just got bryce ^__^

[Porgy]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got bryce ^__^

Well, that is my narrow minded opinion.

maybe, but an entertaining one to say the least.

[omgwtfToph]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got bryce ^__^

And, for the most part, a damn true one, haha

[Mwerp]

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got bryce ^__^

You #$#ing moron.

this where I stopped reading. Not going to waste my time reading garbage from someone who just degrades others based on their opinion. Have a peachy day.

Well isn't that a cute little method of cheating out because you know you've lost =(

[Reach]

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got bryce ^__^

Wait, what the hell? Bryce is awesome unless you suck. RJ uses nothing but Bryce and Photoshop and he's the best graphic artist I've ever seen. If you want to be a mainstream trendwhore, go for it, but don't force your beliefs down other people's throats.

Its still a very weak program.

And you havn't seen much if you think rj is the best ever

But whatever. If he wants to use bryce, let him. Its not going to kill anyone. I used to use bryce sometimes. Shoot me? 3DSM is a much better program though. I really suggest it, it owns up pretty much everything, anything abstract or terrian wise you want to make.

[Squeek]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got bryce ^__^

No, Mwerp, that's someone getting sick of listening to your unchanging rants defending your "art". I said something similar only to hear the same reply out of you while I was fully capable of finishing what I started against you.

You have no right to call any person's opinions wrong. Aperson said Porgy was right, I agreed. This was the reason I said aperson agrees with me. I agree with soccr when he said "I dont get why people call throwing a few polygons on a stage art...

It has no meaning what-so-ever. Get either Maya, Lightwave, 3DS Max, or Softimage. Then you can learn and get good at creating 3D scenes with a different approach rather then putting polygons together with reflections..."

See? Those two posted once in this article. I had no background information on either; I based what I said off their posts.

Also, Jewpin put into a comical post exactly what I've been trying to tell you since my "My thoughts on photoshop / bryce renders" thread. Read it carefully. TWICE if you have to.

~Squeek

PS - To add to jewpin's thoughts on modern art, there's an exhibit by us consisting of only fluourescent light bulbs on a wall. Not even in a pattern. Like, a box, then one by itself, then a vertical one by itself. Paragraphs explaining the artist's ideas were included.

[Porgy]

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got bryce ^__^

You #$#ing moron.

this where I stopped reading. Not going to waste my time reading garbage from someone who just degrades others based on their opinion. Have a peachy day.

Well isn't that a cute little method of cheating out because you know you've lost =(

gee, that wasn't predictable. Deja vu from another thread.

[flypie743]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got bryce ^__^

I agree with soccr when he said "I dont get why people call throwing a few polygons on a stage art...

That refers to people who don't use bryce correctly. But, when you use bryce to it's full potential you can create some awesome stuff.

[Mwerp]

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got bryce ^__^

No, Mwerp, that's someone getting sick of listening to your unchanging rants defending your "art". I said something similar only to hear the same reply out of you while I was fully capable of finishing what I started against you.

I have yet to see either of you prove me wrong in either of your points, so I'd say it's pretty safe to assume you both lose.

You have no right to call any person's opinions wrong. Aperson said Porgy was right, I agreed. This was the reason I said aperson agrees with me.

Aperson said Porgy was right about Bryce being a bad program. Not about abstract art not being art. As such, it was very foolish of you to try and use that as backup for your own argument, which was that abstract art is not art.

I agree with soccr when he said "I dont get why people call throwing a few polygons on a stage art...

It's silly that you should even try to judge Bryce when you don't even know about what it can do aside from the spheres and toruses. And why would you say that polygons on a stage isn't art? The artists for Marvel Comics start out their characters with lines, circles, and triangles. In the end it evolves into cylinders, circles, triangles, rectangles, and whatever else, just blended together so you don't really think about them at all. You see the final product, not what went in to making it. Polygons are used to make pretty much every art form.

It has no meaning what-so-ever. Get either Maya, Lightwave, 3DS Max, or Softimage. Then you can learn and get good at creating 3D scenes with a different approach rather then putting polygons together with reflections..."

Funny thing is you can do the same thing inthe programs you just named that you seem so skeptical of Bryce about. Polygons and reflections(and I won't go past that because it would appear as though you cannot comprehend any further than that). Another thing you don't realize is that Bryce can do landscapes as well. In fact, Bryce was built with that art mindset in mind.

See? Those two posted once in this article. I had no background information on either; I based what I said off their posts.

You want to know a really weird thing about what Soccr said?
His avatar is composed of cubes on a grid background.
And here he is, running around saying that polygons on a stage isn't art. Hah. I tend not to side with people who can't spell simple english words correctly. Generally says something about their mental capacity.

Also, Jewpin put into a comical post exactly what I've been trying to tell you since my "My thoughts on photoshop / bryce renders" thread. Read it carefully. TWICE if you have to.

I already read it. Nothing of it concerned what we're talking about. Look at it again.

