Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Alfa

Regulars
  • Content Count

    676
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Alfa

  1. Finding a GOOD sales job can get you more than a decent salary. It's not easy though, and you really have to find a good employer. Almost any job can open doors for you though. A friend of mine used to work as a grunt for DHL, and somehow that led him to product development for Sony. At my current job I started with virtually brainless tasks in the archives. Now i'm dealing with far more complex legal matters, and soon i'll hopefully be going to a law firm(as an assistant, not a lawyer... yet). Any job that is nice enough to stand for a while, and that rewards you for being good, is a fine place to start. Just make sure you always go that extra mile.
  2. Wow, you are seriously skilled! I especially like your charcoal drawings. In particular the one JASKN posted, and this one: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-EGg7K1x-9hc/ThB_42kPoUI/AAAAAAAAAJI/9VXalVfJBkM/s1600/dscn0332.jpg I keep wondering what she's looking at and thinking of, and that kind of quality makes me want to keep looking at the drawing instead of moving on quickly to the next one. I also like the more clearly rendered faces, like this one: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rKRMCOfCrms/ThB_65xUfKI/AAAAAAAAAJM/PMxP-0wXdlw/s1600/dscn0334.jpg and this: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nLy3mwRBON4/ThB_9dQFsnI/AAAAAAAAAJQ/6PEbv4sv8Kw/s1600/dscn0335.jpg They have the look of economy and "simplicity", something which is far from simple to achieve.
  3. I think that book is allright, but not more. Her approach works to teach you how to copy what you see, with pseudo-scientific explanations as to why it works. While her student examples may seem impressive at first they also suffer from some flaws which may become evident as you get more advanced as an artist. The biggest flaw is that the drawings are disintegrated. Accomplished artists have an understanding of how the shapes and forms work, their underlying structure, and how it all fits toghether. However, looking at things correctly is an important skill and I think Betty Edwards approach can help you improve that. Something else that might be worth looking at are Charles Bargues drawing plates(these are litographs meant to be copied very precisely, google should provide alot of information). To learn construction I think Andrew Loomis and Glen Vilppu are great(atleast if you like figure drawing).
  4. I think the main distiction should be sex as an expression of values rather than non-value driven action(like hedonism/nihilsm and otherwise expressions of lacking self-esteem). What that means in concrete terms is very contextual. I think the general attitude is more important, either treating it casually or as something serious with the potential of being of great value.
  5. Aren't you just assuming that the avarage equates to high standards here? When, in fact, there can be many different reasons for the number of partners that people have? Assuming this holds true for everyone, does it not imply that in some circumstances it might be more reasonable to apply more "casual" standards? For example. I have met one person i've been seriously interested in. It did not work out. Then i've met a few women i've found thorougly admirable, but none of them have been single. I'm closing in on thirty now, so considering how rare and difficult it is to find The OneĀ™ I could very well have grey hair when that happens. I sure hope not, and i'll do my best to not let that happen, but it could happen. I don't like the idea of spending most of my life in abstinence, and I don't think that would be any more healthy than getting drunk every weekend and spending the night with some random slut. Luckily, I think there's an alternative. Women who are of high value, though not necessarily your highest. Someone you may like very much, but not love(atleast not in the same sense).
  6. No. Ah, yes. Avoid any objectivity by attacking our perception of things by reffering to how society has fooled us, and then try to sell us your own twisted form of reality. You might be right, perhaps I didn't give them credit for being as marxist as they really are.
  7. Damn right my reaction is emotional. She's the opposite of things I really love. As far as my judgement goes though, I just nailed her. That is trite old feminist social commentary; where beauty, gender and sexuality - hell, everything - is "just a social construct".
  8. Please, enough already. Saville is a trendy non-conformist burping up trite feminist values - showing fat chicks with beards and dicks. I'll proudly side with the horny frat-boys any day if that's the alternative(which it isn't, art history from ancient Greece til today is full of remarkably beautiful women). God, how I really hate Saville...
  9. The harmony and relationship between the colors.
  10. I agree. That's usually how it goes down. That's why my advice would be to analyze this situation and learn from the mistakes you've made. Deal with any emotional issues so you don't drag around any unwanted baggage. Then if you don't feel like going after a new relationship just yet, focus on your life/career. But, put yourself in situations where you get to meet new people. Doesn't matter if it's just as friends, coworkers or whathaveya. Even if it doesn't lead anywhere you can still learn alot of things about people, and maybe next thing you know you're stading face to face with an absolutley amazing person.
  11. Rearden's style was described as simple, traditional menswear(my words, not Ayn Rands). It was upon closer inspection noticed as being finely tailored and expensive. I'm not saying this as having any significance to your debate. I havent seen the movie so I can't say anything about it. I only offer it as clarification(and, might I add, I think your recollection is correct so i'm not disagreeing with you). I also think that the clothing was part of the characterization of Rearden. He dressed as he did because he valued purposefullness and competence(another way this is shown is by the description of his officce as being ascetic, which also supports the same characterization).
