http://www.ubersite.com/m/84167
Not even all that good. You could sit a monkey infront of MSPaint untill he draws it like the picture.
Once again, monkeys have one up on me then.
Um, what? Evil, are you looking at the same page here? (Or are you sure the image has fully loaded?) That's incredibly impressive work in MSPaint. Very few people could make an image of that quality without copying and pasting even with a high-end graphics tool.
There are some parts of the big picture that are impressive... and there are some parts that are so-so. Anyway, it's a very impressive amount of work.
Ultimately, it's the artist, not the tools. With a better pixel program, he could've made the same ridiculously (not quite contiguous) large scene in less time. Perhaps even unified a palette/level of detail/artistic style.
It's painfully obvious where the reference pictures where used (citiscape, eel-creature, penguin, mouse, panda, all the video game chars, sniper, and Gandalf).
QuoteVery few people could make an image of that quality without copying and pasting even with a high-end graphics tool.
Hmmmm.... I don't know.
For those who bothered to look, the rest of his art is more or less imitations of pre-Raphaelite junk, minus any figures. Still lifes and landscapes -- the bottom rung of the traditional art hierarchy.
Quote from: big brother on Sat 18/02/2006 06:53:46
Ultimately, it's the artist, not the tools. With a better pixel program, he could've made the same ridiculously (not quite contiguous) large scene in less time. Perhaps even unified a palette/level of detail/artistic style.
Well of course; I think that pretty much goes without saying. This certainly doesn't demonstrate that MSPaint has untapped power; obviously he could have done it better and faster in a more high-end program. I think that was the point, though, showing what he could do even with a very limited tool. Yes, with Photoshop or something similar it would have been a lot easier to do, but that would have defeated the purpose.
QuoteIt's painfully obvious where the reference pictures where used (citiscape, eel-creature, penguin, mouse, panda, all the video game chars, sniper, and Gandalf).
Agreed, but so what? Even with reference pictures, most people wouldn't be able to produce something like that.
(Side note: The "eel creature" is, FWIW, an anglerfish. And...it's not one of the better parts of the picture. I can tell what it's supposed to be, but it doesn't look all that much like one.)
QuoteFor those who bothered to look, the rest of his art is more or less imitations of pre-Raphaelite junk, minus any figures. Still lifes and landscapes -- the bottom rung of the traditional art hierarchy.
The rest of his work has little bearing on that particular work. I'm not saying the work is absolutely one of a kind; I'm sure any skilled artist would be able to make something like that. But very few people are skilled artists. ;)
That being said, yeah, thinking about it, maybe I did overstate the point a bit. I still certainly disagree with Evil's assessment that it looks like something a monkey could draw, but "incredibly impressive" may be going a bit too far. Just about any experienced artist probably could have produced something like this, building up from large, solid areas to details, if he took the time to do so. So I guess the impressive aspect of it really comes more from the fact he took all the time that would have been necessary to do this with MSPaint.
(And yeah, like Geoffkhan said, some parts are certainly more impressive than others. The waterfall, the cityscape, and the depiction of Gandalf are probably the high points, but the part with Pikachu and the anglerfish isn't so great, the mouse at the center of the Earth isn't all that hot (er...no pun intended), the cave and the magma are very simplistic, and, heck, the two sprites by the miner any idiot could have reproduced from suitable reference material.)
Yeah...after the glow of the first impression has worn off, though, you kind of have a point. It grabs your attention when you first look at it, given how people think of MSPaint as this limited program, but thinking about it further...yeah, this isn't something that would have been beyond the abilities of any skilled artist, even with MSPaint; it's just that most wouldn't have bothered to take the time to do it with such a limited program.
Oh, well. Still kind of a nifty picture, I guess. Or at least parts of it are. ;)
Quote from: Alun_Clewe on Sat 18/02/2006 07:43:48
Agreed, but so what? Even with reference pictures, most people wouldn't be able to produce something like that.
