Try this with your 3D printer......

[callum]

Excellent piece of work Mike and while I have never seen Purple Rain, I really rate the Thin Red Line.

Callum.

 

[Einion]

I missed the target you were aiming for, but my point is still valid: some things simply cannot be scanned!

Yes of course not Mike, this is essentially irrefutable; but you hitched many of your subsequent points to this horse, which is not a fair argumentative gambit.

With my point having been made, your other arguments are simply splitting hairs.

Far from it as I think you'll see now from the below.

Your example of David is beside the point - especially so since it was made with the very same analog skills I was advocating the first place! Show me Michelangelo's un-tweaked scan of David and I will have cause to reconsider my position......

Sorry was it unclear that that was 3D output from scan data? The fact that you took it to be the original I think makes my point perfectly.

Einion

 

[bonehead]

Sorry was it unclear that that was 3D output from scan data? The fact that you took it to be the original I think makes my point perfectly.

Einion

What? You actually think I could not tell that miniature of David was a scan from the original?

Please. Now you are just being ridiculous. What I meant is that the original David was made using analog skills - not the miniature scan. Let's not forget, David is a SCULPTURE made by a person with actual sculpting skills.

And the scan is just a scan. Strange that you actually convinced yourself i do not know the difference. Whatever......

 

[Gra30]

Simply superb, sculpted by a talented person, with talented hands and manual sculpting skills ( ie actually getting hands dirty
True skill and the reason I have been inspired to practise so much over the years.
As said, a machine cannot do this no matter who is behind it as to me sculpting needs that human touch.
Thanks for showing Mike
Best wishes

 

[captnenglish]

I tried to watch Zardoz many times when I was a kid and didn't get it. I assumed it was because I was a kid. I saw it as an adult, still didn't get it, then I got it, but it still sucks as a movie.

 

[JasonB]

Like most arguments/discussions, entrenched attitudes are not going to be changed regardless of the evidence provided to the contrary. Sometimes I wonder how we ever got past the horse and cart, slide rule or blood letting. I guess die off helps. I can only shake my head at the arguments that keeps getting tossed out that the "machine" is doing the work and not the person controlling it (referring to 3-d sculpting). That must imply that Mike and our other sculptors have some amazing and pretty talented sculpting tools since apparently its the tool that matters and not the person using it.

 

[JasonB]

I tried to watch Zardoz many times when I was a kid and didn't get it. I assumed it was because I was a kid. I saw it as an adult, still didn't get it, then I got it, but it still sucks as a movie.

As long as Hollywood doesn't "rediscover" it and make it a basis for a "reboot".
Basically it came down to Sean Connery being pissed about being considered too old to play Bond, took a role that in no way shape or form he should have, and then he ran around as a soldier killing off people that would live forever otherwise, and who wanted to be killed. Or something like that. I think...

 

[Gra30]

They don't have amazing sculpting tools, but they do have the ability to actually make something directly with and from their hands and how to actually use the tools manually.

. I agree 3d sculptors need the same knowledge to replicate but the process is completely different.

The same as a painter has spent years learning how to hold the brush, mix the medium, apply the medium, layering, letting dry etc (planning for errors that can not be wiped away at a click)

A painter using software and a computer may produce a similar picture but he has not learnt any of the manual skills.
As said the basic knowledge of anatomy etc, yes is the same but the processes are completely different, one manual and as said with the human touch, actually doing, the other doing by software.
One clean, the other dirty.
Like coal miners or metal miners years gone by and later machine extraction

 

[RKapuaala]

Funny to hear this argument taking a full circle again back to digital sculpting not being done by human hands and David being done by skilled hands and that only those working in clay are keeping up that tradition.
It displays to me an ignorance of art History. First and foremost an understanding of how these gigantic sculptures were created but also the artist himself.
For example did you folks know that Michael Angelo once wrote that sculpture was the art of taking away (like he did in stone) not adding too, as we do in clay. He deemed working in clay, no better than painting. Funny isn't it how we scorn certain materials without truly understanding them. To Michael Angelo, most of the people arguing the virtues of wax and clay and the evils of computers are not really sculptors, but painters.
Also it might surprise you to know that most renaisance artists had apprentices that did the dirty work like roughing out sculpts. Some of the more experienced apprentices put in finer details and the artist supervised. The same went for painting. DaVinci and Angelo both were apprentices, they both did work or parts of work that never bore their names, and they both sold work that bore their names but for most part were done by their apprentices.
Don't believe me, pick up some books on these artists and find out.

 

[Gra30]

Yes, they even believe some DaVinci paintings were actually painted by his students, but I bet all these Old Masters started on the workers floor before they became Old Masters and learnt their trade there. I have read some of the books.

 

[JasonB]

They don't have amazing sculpting tools, but they do have the ability to actually make something directly with and from their hands and how to actually use the tools manually.

. I agree 3d sculptors need the same knowledge to replicate but the process is completely different.

The same as a painter has spent years learning how to hold the brush, mix the medium, apply the medium, layering etc
A painter using software and a computer may produce a similar picture but he has not learnt any of the manual skills.
As said the basic knowledge of anatomy etc, yes is the same but the processes are completely different, one manual, actually doing, the other doing by software.
One clean, the other dirty.
Like coal miners or metal miners years gone by and later machine extraction

So in the end it all boils down to manual skills being somehow superior to...other skills regardless of the end result? Its OK to say yes, I just want to get to the underlying belief that manual sculpting is superior to digital regardless of the final product. Its been shown that the results can be equal (and will only get better on the 3-d side). Its been shown that its a human utilizing the machine as a tool that creates the figure, and not the computer by itself. Its not perhaps that you think the "machine" is somehow more responsible for the result (or at least making it easier) than the person using it? Because I definitely get the feeling that the gist of the argument is that somehow the computer that the digital sculptor uses is being seen as a crutch that makes up a bit for a lack of talent, but maybe I just read too much into things. Also, after these threads began, I started looking around at sites that are using 3-d rendering to create their figures. Perhaps its just ignorance on many peoples part and they haven't really looked around, but the figures I have seen (particularly on fantasy and sci-fi related sites) are spectacular. Sometimes I think the line from "Spies Like Us" sums it up pretty well:

 

[pokrad]

the arguments that keep getting tossed out that the "machine" is doing the work and not the person controlling it (referring to 3-d sculpting).

