Larry, paging Doctor Curly, paging Doctor Moe...." (I I just tried to shake my head like that and almost broke my neck - forgot I'd cut off the hair that made for a nice counterweight. Ah well, it was falling out anyways - lol) BTW - what was this thread about to begin with? I've 4gotten...lol


Deagol ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 1:41 PM

I think it was about how apo causes weight gain and hair loss. Those kids had better enjoy it while they can.


undisclosed-designer ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 1:52 PM · edited Tue, 17 January 2006 at 1:56 PM

Did you ever hear of anyone who ever sold any decent sized prints there?

Ask Tom Wilcox oh btw Rick, here is something for you LOL http://news.deviantart.com/article/20069/

Message edited on: 01/17/2006 13:56


Rykk ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 2:46 PM

Hi Harmen - I'm not sure I remember well, but I think Tom was one of the people I talked to. I'll have to track him down and ask again(?) to make sure. He does have some VERY nice flame designs, one that I especially like a TON. I'm nutz for flames on light/white backgrounds - the neat way they melt into the background and the semi-transparent vibe. And thanks for the link! That's WAY cool. I'll have to dig thru my flames and layers/shapes library and see if I can't come up with a face sorta like the one in the "Man in the Box" video by Alice in Chains. Rick


Rykk ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 3:12 PM · edited Tue, 17 January 2006 at 3:23 PM

Keith - yeah, I heard that Apo causes "Trizophrenia". It's a debiltating disease whose symptoms include:

  1. A compulsive restriction of one's diet to pizza (NO neopolitan cut - triangles ONLY! - it makes the patient fly into fits of random script writing!) and Trisquits.

  2. Obsessive and repeated viewing of old THREE's Company reruns and listening to THREE Dog Night albums.

  3. They don't play dominos - they play TRI-ominos.

  4. Baseball players with this malady never score any runs because they won't leave THIRD base. Though they VERY rarely get there as they seem to like the idea of THREE strikes...

  5. Likewise, adolescents with this addiction invariably get stuck at THIRD base on dates. ;-)

  6. The only CHRISTmas song they can remember is "We THREE Kings".

  7. They will only use Ultrafractal THREE point oh THREE if at all and then only use THREE layers.

  8. They fail math classes because they insist that the value of pi is 3.1433333333333333333333333333333333__. (They rationalize that the "1" and "4" equal THREE because -1 + 4 = THREE.) This tends to make them poor, though certainly original, fractal formula writers and ill suited to writing machine code and designing digital circuitry as they work in TRInary rather than binary. They DO, however, excel in designing IC's with TRI-state outputs.

  9. They are usually in total denial and unaware of their affliction and may snap aggressively if anyone points out their fixation on anything to do with the......number......THREEEEEEEEE - Bwaaaahaaaahaaaaahaaaaaa!

Message edited on: 01/17/2006 15:17

Message edited on: 01/17/2006 15:19

Message edited on: 01/17/2006 15:21

Message edited on: 01/17/2006 15:23


TonyYeboah ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 3:32 PM · edited Tue, 17 January 2006 at 3:43 PM

I was just about to say, "Do they make 3 edits to every post?" and you went and did a 4th. Guess ya not Trizophrenic.

Tri-ominos, damn that takes me back (yea, I owned it). But shouldn't 'Dominoes' be called 'Bi-ominoes'?

Or maybe that's too overtly sexual for a toy company, what with them being able to be laid both ways...

Message edited on: 01/17/2006 15:37

Message edited on: 01/17/2006 15:43


Rykk ( ) posted Tue, 17 January 2006 at 4:26 PM

LOL - Had to catch all the misspellings and added a word or two. ACTUALLY, I goofed the first edit so that equals "-1" and since the total number of edit notices is "4", it doesn't take a rocket scientist to calculate that there are only THREE edits. To wit: -1 + 4 = THREE...Duh!!........three........th...ree......THREEEEEEEEEEEE!! (BTW - I'm bummed the Pluto shot was scrubbed today - we were all fired up to watch it from the roof of the building I work in.) (BTW2 - I knew a girl sorta like that in high school 'cept she liked them laid THREE ways...lol) Kind of a slooooooow day at work....can't believe I'm actually getting paid 4 this.....:-)


Richardphotos ( ) posted Mon, 23 January 2006 at 10:36 PM

if you think Apo' is not art then you are free to think what you want. they have cameras everywhere, the gov. wants to know what we search for on google,our name and mark is everywhere, but they still have no control over how we think. some places one may not be able to speak what they think but you still have the privilege to think-I think maybe! I personally spend alot of time creating Apo' flames/fractals /doodads what ever you want to call them. I stick with Apo' because when I tried UF I got chewed out by 2-3 people that I was using their formula. well using a formula for Apo' that had been wrung out to dry and still someone complained trying to say they did not get credit. I enjoy Apo' to the fullest and stick with random flames to make my stuff and to me it is a form of art.


  • 1
  • 2

Privacy Notice

This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.