One thing that I'm reminded of is a little misconception of the term "reference picture." A lot of times I see near-direct traces of an image, and then the term "reference picture" is used (I'm not necessarily referring to this mspaint work, of course). In my opinion, "true" reference pictures are those pictures that you use only to perceive certain details and realize them in your own work.
Nothing wrong with tracing or copying from something else, though. That's a great way to learn!
What? You mean... he didn't look at pictures of Gandalf to get an idea of the guy in his head, then draw him from memory?! I am SO disillusioned!! >_<
Seriously, who cares. The picture is fucking amazing. You're all just sour cause you guys aren't cool enough to have thought of doing this yourself.
Babies. ¬_¬
Give the devil his due!! Man thats awesome .
But as mentioned he could of probably done
it in half the time with something else. o wel
its his time.
Once again WOW!
Anybody with a slow connection its a 3.2mb file!
The gandalf picture is awesome, most impressive paint artwork. Evil I think you're silly for missing the point that what makes it most amazing (at least to me) is that someone DID try and do it in MS Paint! :P
Anyway the rest of his pictures suck.
Kidding ;)
How quickly you forget Opo Terser, our (semi-resident) MSPainter.
(http://www.2dadventure.com/ags/g.png)
(http://www.2dadventure.com/ags/oceanboat_copy.gif)
(http://www.2dadventure.com/ags/y_copy.gif)
(http://www.2dadventure.com/ags/tomato_copy.gif)
(http://www.2dadventure.com/ags/eb_copy.gif)
(http://www.2dadventure.com/ags/himself_copy.gif)
(http://www.2dadventure.com/ags/beachhhh.gif)
That's good MSPaint, not this hackneyed rubbish.
I can't see the pic... :-\
I think that you have to wait a little longer Victor. How long did you wait?
I, with a 2.2 Mbps connection had to wait for around a minute or so...
Err... I have 100 Mbps, and i waited for some time... :P Why wont someone just post the pic here?
In bmp format it's 20 Mb (!!!!)
but here it is (hopefully). Have a nice time scrolling down everybody:
(http://www.nikolasideris.homecall.co.uk/mspaint.jpg)
For Victor to see...
Then you are free to edit my post.
Personally i dont think it's great. Just a collection of MS paint images and as mentioned, its more to do with the time spent than actual talent. Opo Terser's stuff is amazing in comparison IMO.
So, if something looks good because some time was spent on it, it's actually bad?
Wow, I haven't been here in forever, glad to see people still remember me. ;)
I don't know what most of you are talking aboot!!!
This is a mother-f*cking sweet piece of art!
Ooh holy jeebus! Thats great! Some of it might have been better (lava area especially), but that first part just stole my heart :D
Also, Opo's work is really good! :)
Agreed! I use Paint and I know how hard it is! ('Course I've been using ArtGem lately) That's great work!
Would you think less of it if you didn't know it was made in Paint? Essentially, the main difference (as far as limited palette raster goes) is that the end result in Paint took more time than the end result would in a better pixel program. It doesn't show he has amazing ability, just a lot of patience. I doubt he could do better with a better program.
It's akin to showing off a mediocre painting and saying you spent 3 years making with ground up clay and pollen only using your non-dominant hand. "Wow, amazing" is not my response.
It's sloppy and Opo def has him beat.
QuoteThe rest of his work has little bearing on that particular work.
How do you figure? I think it's a good indication of his skill as an artist. Seeing no other works featuring figures makes me suspect he HEAVILY relied on reference photos.
Quote from: Opo Terser on Sat 18/02/2006 20:40:49
Wow, I haven't been here in forever, glad to see people still remember me. ;)
Grr... You need to get back and post more! For you are awesome
I really like the drippy water.
I honestly, in my heart of hearts, think all you people saying "It's not that great" are just jealous. You're like, "Shit, I'M a better artist than that, and yet this guy's getting all this praise! He doesn't even use <insert art technique>! Heck, it's just because he did it in a stupid program and spent a lot of time on it".
