just got bryce ^__^

[Mwerp]

well to start, reference the entire collective works of Pixar. Just to start.....

Goodness gracious you are a fool.
Does Pixar do abstract art?
No.
They're about 3d modeling.
Now get your ass back on track and stay on topic.

mwerp... would you mind posting some examples for what you are talking about? as an art n00b, i'm curious... you've said alot that Bryce isn't just about this and can do that... would you mind showing me some examples of its capabilities? i think it would also help you prove your case if you had some graphic examples.

How about you be more specific as to what you want. You want examples of what I've been talking about? I've been talking about so much. Or by capabilities do you mean what it can do other than toruses/spheres?

[Tasselfoot]

what it is capable of doing other than just toruses and spheres. porgy and crew keep talking about how it lacks the ability to do alot and how it takes longer, doesn't look as good, etc... perhaps you could post what you feel are close to the limits of Bryce's capabilities...

or, if its easier for you... you could go back through your multitude of quotes and pick a few pieces that best illustrate your point. they do say that a picture says a thousand words.

[Mwerp]

I believe Toph already linked to a good one used in Prophetess but I don' t know how good you people are at using your eyes.

I don't think it's possible for me to show you something close to the limit of Bryce's capabilities. I can, however, show you stuff besides shiny toruses/spheres etc.



No I didn't use spheres for Realization.


The renders are more ambient in Love Is Eternity, but you can tell it's not shiny toruses.


So..?

[Porgy]

Originally Posted by Mwerp

Goodness gracious you are a fool.
Does Pixar do abstract art?
No.
They're about 3d modeling.
Now get your ass back on track and stay on topic.

well let's see. Your quote was verbatim:

Radical Julian still uses Bryce and he's far more professional than Maya, Lightwave, 3DSM, etc. users. True, opinion. Seriously though, maybe you should take a closer look into his collection if you think at least he(because I'm assuming there are better Bryce users out there) isn't as good if not better than the others.

Now I don't know how other people read this but to me it says "Radical Julian is more professional than anybody else that use maya, lightwave, etc. Nowhere does it say what style of art you are referring to. Now if YOU will stop making a fool of yourself now.

Oh and as for your collection. They have been so manipulated in photoshop its really kinda hard to see where Bryce was used in the first place. Hell, I'd be so bold as to say that in the current state of of the images they could be recreated easily using a variety of brushes and filters in photoshop and just skip the bryce part completely. Would probably save you time.

PS. I think all of them except the first one blow balls. And even the first one isnt great I just like the color scheme. Even I could have found better Bryce artwork than that to show.

[Squeek]

Mwerp, one thing.

Can you describe for me what these are?

Because to ME, that's no different from this.

~Squeek

[Kilgamayan]

This is where objectivity comes in.

The reason Mwerp keeps trying to get someone to prove that all those professional artist are beter than RJ is because he knows it can't be done. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder - there's no universal definition for what makes good art.

Take a college-level music history course some time - you'd be amazed at what some time periods considered music because to you it makes your ears bleed. Art functions the same way - one could see a painting and deem it the best piece of work ever whereas another can look at that same painting 5 minutes later and determine it looks no better than if they had taken a blank canvas and shit all over it.

So to you, Squeek, maybe they are the same. But to Mwerp (and others, I'm sure), they're vastly different. And it's not something I could explain simply because of the difference of standards.

[Mwerp]

Originally Posted by Porgy

well let's see. Your quote was verbatim:

Now I don't know how other people read this but to me it says "Radical Julian is more professional than anybody else that use maya, lightwave, etc. Nowhere does it say what style of art you are referring to. Now if YOU will stop making a fool of yourself now.

Holy shit I can't believe you.
THIS WHOLE THREAD FROM THE BEGINNING HAS BEEN ABOUT ABSTRACT ART YOU FUCKING MORON
YES I JUST CUSSED YOU OUT YOU PUSSO******
YOU DESERVE IT FOR HOW DENSE YOU ARE
YOU KEEP MISSING THE POINT EACH TIME I TELL IT TO YOU
WHY?
BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT YOU CAN'T WIN UNLESS IT'S NOT ABOUT THAT
PICKING OUT LATER QUOTES OUT OF WHOLE SUBJECT MATTER CONTEXT DOES NOT HELP YOU AT ALL IN THIS SITUATION

Oh and as for your collection. They have been so manipulated in photoshop its really kinda hard to see where Bryce was used in the first place.

It's plain as day. The PS work did not alter the renders, just moved them around.

Hell, I'd be so bold as to say that in the current state of of the images they could be recreated easily using a variety of brushes and filters in photoshop and just skip the bryce part completely. Would probably save you time.