Yap, this bothers me too. Obviously no one followed the link I posted before to the 75mm figure sculpted and printed, so here is a pic:

Here is the original link to the post: http://www.planetfigure.com/threads/shargh-orc-fury.52426/

So what questions we could ask here:

Where the hell Joaquin found an orc to scan it ?
What machine and software made this orc ?

Wrong questions if You ask me...and who thinks that this is not sculpting, will probably never change his mind...
Not that I have something against that way of thinking, but I think differently

My last one, I promise


P.S. Great work Bonehead, nice portrait, I could spend hours just looking at it...

 

[Gra30]

I don't want to derail the thread as it is not far on great work.
Please read my posts, I didn't say it was not sculpting, I have actually congratulated 3d sculpts on other threads.
I appreciate both mediums, my point as that the processes for each are different but require similar knowledge.
I am not against digital, but I do think they bring different qualities and the sculptors and artists should be respected for different fields of expertise
I would buy digital if I liked it enough and I am interested to learn to a degree, but hand sculpting to me brings something different, something I have worked and aspired to and something that I generally appreciate a little more, but that is just me.
Best wishes

 

[bonehead]

What? I always thought I had good communicating skills. Apparently not, as everybody seems to have twisted and misconstrued all i have said.

This thread was in response to that other thread that implied that - now that we have computers that scan and can then print out objects, that sculpting skills have now gone the way of the dodo. This is a ridiculous assumption. I have a good friend in the movie business whose job is to sculpt characters using a computer program.

Guess what? He still needs artistic skills to make anything useable! So the skills cross over to the technology: the computer sculpting program is nothing more than a new tool utilized to create sculpts on a computer instead of in 3-dimensional reality. Even when he works from scans (often taken from an actor's head) he still needs to tweak them on the computer. He is right in the dirt of computer sculpting and imaging, but he still needs artistic talent to pull it all together. And, even though he is familiar with the requisite computer programs, he would never have gotten his job without the artistic abilities needed to make the work.

So, my point is this: the artist's skills are still needed to create anything of artistic value.

That is not rocket science, but apparently it is completely lost on some........

Matt, Yep, Zardoz still sucks as movie! It can do nothing else......

 

[RKapuaala]

Gra30
Every medium we use brings different qualities to our work. I have worked in wood, bone, clay (bisque and stonewaer as well as ceramics and plasticine), wax, paper, fabric, you name it I've sculpted with it. In some cases I have combined materials to get the different qualites I desire. Computerized sculpting is reaching a level of accuracy and material variety that surpasses what the current 3D printers can handle. Bump maps and texture maps and specular maps and displacement maps, will allow the ARTIST not the machine to create some mind blowing stuff. In the futre, they will be able to print that stuff out and you will be able to buy it and appreciate it. It will be affordable for the masses and not the previlidged few like the Great Artists works were.
Open your mind to the potential,,, you are the artist,,, not the tools or the materials.

 

[RKapuaala]

Bonehead,,, right on. I didn't get that from your posts, but yes, that is what I am arguing. 'So, my point is this: the artist's skills are still needed to create anything of artistic value.'

 

[JasonB]

I guess its lost on me, since the subject goes from "can your 3-d printer do this?" to " the computer is just a tool and its the talented human using it has the skills". So I guess it should have been "can your 3-d sculptor using his computer do this and print it on a 3-d printer"??? I think they can. Kinda hard to pin down the point when it keeps around so much. Oh well, it is what it is. I don't think I will ever look at 2 figures of similar quality and interest to me and decide which one I buy after asking how it was made. Matters not at all to me. Probably the price would be the determining factor, and if things go as usual, hand made always seems to cost more...

 

[captnenglish]

As long as Hollywood doesn't "rediscover" it and make it a basis for a "reboot".
Basically it came down to Sean Connery being pissed about being considered too old to play Bond, took a role that in no way shape or form he should have, and then he ran around as a soldier killing off people that would live forever otherwise, and who wanted to be killed. Or something like that. I think...

snip
Matt, Yep, Zardoz still sucks as movie! It can do nothing else......

Jason, that is the story of the movie, I was addressing the in the movie.
Mike, I really dig the concept/story of the movie but the execution was just awful and I have a softspot for 70s cinema.

 

[JasonB]

Jason, that is the story of the movie, I was addressing the in the movie.

Wait, that wasn't the story IN the movie as well? Damn, I really didn't understand it...

 

[Richie]

Hi Mike,
Great work. Just my 2 banana's worth, whilst I see the points of view of the others and it will have a place in the future I side with you and Graham. I would like to throw something into the pot hear and say look at this link and not a computer or printer in sight. I just loved this documentary when it was on TV and the so called art world expert establishment certainly got their noses rubbed in it, not once but many times. May be it's just the chip on my shoulder fighting for the little guy.
It is the gift of the artist, the apprenticeship served, understanding human anatomy and drapery, the sacrifices made, the determination/tenacity and the personal stamp put on pieces that make them desirable.
cheers
Richie
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...un-sculpture-fake-British-OAP-fraudsters.html