Get over it :) It's a great picture, and the fact that that other guy I've never heard of's pictures are ALSO amazing takes nothing away from it. Dan, I love your art. I LOVE it! But how about if I compare it to my favourite professional artist and say, "Well, that makes Dan's art pretty damn ho-hum". It doesn't, because I still love your pictures, I get pleasure from looking at them, and I appreciate the effort you put in.
I -would- appreciate the artwork of someone who spent 3 years painting a picture because they made their own paints and used their wrong hand. I remember seeing on TV this young kid whose paintings were selling in the tens of thousands. I was amazed that such a small kid could paint and conceptualise so beautifully! However, if I had heard those paintings were done by an adult, I'd think, "Pff, they're pretty average to crap".
Amazing MS Paint artwork, and that's that.
You know, I can't help but find it a little ironic that people who hang out in a forum dedicated to creating amateur versions of decade-old adventure games with los res graphics are complaining about someone who wanted to try creating a picture with the bare minimum.
Kinoko, your heart of hearts is wrong. Why don't you go to www.gfxzone.org and browse the 8-bit galleries to see what can be done with pixels? There's a history to this medium, and checking it out before saying other people that know it are jealous might provide some perspective, yes?
This is very patient work. But it's very sloppy, pixel-technique wise.
In fact let me save you the trouble:
Cyclone, 15 years ago:
http://www.gfxzone.org/personal/cyclone/02/cyclone-gebissene_toele.html
amiga doubleheight rez
http://www.gfxzone.org/personal/cyclone/02/cyclone-no_fishfood.html
lazur, 10 years ago, 16 colours
http://www.gfxzone.org/personal/lazur/01/lazur-przystan.html
x-man, 7 years ago:
http://www.gfxzone.org/personal/x_man/01/x_man-evil_nun.html
I think this is better: http://www.ubersite.com/m/84244
So, it's not the greatest thing out there, right? None of you guys are Rennaissance painters either but I still think a lot of peoples' art here is amazing, sloppy or not.
Esseb: That fucking takes the cake :D My god!! AMAZING!
You're free to like it as much as you want, Kinoko. I don't think it's justified to call other people who don't jealous, though. I read that kind of comments a lot of pixeljoint, which is a service used by a lot of people who have no idea about pixel art. Somebody posts a photo job and everybody goes 'OMG BEST PIXEL ART EVER' and if you say anything to crit it they just go 'oh shut up, do better yourself'. Regardless of that I have done better, that really really doesn't make any sense. And if you really want to know, people with no appreciation of the history of the medium (pixel art) that praise second-rate art because they haven't seen the first-rate aren't something I like to see. The demoscene produced amazing artwork to be remembered. This person sat there and did very tiring work, but bland work, on mspaint for years. Good for him. I'll go with people who are both workhorses and also amazingly talented, personally.
Fair enough, I know that understanding a kind of art gives you much higher standards. But I'm not attacking YOU, Helm. My comments are mainly aimed at whoever thinks something shouldn't be appreciated because of the effort put in, or the way it was painted. Especially the people who can't see the point in not using the best technology to create a picture.
but you really set yourself up for these things. When you said 'everybody that doesn't like this maybe is jealous' I thought "I don't like this therefore I am jealous?". Your generalization, what can I do?
I enjoy and do art that's made with what many feel are obsolete tools, because they reenforce the computer art aesthetic aspect. The squares of pixels, the accentuation of limited, unified palettes, odd colour choice, every colour everywhere, dithering, tiles and repetition of themes, things that are very tied in my head with what computer and video game art is like. Just using ms paint sloppily and then going 'I'm awesome!' isn't enough, personally.
Acctually, no, I wouldn't think any less of it if it was made in a different art program. It's great.
I knew that you could do the same thing if you spent more time on it as you could do in a different program, which is why I never switched (even though I'm using ArtGem for things like clouds and stars, I still mainly use Paint.)
We all have different opinions about what art is good or not, I'd say Piccasso's art was horrible-my 2 year old niece could do just as good. But other people pay millions of dollars for his art. But I'd rather go try and draw something better than complaining why people like it so much.
