Hanarky

I didn't mean to get involved in this. Having read this thread and moved on to another ("The cast your vote" one), I hardly can retain my anger. Sorry, when I give new oil into the fire.

Chester you are such a negativist. Ever since I come here for a few weeks, all I have seen from you was to run people down, either personally or their work. In every single post from you, one can feel the disgust you have for them. Hardly one post that showed a little positive attitude or even help.

I made my way trough the net in the search for friendly PS-forums, where I can get help and encouragement, and believe me, it's hard to find one. In most I was run down for questions, that were a big problem for me, but the "experts" teached me, that I am only too stupid and better should give up with PS.

I feel welcome here and I get help here and have learned a lot. I do wish constructive critics about my pics posted here to make them better and see mistakes, since I know a lot of them sucks. I am a beginner.

But not such a shit that you write [upset] [upset] } } } }

Sorry, that had to be said. I am enerved from this guy ever since I come here and it makes me sad, that he is able to poison this forum with his negative spirits.

For the pic, that this mess was all around. I just find it awesome, thought the background isn't my favorite. And it is completely indifferent for me, how low or great technique this person used. It looks awesome, that's all that matters to me.

Hanarky

P.S Let's respect each other and go on in a friendly way, okay?
I love being here

MisterMister

Well, ya can't really say "let's respect each other and go in a friendly way" and at the same time slam the guy.

I have seen Chester make some encouraging comments. And besides, the last time I checked, this was still a free country. He is entitled to his say just like everyone else.

And that is my own 0.10 worth ....

MsOz

Well, first off, this is not a country, this is the Internet, an electronic medium not physically part of any one country in particular, although some countries DO control content (like China, and parts of the Middle East).

Secondly, "entitlements" do not quite mean the same thing in Cyber-Space. Censorship of words, sounds, and images occurs on every level, from the Filtering Software blanking out entire pages for even a single instance of a restricted word, to Forum moderators who, at any time have the power to modify/delete ANY post with complete liberty (at the discretion of the Site OWNER, who dictates what is and is not acceptable on the bandwidth he/she is paying for), to the ISP, who may have their own set of "what is acceptable here" standards.

Third, ain't none of this stuff come for free, comprende? The Internet costs from the moment you power up your PC, and every participant has paid for some portion of their presence in simply being able to access a Forum, which, in turn dictates that their actions and presence on any site can be dictated to some extent.

It is STILL a privilege to be able to post one's opinion on Forums such as this one, and it is up to the mods to decide what can or cannot be expressed here, from insulting posts without explanation ("it's ugly."), to power-delerious commands ("...it shouldn't be mentioned here.") ("don't make a comment [unless it's a compliment]...go right ahead ") to AppleCider's most intelligent piece of advice, which is "...point them to a better way." Any moving lifeform with access to a keyboard can post their opinion on a Forum, no matter how inane, mean, or counterproductive it may be, and to argue with such individuals is pointless, and counterproductive to the entire existance of the Internet, which is the free exchange of IDEAS. So, instead, be ProActive. Rather than arguing why a post is Politically Incorrect, and how people should post, instead, IGNORE what is stupid about a post, focus on the main topic (Ugly or not, can this effect be achieved in Photoshop, I think not) and then respond to THAT (Actually, I think it can be done with a custom brush, a LOT of layers, and some liquify and shearing applied. No, I will not prove it to you, it does not benefit me to spend that much time to duplicate an effect I think is ugly.)...

There's nothing wrong with expressing a negative opinion, just back it up, rather than merely demonstrating that you can hit an enter button to show your presence. That's a sad way to justify your existance on any Forum, and you're better off just lurking (as are the rest of us!) if all you have to contribute is a "that's great," "I don't like it," or "show me how to do it," type post...

huma

...dragging the thread, kicking and screaming, back on topic....



I think the pic was done in photoshop only with the use of actions. You can record and play an action that copies, transforms, merges layers, then pastes. Keep doing it and you'll get all sort of interesting effects. Computer Arts had a tutorial on fractuals that went into this in detail. You may wish to look on their site to see if they posted it online. It really isn't that much more difficult than Mark's 3d tutorial.

I don't care for the yellow. I think the artist should have went with blue for a technical blueprint kind of effect but that's just my opinion.

Chester, thank you for posting the link. I just discovered Expose this past week. I would love to enter their contest. However, I'm not quite at that level yet. Maybe in about a year when I get mastery over the airbrush and pen tools. [excited]

Chester

you seem to me like a guy who is willing to learn, who is determined, patient and who loves art... trust me moth, those are the right ingredients!
youll be more amazed about yourself sooner than you think

and about the pen tool... its so easy... it looks more complicated than it is, really. learn the shortcuts and youll discover that you seldom switch between the different pen tools...thats the whole trick... and if things seem to be too complicated... remember the days when you looked up to those who already knew how to use photoshop...

Anamacha

Although it's quick and easy to say "wow, that's really cool" or "gee, that's ugly" is quick and easy, it's not really helpful to the artist in question. IMO. Sure, the ego stroke is nice -- who doesn't like that?

It's more fulfilling, IMO, for the artist as well as the speaker, for them to make a more full remark. Such as "I like it, but your use of shadows is a little off. I think it would be better if you paid more attention to the detail in teh shadows."

See? That's helpfl to the artist, AND to the speaker.

IMO anyway.

Smoke420

Thanks you for getting us back on topic [righton] Hmm, only with use of actions? I think it must've been more than that. If it was just that... im sorta impressed.

huma

I think you may have misunderstood me. I meant to say that I believe you could make the picture in Photoshop without the use of a 3d program. However, to do it the artist looks like he made [size=18px]alot[/size] of duplicate layers and made some small changes to each layer.

Actions are perfect for such activities. Record it once and all you have to do is keep pushing a button.

By the way the tutorial I referred to earlier is "Using fractals in Photoshop" It can be found in Creative Collection2 from the makers of Computer Arts and Arts Special.

Anamacha

where can we find that? Or should we just try googling for it?

retired_paddza

Damned skippy. We should all bow down and kiss Mark's ass for providing this haven for us! [doh][righton]

Back on topic, I think it's all too common these days to associate skill and technology. People tend to think that if something is good it must have been done with good technology. I would hasten to point out that there were some amazingly realistic works being produced hundreds of years ago by painters that had no access to technology of the sort we find commonplace. Take a look at those two sites that I posted. I'd be hard pressed to dicern some of Bert Monroy's work from photography due to it's realism and detail. He primarily uses Illustrator to build his objects and photoshop to color them. No 3D software. The other site I posted, eyewoo, has some wonderful examples of paintings that look entirely realistic and have copious amounts of depth in them and those are done primarily in Photoshop, in fact he posts some tutorials on how they were built on his site. I've run into him on some forums, he's a cool guy and great artist. Skill vs. Technology. You don't need fancy 3D programs if you really have artistic talent. Hell, I've even had people ask me if I use 3D software for some of my stuff:

gear

pill

canister

... and I'm not even a good artist.

I tend to think that in the hands of a good artist, anything becomes a tool of great art. I've seen pictures that looked close to photographics come from a napkin and a ball point pen. I think also, that no matter how much software you get, if you aren't a good artist, you are only going to go so far. We seem to get so wrapped up in the technology we forget that the real creative spark is the person and it would be there with or without the computer.