  12. It's something i've observed with friends who started smoking regularly. There's also research that indicates impaired cognitive abilities asociated with marijuana use: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20721538 http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/275/7/521.abstract http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7648994 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2801665 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7776840
  13. I'd say it's similar to alcohol, only a more dreamy relaxing "buzz", minus most of the negative side effects. You just get retarded in a more pot-headed way. It should be noted though that there are many different plants, and different qualities. That's one reason why experiences may differ. And, just as with alcohol, not everyone reacts the same. If you're asking about the dangers, I think the biggest danger is that it's so undramatic. Alcohol is much easier to moderate, because if you drink too much and too often you're soon going to regret it. With pot you just slowly become dumber and dumber, until you only have three words left in your vocabulary: "duh", "uh" and "duuude". I don't regret having tried it, but i'm glad I never made a habit out of it. The whole idea of smoking, or drinking, yourself to retardation is not very alluring.
  14. Haha, thanks! Nah, it's got more to do with the ratio of crap I have to produce in order to arrive at something that looks good. It's like writing a novel in a foreign language. Maybe it turns out well at the end, but if you're struggling with the grammar and need a dictionary you haven't exactly mastered the language yet. Maybe i'll post some 3d work in the future, when I have something I can or want to show. Sure. It's just a picture I found through google, and I thought she had a nice profile. BTW, I just added to your reputation trying to multi quote. Perhaps i'm not as tech-savvy as I like to think, or i'm just running out of coffee in the blood stream, but um... yeah, you're welcome.
  15. Thanks! I used a photo reference, with some minor changes to the drawing as not to just copy it completely(a more mature face, tweaking the expression a bit and trying to play a little with soft and hard edges in an attempt to make the eye center more on the face). I'm trying to devote more time to get better at constructing faces(and figures) from imagination. Which, for me atleast, is the hardest part of the drawing process. One reason perhaps being that i'm so used to working in 3D, and that means I really have to twist my mind around when translating those forms into 2D.
  16. I think it's interesting how revealing it can be, what you take away from Rand's work. I remember when I first read Atlas and eencountering critics who thought it was about destruction and "killing everyone". My own reaction being that I had to stop and think for a moment before concluding that, now that they'd mentioned it, that most of the world was indeed going to hell(though as a consequence of evil). I'll never understand how some people will only see that, completely missing the concept of justice, and miss the inspiring portrayal of heroes and her sense of life.
  17. Thought i'd post a little drawing I did recently(in Photoshop). The idea was to study value, without any intention of showing it to anyone, but i'm quite happy with how it turned out(especially considering my 2D skills are a real weakness, which is why I made this). Hope you enjoy.
  18. There's something not quite right about this ad... There. Now it's almost perfect. Only thing missing is a mention of the enourmous impact the film will have in Hollywood.
  19. When I say this depicts a chivalrous knight coming to save the lady in distress, I can in fact point to the guy in armor about to sheath his sword, the other guy laying beaten on the ground and the lady tied to the tree. With music maybe someone well versed in musical theory can explain how it works, but the fact is that people will fairly universally get the same message. Responses may differ, but there's rarely any doubt if it's a romantic song or a heroic piece. It's pretty hard to miss what Dicksee's painting is about, and it's hard to miss the heroism in Hans Zimmers Knight's March: Like it or not, you're still going to "get it". Are there abstract painting that can do the same? But an abstract shape is not really a context. A square or a circle doesn't really tell me what that texture belongs to. No, I haven't taken any tests, but I can say with confidence that my abilities would exceed any untrained eyes. Also, I would have noticed if I was dysfunctional in any such regard. What exactly did she say and in what context? Not exactly. The only abstract ideas communicated by product designs are those tied to the utilitarian aspects of the product. It's like accelerated lines on a car with the right proportions will communicate "fast" or "sporty". I think what i've written previously on painting and music covers them, but let's touch on architecture. Architecture is different because it fundamentally deals with man's place on earth. This is by it's very nature of covering the fundamental need of shelter. If a painting shows a "microcosm" then architecture would be more like "macrocosm", it creates it's own world for man to live in. That makes it fundamentally different from any other artistic pratice. No, I think architecture and music can "say something significant" and communicate a sense of life, but I don't think product designs can do that. At best they could perhaps communicate some sense of life(like for instance how choice of cars are often tied to lifestyles and such preferences). I don't think anyones feelings are a good criteria for qualifying anything as art.