What are we doing here argueing about somebody else's art? We should go draw some art ourselves and get on with our lives.
I'm still waiting for one of those monkeys to come and do my games art for me....
If he does, Squinky, get him to see if he can make me some music, too.
And a danish, dammit!
Quote from: big brother on Sun 19/02/2006 01:26:11
QuoteThe rest of his work has little bearing on that particular work.
How do you figure? I think it's a good indication of his skill as an artist. Seeing no other works featuring figures makes me suspect he HEAVILY relied on reference photos.
Your other points, I've conceded, at least to a degree, but this one, I still really don't see where you're coming from.Ã, If you're discussing the quality of this particular piece, what on Earth does it matter what his other pieces are like?Ã, Can't it be judged on its own merits without reference to what else he's done?
Yes, he's relied heavily on reference photos to make this piece.Ã, Agreed.Ã, I figured that without looking at his other pieces.Ã, Again, so what?Ã, Many artists rely heavily on reference photos.Ã, In fact, most do, probably.Ã, Even in the Renaissance, artists had models pose for them, which amounts to much the same thing.Ã, Even making an exact copy of a reference photo isn't something most people can do.Ã, If that's easy for you, congratulations, but then you're far in the minority.
Give me a camera any day...
Stupid MSPaint is for pussies!!!
I would argue that anything other than MSPaint is for pussies ^_- The more primitive your tools, the harder you have to work to produce the same level of artwork.
why, back in my day we drew 1bit pixel art by manually flicking off and on 320x200 switches...
Quote from: Helm on Sun 19/02/2006 07:23:24
why, back in my day...
Yes granny you did...
QuoteThe demoscene produced amazing artwork to be remembered.
Helm, I insist you stop making me Amiga nostalgic IMMEDIATELY. God, I remember just downloading scene demos instead of games because looking at the crazy shit they could pull off was more fun than 85% of the games out :o. As far as this Paint thing goes, it's clear he did it for some kind of bragging rights (his comment in the topic pretty much cements it) rather than because he has no alternative paint program. His point also falls a little flat imo, since it's logical to use whatever program works best for you rather than downgrade and suffer with a lack of brush and color options. It looks quite good, I admit, but I also don't believe he didn't trace anything. The Gandalf picture, for example, looks traced to me in all honesty- and the game sprites I'd bet are rips.
I assume Kinoko must be a fan of the Dogma school of film making, cutting off one's nose to hardcorise one's face.
What impresses me about the picture is the ridiculously huge amount of free time the guy must have. I admire a man who gives up everything else in his life so that he can make an enormous piece of okay but bland pixel art with pointlessly hard-to-use software so that he can show his acquaintances on the Internet how little else he has to do with his time.
As art, objectively viewed, this honestly doesn't impress me a great deal (and I must admit that I can't comprehend the logic behind the idea that this would have anything to do with jealousy). As a display of the heroic sacrifice of "somewhere around 100 hours" (http://www.ubersite.com/m/84167#1843990) to something ridiculously pointless, I can nod acknowledgingly at his geekiness, but that's it.
And even there it falls short: MS Paint, pixel art, and pop culture references have been around for a while. It doesn't take a genius to combine them into this idea. Now, building a playable harpsichord almost entirely from LEGO parts (http://www.henrylim.org/Harpsichord.html)--that's a truly impressive feat. It requires far more imagination and craftsmanship, and it's much more esoteric than pictures of Pikachu and Gandalf. Henry Lim is a true hero.
There are two seperate things in art.
Creativity aka imagination and technic aka what you know.
the guy here had the technique to do something like that in Mspaint, apparently huge ammounts of time, enormous ego and no imagination whatsoever.
I cannot admire a guy for copying something.
Of course he is very good technically speaking but can be accomplished by a lot of people. Creativity on the other hand seems a little rare...