EXACTLY.
They don't look at all to you like they came out of Bryce, now do they?
You have just proven yourself wrong.

PS. I think all of them except the first one blow balls. And even the first one isnt great I just like the color scheme.

That's because you don't appreciate abstract art. That's great because I wasn't fond of your modelling either. As Kilga said, beauty is indeed in the eye of the beholder.

Even I could have found better Bryce artwork than that to show.

According to you, all you've seen is shiny tori/spheres.
So now are you revealing something to us?
Have you indeed seen Bryce abstract that isn't composed of such material?
I want to see you back that quote up.

The reason Mwerp keeps trying to get someone to prove that all those professional artist are beter than RJ is because he knows it can't be done. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder - there's no universal definition for what makes good art.

Very good. I didn't even know you'd been paying attention.

Mwerp, one thing.

Can you describe for me what these are?

Because to ME, that's no different from this.

~Squeek

That's because you're a fool with no art sense. You've even said it yourself. If you honestly want a better difference it's because in pretty much everyone's opinion what you posted is utter garbage(and don't try and say otherwise because that's incredibly childish for you to say that just to win an argument if you know your response is a lie).
But heck, as Kilga said, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If you want to bullshit yourself and claim that your paintjob is great with the sole intention of doing it for argumental purposes, I'm not going to stop you.
However, art is NOT in the eye of the beholder.
Just because one coonsimon thinks that a particular art form is not art does not mean it is no longer art. Especially when said coonsimon has no idea what he's talking about.

[Mwerp]

I wish you people would stop interrupting this with gay things like that.

[Tasselfoot]

i just really would like to know... what is a coonsimon? this thread was already locked once, if the quality of the language doesn't stay above the trailer park level, it'll be locked a second time.

[Kilgamayan]

Originally Posted by Mwerp

Very good. I didn't even know you'd been paying attention.

Funny thing is, I read about one post that required me to scroll through it.

Everything else got slapped with "tl;dr".

Well, I skimmed them a bit, but you know what I mean.

[Porgy]

if the quality of the language doesn't stay above the trailer park level, it'll be locked a second time.

that would require the intellect of many of these posts to stay above trailer park IQ.

Mwerp, I don't believe you are on any level to judge the validity of anybodies taste in art. Although I wouldn't judge myself or anybody else for that matter qualified to tell anybody how to appreciate art I will give it that I attend an art school. My portfolio has gotten me accepted to the Art Center of Pasadena which has one of the countries most rigorous acceptance qualifications. It requires a portfolio well rounded in the classical art skills of free hand, painting, and sculpting as well as digital 2d and 3d techniques. But I will not call you or anybody else a moron for their taste in art, although i do think you are stubborn and oblivious which often go hand in hand with idiocy. You see, in a debate there is no "win or lose" per se, but more a matter of who can prove a point the best. But we can't even achieve that as you keep shifting the point of interest. The topic of the thread is "Just got Bryce" not "look at my abstract art" and the post I made that sparked all this was suggesting to the topic starter that if he enjoys 3d he might consider looking into more advanced 3d packages. You seem to get uppity about this since Bryce is all you use and abstract art is all you create. And then you get out of hand and start calling other people names because we are trying to debate a subject that spans more than just abstract art. Yes, Bryce can create material used in abstract art pieces. What we are arguing is that its capabilities end there. That maybe the topic starter might want to branch out to more universal applications of 3d in art. So how about you figure out WHAT exactly is the point you are trying to prove and stay on point. mmmkay?

[Kilgamayan]

Originally Posted by Porgy

Mwerp, I don't believe you are on any level to judge the validity of anybodies taste in art. Although I wouldn't judge myself or anybody else for that matter qualified to tell anybody how to appreciate art I will give it that I attend an art school. My portfolio has gotten me accepted to the Art Center of Pasadena which has one of the countries most rigorous acceptance qualifications. It requires a portfolio well rounded in the classical art skills of free hand, painting, and sculpting as well as digital 2d and 3d techniques.

Hooray for popular opinion equating to fact.

[Mwerp]

Originally Posted by Porgy

that would require the intellect of many of these posts to stay above trailer park IQ.

I'm surprised you're trying to slam my intelligence when I'm a far greater intellectual than you are.
Also considering the use of vulgar insults does not imply lack of brain power.

Mwerp, I don't believe you are on any level to judge the validity of anybodies taste in art. Although I wouldn't judge myself or anybody else for that matter qualified to tell anybody how to appreciate art I will give it that I attend an art school. My portfolio has gotten me accepted to the Art Center of Pasadena which has one of the countries most rigorous acceptance qualifications. It requires a portfolio well rounded in the classical art skills of free hand, painting, and sculpting as well as digital 2d and 3d techniques. But I will not call you or anybody else a moron for their taste in art, although i do think you are stubborn and oblivious which often go hand in hand with idiocy.