  20. My point is, what if I just start making stuff up with fanciful descriptions? If you doubt my claims i'll refer you to my friends, or suggest that you might be dysfunctional. Not a very convincing case though, is it? I'm saying that a texture by itself is just a "pattern". Within the right context though it can be used to describe certain attributes. Tone-deaf people are dysfunctional in their ability to distinguish relative pitches. I have seen no evidence to suggest that my abilities in the visual arts are dysfunctional in a similar way. In fact, I can distinguish light and color fairly accurately and I have no problems seeing shape and form. For the record, I didn't say that I dont respond to abstract art. As a matter of fact, I do respond to some of it. I think that combinations of colors, values, shapes and forms can have a psychological impact. However, I do not think that abstract art can concretize abstractions. It may cause feelings or sensations, but whatever meaning you put into them comes from your imagination. I can make an analogy to product design. Take the iPhone for example. It's something that alot of people find desirable, very much thanks to it's design. A little fascinating considering it's basically a square with rounded corners. However, what makes it so sucessfull is how the bevels and fillets are shaped, where even tiny differences effect how we feel, and the material/texture and color that helps us relate to how it would be to interact with it(and create the sensations when we're actually interacting). Very much like your abstract art, is it not? However, even though Steve Jobs probably would like to call it art, it really isn't. Millions of people may experience similar feelings and sensations, but it's only a successful design. It may not have been the most elaborate explanation, but I don't think I was vague. I mean, the value range is pretty even with mid-greys in foreground and darker values in the bagground/negative spaces - nothing really stands out there. The colors are very saturated though, especially the reds and oranges with the greens helping them "pop". Saturated colors are often used to suggest life, vitality, energy or prosperity. Considering there is an energetic feel to the painting that's probably what the artist was after. If you want a really good explanation you should get in touch with those post-modernists selling their feces for millions. I'm not sure what they'll tell you, but their pitches have to be something really amazing. I usually don't care for still lifes other than to admire some artists techniques. Actually, there's very little art I care for other than admiring technique.
  21. I wouldn't accept that the texture could represent rugged individualism in the first place. For one thing, art is a concretization of abstractions. It is for example like taking a theme, say love or heroism, and making a conrete representation of that. That's from where art derives it's value. And, music can actually do that. It just communicates differently, more directly, than the visual arts. I am yet to be convinced abstract art can do that. So far I have only seen it being defended as doing the opposite - making abstractions of concretes. Unfortunately it seems once it's been seen, it cannot be un-seen. That certainly makes it big enough to see. As for the subject I can't find anything that suggest other than it would be about the colors on the leaves. With a subdued value range the color and their saturation is the point of interest, and it's not a far stretch here to say that she used them to get at something lively and energetic. Well, if Rand ever judged pictures so small she had to put her nose to the canvas and squint real hard...
  22. The images are way too small to make any judgements at all. Also, not all of us are used to judging paintings of schrubbery. Not all paintings have any meaning, and all meanings are not expressed clearly. Latsly, to really make accurate judgemens takes a great deal of knowledge and analysis. Even if you get it, explaining the how and why is not a small task. For example: This painting is called "Philip the Good", but what is it that's supposedly good about him? http://idadeadulta.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/philip_the_good1.jpg Or her? http://www.paintinghere.com/painting/Portrait_of_Mme_N._M._Polovtsova_21750.html What's the main theme here? http://www.artilim.com/painting/c/cecchi-adriano/at-the-dressmakers.jpg Or what's the narrative here, and why? http://www.artrenewal.org/pages/artwork.php?artworkid=32161&size=large These examples are just things I found after recently revisiting a favorite DVD of mine, called "Mechanics of Color". Anyway, my guess is that without a basic understanding of color it will be hard to answer the questions. As for the details of my descriptions, let's pretend that I answered something like; "the texture on the flower petals suggest a rugged individualism". What's your answer to that? And just because something evokes feelings or sensations, even if you can objectively explain why, doesn't make it art. It could, however, be an effective design. Clearly my guesswork wasn't very good, however that picture must be seen in full size before I believe you. Until then it's a fractal image generated by a computer on Charlie Sheen. I can clearly see leafy things, a Snorlax and some green translucent tentacles.
  23. 1. Lush, rich and colorful. 2. Looks like a photograph with a lot of digital vibrance. 3. Not sure if it's a painting or photograph. If it's a painting it's well done capturing the light of an overcast day. 4. Looks familiar. My guess is that it's part of a bigger picture. 5. Leaves in spectral light with a pink Snorlax in the background. I'm guessing somehow done with computers. 6. Rather similar to Mondrian's tree. 7. Pretty flowers again.
  24. That actually looked pretty good. I don't think it's flawless but it raises my hope of this movie being watchable. Rearden even seems to be well casted.
  25. Alfa

    My art

    I think your figure drawings and the rendering of the shell looks excellent. Am I right in quessing that these were drawn from life, while the paintings were from imagination with some help from photographic references?
×
×
  • Create New...