So yes, impressive, definately? Worth something? not really. Did this guy pesruade me to try out MS paint? NO WAY! Is he being paid by Microsoft? Have no idea, but I highly doubt it... Do I have a sense of humour? Have no idea! ;D
I'm beginning to question his technical skill as well. Google images turned up this image (http://www.the-reel-mccoy.com/movies/2002/images/TheTwoTowers_GandalfTheWhite.jpg) on the first page. I had to do some scaling, but it wasn't difficult to do a little comparison:
(http://biphome.spray.se/erik.igelstrom/agsf/gandalf_trace2.gif)
(See also http://biphome.spray.se/erik.igelstrom/agsf/gandalf_trace.gif for a more high-tech animation.)
This leads me to the conclusion that he has either traced it, or he is some sort of awesome cybernetic photocopying device. For some reason I'm even less impressed now.
Given the amount of time spent on it, I think it's QUITE conceivable that he simply used it as a reference and copied without tracing.
So wait, does this mean that he didn't draw the image by himself as he first boasted? That's just plain old crap(I mean the lying about the pic... :-\)! That was totally traced!
Well, here's a link to a page that appearantly shows some of the stages of the "Gandalf" stage of his picture (and he does say it was the hardest part of his picture to do): http://www.swmoore.com/paintproof.htmlÃ, , so it's possible that with careful eye-to-hand coordination, lots of natural skill, and lots of time that he could have copied it carefully "freehand" and it might appear that he traced it.Ã, Ã, Myself, I'm not such like a "good" artist, however, if I spend a lot of time with pencil & paper, I can come up with (and have before in the past) a fairly accurate "copy" of a reference picture by doing it freehand (without tracing).Ã, Anyways, either way, I think the guy is very talented.Ã,Â
I fail to see how shots of the drawing in various stages in any way prove that he didn't trace it. Assuming that he didn't, though, he must have continuously been measuring it very carefully--pixel by pixel. I don't reckon this requires either eye-to-hand coordination or natural skill. Just a very unlikely amount of time and patience.
Anyway, I don't really understand why it's so difficult to accept--in light of a comparison with the reference image--that some guy traced pictures and lied about it. This is the Internet.
There's just no way. Eldkatt showed pretty definitively that it was a paintover. Look at the precise location of EVERY SINGLE FINGER in his hand, even it's location on the staff. If he had not done a paintover the hand would have been slightly lower, a finger skewed or a bit short, etc. I'm not sure why he even bothered hiding it really.
Yep. you're probably right that the guy traced it. And I wasn't really trying to defend the guy, just I wanted to share his website link that he claims was "proof" that he drew it all himself. But taking a closer at the pic by Eldkatt, yeah, most likely there was tracing involved.
Anyways, it's still a cool piece of artwork. ;) Gandalf rocks.
Sarcasm seems to glaze over half the people in this forum..
Anyway, I'm with Helm. I'm no demo scene enthusiast, but I totally respect those guys alot more than some kiddie who spends 100+ hours on something inconsistently drawn and generally uninteresting.
"Hey! Let's throw in refreneces to popular video games and films and people will LOVE whatever I 'draw'!"
Ah, someone's jealously!
"What impresses me about the picture is the ridiculously huge amount of free time the guy must have. I admire a man who gives up everything else in his life so that he can make an enormous piece of okay but bland pixel art with pointlessly hard-to-use software so that he can show his acquaintances on the Internet how little else he has to do with his time."
What amazes me if the ridiculously huge amount of free time all of you must have. It's just a picture. He may or may not have traced it (which, I don't believe you can do on Paint, if it is a Paint picture), but it's a good picture. It's not that big of a deal. It's put together good and it has good art. Instead of argueing about if he has talent or not, why don't you just go and get on with your lives and draw something better or whatever you're working on? And if you have to keep talking about this, just judge the picture, if it's good or not. Even that is a definate waste of time, seeing as this isn't your art, and neither has it been posted in the Critic's Lounge. It's just some random guy's picture on the internet. While all you keep argueing about if he has talent or not, I'll be working on my own art, and the way it's going looks like I'll be done before you settle this case (and the sequel, too.)
