Then here’s some advice for you: learn to take criticism now as what you’re reading here is a cakewalk.
Anonymous
I’ll agree on points 1 and 2. Far be it from me to defend Norman Rockwell but digital art should be about a lot more than Layer Options. Rockwell might have been a borderline pedo but at least he could draw. What made the early photoshop collage guys good was that they were almost like installations. There’d be sculpture, purposeful photography, chunky oils etc which were collected together in photoshop. Now-days there’s tablets and all sorts of other things you can use to display your technical worthiness.
Liam_McGonagle
Okay, maybe I see your point of view a bit better now. I don’t think I’m releasing any national secrets when I say that I’m not a digital artist myself and that I’ve never had a digital art-specific appreciation course.
I think you may be saying that you’re disgusted with this fellow’s lack of technical novelty and sophistication. Those are two points I am left to evaluate in a totally naive way, ’cause as I say, I’ve never really explored the issue in a specifically digital context.
But I suppose I’m not the only one in that boat. It’s hard for me to understand some of the posts here, but I think you’re the only one who’s raised specific deficiencies to technique up to this point.
Ironically, my condemnation of Rockwell also centered on technique, though with regard to its utter lack of novelty rather than its sophistication. I agree Rockwell had more technical drafting skill than I’ll ever possess. It’s just hard for me to understand why he didn’t just go into photo composition.
And I agree he was politically retrograde, if that’s what you meant to imply. I didn’t know about any pedaphaelia accusations, though.
.>>
Noted. I’ve been getting flammed on the internet for nearly 10 years now for my pretentious ramblings – the only difference is – now i get it on DISINFO.COM!! yay me.
.>>
Wow, Gregory, if I could sustain your level of coherence – I’d be unstoppable!! And your comment on my naïveté is certainly understandable – I am the first one to admit my outlook is ultimately one of youthful optimism. And there is no reason not to have such a perspective. The history of the world is the story of people making a difference – some good, some bad – but I absolutely refuse to believe I am immune to such recognition.
So, here’s the REAL synopsis of the K.oM. BOOK0: The Link between Art & Magic, is a single, Universal Mind. Simple.
Is it a reinterpretation of countless other ‘occult theories’? Absolutely. Do I reduce thousands of years of mysticism to its most base and simplest terms? In order to gain broader mass appeal. . ? You better fucking believe it.
So here’s to all you cynics, critics and complainers accusing me of being a pretentious thief… EA™3!!!
Anonymous
I can be a bit of a curmudgeon about it but digital art really suffers from laziness. It’s an exciting medium but is struggling to be taken seriously. It’s no big deal really to see something like this on a website, but people do try and exhibit similarly constructed works. (I’d not have entered the fray if not for the OP flashing his ‘artist’ badge to dispel criticism.). I totally agree with you on Rockwell to be honest. He’s the other side of the coin – great vocabulary but uses it to talk about kids in short shorts.
Gabzgrl
This was a true pleasure to read. I think you should write another!
I might buy the book, too, does it have the illustrations?
Pingback: The KE$HA KULT TAROT BOOK | Disinformation