Comments on: IMG MGMT: 20 Archetypes

By: Artists on the Internet | Stephen Truax

Artists on the Internet | Stephen Truax — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 00:43:28 +0000

[...] 2007, Tom Moody’s digital works – note the exchange these two artists had on ArtFagCity here on the use of digital tools to make art; a., or analyze the cultural implications therein: Kevin [...]

By: the fabs

the fabs — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:52:45 +0000

THE BEAR IS THE GREATEST!!!

srsly hes just sitting there chilling out.

By: the fabs

the fabs — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:52:00 +0000

THE BEAR IS THE GREATEST!!!

srsly hes just sitting there chilling out.

By: Tom Moody

Tom Moody — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 19:49:55 +0000

Just in case anyone reading this gets the impression that I’m an antiquarian lover of the “touch” of art, I stopped doing conventional painting and drawing about 10 years ago and use only the computer to make work. But I still hate it. (Digital sound is a different story–I think it’s way ahead of visual technologies.)

By: Tom Moody

Tom Moody — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 19:49:00 +0000

By: kevin zucker

kevin zucker — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 18:59:18 +0000

Tom- I know what you mean about the movies and ads that embrace that 3D aesthetic (“rubbery horrorfests” was a great description). I just wanted to point out that the technologies we’re talking about have also been involved in the production of some very interesting painting, sculpture, photo, printmaking. This includes work where the role of the computer is small and unseen but crucial. (I do think that there’s even some good digital animation out there though it’s definitely still the exception.)

While I think I have a slightly more optimistic view than you do on the capacities and limitations of some software, I would agree (from lots of experience) that working in tension with the tools is often more productive than working to their strengths.

I agree wholeheartedly that artists should be consulted on the selection of test objects. But then again, I think artists should be consulted about more or less everything.

By: kevin zucker

kevin zucker — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 18:59:00 +0000

I agree wholeheartedly that artists should be consulted on the selection of test objects. But then again, I think artists should be consulted about more or less everything.

By: tom moody

tom moody — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:11:23 +0000

Kevin,
Agreed that the auteur vs teams is a bigger discussion.

With Pixar movies (and many current ads and shorts that use that type of heavily rendered tech) there is a “look what we did this time” quality to each new film. In a sense they’re still doing their testing and that experimentation (and all the failure) is right up on the surface. So I don’t think we’re “there” yet. Although it’s probably too late to stop the digital puppet animation freight train–the box office is too solid.

Yes, there are artists working with Photoshop and these other tools but I believe they are getting good results as much in spite of as because of the means they are given (by corporate teams).

What I’m saying, I suppose, is perhaps engineers should ask artists’ advice before going out to the Pottery Barn to buy a new test object. It’s difficult to say whether our visual history might have been better if they had been doing that all along but I’m guessing it might have been more interesting.

By: tom moody

tom moody — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:11:00 +0000

Kevin,
Agreed that the auteur vs teams is a bigger discussion.

Yes, there are artists working with Photoshop and these other tools but I believe they are getting good results as much in spite of as because of the means they are given (by corporate teams).

By: kevin zucker

kevin zucker — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 04:48:27 +0000

Hi drx- I’ve seen the cow model around, but I omitted that and a lot of other well-known tests that didn’t have a real-world origin. If there’s an actual cow behind the model, I’d love to know about it.

My best,
Kevin