(I myself am going to hang it on my wall, whether or not it's completely traced)
I don't think someone who is printing this shit out and hanging it on the wall should be lecturing the rest of us about wasting our time.
Quote from: Grapefruitologist on Mon 20/02/2006 20:44:11
What amazes me if the ridiculously huge amount of free time all of you must have. It's just a picture. He may or may not have traced it (which, I don't believe you can do on Paint, if it is a Paint picture), but it's a good picture. It's not that big of a deal. It's put together good and it has good art. Instead of argueing about if he has talent or not, why don't you just go and get on with your lives and draw something better or whatever you're working on?
See, here's the thing. I don't think it's a particularly good picture. The fact that he also traced it
and lied about it is just icing on the cake.
And if we were so keen on not wasting time, we wouldn't be reading General Discussion, would we? Or printing some random guy's picture that we found on the Internet and hanging it on the wall.
Well, whatever. I myself like the picture.
Hey grapefruit, why don't you have an avatar?
It gives you an identity! For weeks I thought Chicky was a hot woman! And progZmax thinks it's still christmas! And Helm with his funny disguise thingy going on! And me barely visible in the dark with a red light shining at me..... is it a sniper's sight?
Errrrrrrrr.............
Because... I can't make up my mind about what picture I want to put on there!
Quote from: ManicMatt on Mon 20/02/2006 23:29:02
Hey grapefruit, why don't you have an avatar?
It gives you an identity! For weeks I thought Chicky was a hot woman! And progZmax thinks it's still christmas! And Helm with his funny disguise thingy going on! And me barely visible in the dark with a red light shining at me..... is it a sniper's sight...
... and farlander is Lance Armstrong, and Nikolas has a son who is destined to rule the world, mordalles is really really evil and i am some mad leprechaun who is gonna beat you to a pulp. While ol' grape here is just... wel... Noone knows
Fine, I'll get one.
This is... a picture of window frost I took that I painted in ArtGem.
I had a better one, but I can't find it.
it's very obvious he traces photos. you don't even have to see the original of gandalf. just look at the fisherman's silhouette and compare it to the crappy penguin. it's like its done by two very different people. obviously, in one case he didn't have sometihng to trace, and in the other one he had.
hehe, this is actually very funny.
QuoteAnd Helm with his funny disguise thingy going on!
what funny disguise?...
please don't insult other people's lifestyle choices. And a good day to you, s*r.
The hat thingy. And the glued on facial-hair?
And what is s*are supposed to mean? You just made that up didnt you?
What hat? That's my hair, done nice, with a pretty flower. The facial hair is also real! You hurt me!
Vict0r, please stop persuing me, I will never give in to you. I simply do not love you.
Okay. I agree with you!
Quote from: vict0r on Tue 21/02/2006 16:29:25
The hat thingy. And the glued on facial-hair?
And what is s*are supposed to mean? You just made that up didnt you?
Listen, pal! I won't have you calling Helm's lovely up-do a "hat thingy", nor will I stand for you making accusations that his facial hair is fake in any way! Now apologize or we shall have to get into fisticuffs!
Have at you!
Ah, fisticuffs. Splendid! I shalt not apologise, thou crusty botch of nature!
vict0r.
i think that it's wrong to insult this guy. even if he did trace the gandalf picture, it still took him a lot of patience to do so. also, you can learn a lot about drawing by tracing something.
He's better than me, I can easily say that. When I look at it I don't think too much on it, so it seems cool, and can only speculate that people are mostly picking on it because it was posted in a sort of bragging, show-off manner.
Quote from: Helm on Tue 21/02/2006 16:45:00
vict0r.
What? I'm learning about shakespear in school now! Dont blame me for shamelessly insulting you.
Blame shakespeare!
vict0r.
WHAT?
Quote from: Helm on Tue 21/02/2006 17:16:15
vict0r.
vict0r.
vict0r.
vict0r.
(What?!)
Never mind.
vict0r.
vict0r.
vict0r...