Graphic art(note how he states that it is indeed art before he even starts to get to talk about it): It is great when it is done right. It is a shame that that is rarely the case though. People think, because they can add some lens flares here and there, and sprinkle in some geometric shapes all over the place, that BINGO, abstract art, "I am a f*cking artistic genius." Sure, it may look pretty, but you are not an artist.

The bolded parts were the core pieces of those sentences which did not prove you right at all.
Italicized is the part of his quote that is entirely subjective and cannot be used to describe all scenarios. Basically what I see in that sentence is a close-minded literalist speaking his thoughts about abstract pieces, or things he cannot see with literal meaning. Surrealism was a huge hit among artists in the past. Surrealism can encompass a wide variety of situations in a scene, whether it be clocks melting on shelves on a hot plane under the sun, to scattered nonsensical shapes with no visible meaning. I don't see why anyone wouldn't consider this(and abstract art) to be an example of what art is not.

[Porgy]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got bryce ^

I have yet to see either of you prove me wrong in either of your points, so I'd say it's pretty safe to assume you both lose.

you keep using the term "lose" every time somebody doesnt want to listen to you. What exactly is it we are losing? An argument? Just because we choose not to listen to you call people derogatory names doesn't constitute failing to prove a point, especially when there is a grip of other people voicing opinions quite contrary to yours. I guess you could argue that I am losing time listening to you defend an inferior program so fiercely but I'd just inform you of the amusement I get from reading your fiesty posts rebutting me. I could be losing my patience, but really its only because it frustrates me to see anybody with a spark of talent inhibit themselves by being so close minded about expanding their talents due to their devotion to a stone age program. I dunno really what it is I keep losing, but as long as you keep up your funny posts I'll keep giving more of it.

[Mwerp]

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got bry

[quote="Porgy"]

I have yet to see either of you prove me wrong in either of your points, so I'd say it's pretty safe to assume you both lose.

you keep using the term "lose" every time somebody doesnt want to listen to you.

If you didn't want to listen to me you wouldn't keep replying. If you seriously didn't want to keep arguing you'd just ignore everything I say. But you don't. You continue. Yet in each time you continue, you have no rebuttals, just reasons why you shouldn't have to keep responding.

What exactly is it we are losing? An argument?

You know that WOULD make sense.

Just because we choose not to listen to you call people derogatory names doesn't constitute failing to prove a point, especially when there is a grip of other people voicing opinions quite contrary to yours.

You failed before I called him a moron, and you're still failing. Go ahead, try and prove me wrong.

I guess you could argue that I am losing time listening to you defend an inferior program so fiercely but I'd just inform you of the amusement I get from reading your fiesty posts rebutting me.

Interesting. Tell me just why it's inferior again? Keep in mind that we're not talking about modeling, we're talking about abstract.

I could be losing my patience, but really its only because it frustrates me to see anybody with a spark of talent inhibit themselves by being so close minded about expanding their talents due to their devotion to a stone age program.

Oddly enough, with this "Stone-age" program of mine, I'm a better artist than you and just about everyone else that posts on this site(with the exceptions of Reach and aperson, I'd say we're all on par but you really can't compare photomanipulation to creating something from nothing). Not only that, RJ uses the very same program you are so averse to and is a better artist(in mine and many other's belief) than everyone here and plenty other communities as well. In fact I honestly I have to say that I haven't seen anyone more unique than he. AND not only is he an abstract artist, he does hand drawings moreso than he does abstract.

I dunno really what it is I keep losing, but as long as you keep up your funny posts I'll keep giving more of it.

How cute. Here you say my posts are funny and humorous, and before you say "I could be losing my patience, but really its only because it frustrates me". So which is it? Contradicting yourself never makes you look too bright, and you definitely don't want another scar on your record.
What do you keep losing? Proving me wrong. I have yet to see it, and each time I prompt you about this you turn away, saying you don't want to continue or you're tired of reading what I have to say.
Very peculiar.

[Porgy]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got

oh lordy, now you are claiming to be a better artist? Since when did this turn into a pissing contest on whose art is better? Better in whose opinion? Of course, i forgot Mwerp has the last say on what is considered "good art". When people start paying for your work please come back and we'll chat.

[omgwtfToph]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got

Frankly Mwerp is a better graphic artist than you. The fact that he makes really awesome stuff with Bryce and Photoshop and the fact that you rely on Maya and "higher-end" programs to create lesser work (I'm judging this on your sig so if I'm wrong feel free to correct me rolleyesemoticon) means that he is better. And Mwerp has nothing on RJ, too, so don't even get me started on that one.

[Porgy]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got

nothing on my sig was created in maya. And I fail to see how judgement on who is a better graphic artist is based on how well you create abstract art.

[Mwerp]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got

Well considering we're dealing with abstract art and have been talking about it, it should be implied you know.
But hey throughout this whole topic you've had this misconception that we're talking about modeling, which would be a false belief.

[Porgy]

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: just got

you keep concentrating on abstract art. Some of us look beyond a single style of art, especially since the topic isn't "look at my abstract art!" but rather "I just got Bryce".. And who is we?