Fantastic but that was irrelevant because I never judged the validity of anybody's taste in art. If you're talking about that MSPaint assjob then I'm sorry to say it but you're either really really dumb or you must have some reading handicap or something.
I'm shocked that you'd call ME stubborn when you're the one who can't get away from the modelling subject and come back to the focus of discussion: abstract.

You see, in a debate there is no "win or lose" per se, but more a matter of who can prove a point the best.

First of all that's incorrect.
Second, when "You see," is used to start a sentence, the content of the sentence it is used in should relate to the previous subject of the past one or two sentences.

But we can't even achieve that as you keep shifting the point of interest.

What the FUCK?!
I'M shifting the point of interest?
Holy shit you're retarded.

The topic of the thread is "Just got Bryce" not "look at my abstract art" and the post I made that sparked all this was suggesting to the topic starter that if he enjoys 3d he might consider looking into more advanced 3d packages.

I named a topic something like "alkjsdfl;df" in this forum.
The content of the topic was abstract art.
Name of topic does not necessarily imply its content.
Regardless, this discussion was sprung from a previous topic of which's content involved abstract art. There, you told him Bryce is a horrible program and he shouldn't use it for that. This whole discussion we've been having is based off of that.

You seem to get uppity about this since Bryce is all you use and abstract art is all you create.

And abstract art is all we've been talking about.

And then you get out of hand and start calling other people names because we are trying to debate a subject that spans more than just abstract art.

No, we're not. You may want to, sure. All that does is makes you look ridiculous. You know you can't win with the original topic at hand, so you have to wait til a moment where you can try and change it.

Yes, Bryce can create material used in abstract art pieces. What we are arguing is that its capabilities end there.

You don't have any idea what's going on, do you?

That maybe the topic starter might want to branch out to more universal applications of 3d in art.

You're going to base this on a maybe?

So how about you figure out WHAT exactly is the point you are trying to prove and stay on point. mmmkay?

How about you try harder at reading more closely k lol

[Porgy]

I'm a far greater intellectual than you are.

Oh? And on what basis do you make this argument?

Also considering the use of vulgar insults does not imply lack of brain power.

No, just a lack of maturity. Most people don't talk like that in civil conversation.

Fantastic but that was irrelevant because I never judged the validity of anybody's taste in art.

That's because you're a fool with no art sense.

lapse of memory?

I'm shocked that you'd call ME stubborn when you're the one who can't get away from the modelling subject and come back to the focus of discussion: abstract.

Im talking about the versatility of a 3d package, its modelling capabilities only being a small fraction of it. And once again, wrong, the focus of the subject is not abstract.

First of all that's incorrect.
Second, when "You see," is used to start a sentence, the content of the sentence it is used in should relate to the previous subject of the past one or two sentences.

"You see" is used as a transitionary here. But then again your major is english again, right? What? High school? Oh...

I'M shifting the point of interest?

Yes, you are. You keep moving to an argument involving abstract art in mind while some of us are talking of a more general sense of 3d. But I think I said that before.... a couple times.

I named a topic something like "alkjsdfl;df" in this forum.
The content of the topic was abstract art.
Name of topic does not necessarily imply its content.
Regardless, this discussion was sprung from a previous topic of which's content involved abstract art. There, you told him Bryce is a horrible program and he shouldn't use it for that. This whole discussion we've been having is based off of that.

What thread was I in again? Did I make a wrong turn at Albuquerque. I could have sworn the sign said "Just got Bryce".

And abstract art is all we've been talking about.

Once again, wrong.

No, we're not. You may want to, sure. All that does is makes you look ridiculous. You know you can't win with the original topic at hand, so you have to wait til a moment where you can try and change it.

please refer to the previous answer for the sake of repetition.

You don't have any idea what's going on, do you?

I could ask you the very same question.

You're going to base this on a maybe?

Did I spell anything wrong there? Yeah, I said maybe being that i don't know for sure that he wants to, it was merely a suggestion.

How about you try harder at reading more closely k lol

ok lol roflmao kthx ttyl.

[Tasselfoot]

if you two wish to keep this going, do it over AIM.

neither of you are saying anything new. and, you are both arguing different things.

ps - i'm not alone in the decision to lock this, so don't yell only at me if you are upset by it.

[jewpinthethird]

I agree with this lock.

BING.

Because everyone knows Abstract Art isnt really Art.

ZING.