Hmmmmm... why does this sound familiar? ;)
Quote from: Helm on Tue 21/02/2006 16:31:29
What hat? That's my hair, done nice, with a pretty flower. The facial hair is also real! You hurt me!
Just goes to show that we can't really make out the image too well, what with avatar's being so small!
Well whatever is going on with your hair, it looks better down.
I'm still in the belief that it is in fact a hat.
And glued on facial hair.(i'm actually getting my doubts about this after seing a pic of your dad)
Quote from: vict0r on Tue 21/02/2006 17:35:14
I'm still in the belief that it is in fact a hat.
And glued on facial hair.(i'm actually getting my doubts about this after seing a pic of your dad)
/me rolls up her sleeves.
Pugilism!
Quote from: Squinky on Tue 21/02/2006 17:14:41
only speculate that people are mostly picking on it because it was posted in a sort of bragging, show-off manner.
Now that's a much better explanation than jealousy. That's partially the reason I picked on it.
"How's my artwork?"
"Terrible."
Also, most of it is rubbish.
Quote from: Pesty on Tue 21/02/2006 17:36:25
/me rolls up her sleeves.
/me looks at his avatar.
How should i know that his hair isnt a hat, when it certainly looks like one? And looking at that facial hair again, it must be glued on.
Quote from: ManicMatt on Tue 21/02/2006 17:32:45
Well whatever is going on with your hair, it looks better down.
Yeah we liked you as Jesus. The internet has spoken.
Quote from: skyfire1 on Tue 21/02/2006 17:10:24
i think that it's wrong to insult this guy. even if he did trace the gandalf picture, it still took him a lot of patience to do so. also, you can learn a lot about drawing by tracing something.
Setting the in itself quite relevant topic of Helm's facial hair aside for the moment, I maintain that I personally do not find the MS Paint thing (you know, the topic of this thread) particularly impressive or enjoyable as an artwork. I don't really think that's an insult. More importantly, I think it's pretty pointless to admire an accomplishment solely on the amount of time invested in creating it. (Unless it's as awesome as Henry Lim's LEGO harpsichord (http://www.henrylim.org/Harpsichord.html), which I will continue to bring up in this thread until it receives more praise than the MS Painting.) Okay, he spent days tracing pop culture references in MS Paint, and he might have learnt something in the process (though evidently ut wasn't
tact). Good for him. I still don't like the result.
I think that Henrys' hapsichord takes a lot more courage, talent, brain, ideas, creativity, patience, technique, love and alcohol (maybe), to do, than a HUGe (and beautifull in my terms), MS Paint pic.
Henry is apparent that studied a lot before starting to build his hapsichord.
He had an original idea to begin with.
He had the technical ability to do it.
There is no way he could've traced it (lol)
And I really believe that he learned a lot in the process, but also I think that he has to offer a lot: To leanr about the hapsichord, a rather (not a lot but...) rare instument.
I honestly hope that EldKatt will keep on bringing him up!
Quote from: EldKatt on Tue 21/02/2006 20:12:44
(Unless it's as awesome as Henry Lim's LEGO harpsichord (http://www.henrylim.org/Harpsichord.html), ...)
That takes awesome to new extremes
He might have traced it, lied, and bragged about it. But I still like the picture. Doesn't mean I agree with how he's showing it off.
Really? Hmm if I found out one of my fave muscians had ripped off some other band's songs and made it their own, I'd no longer be able to listen to it without gritting my teeth.
I acctually listen to some bands that ripped off some sounds from other people...
I really don't judge art by its maker.
I don't mean in the hip-hop sense of sampling songs, nor cover versions, I meant like if a band totally ripped something off and claimed it as their own. That's not what you meant was it?
It's ok though...
It's just a picture on the internet.
Well, it's not a rap song, I don't really know, I just heard that this one band that I kinda like stole some stuff from elsewhere and that it wasn't going to be sold in the U.S. because of that (but luckily I was able to get it off a russian site!)
My brother told me, but that's all I know.