Welcome to Gaia! ::

Cross posted from AD

As with any profession or hobby, we learn the history of our craft as a major part of our training. We learn a broad history of artists, styles, techniques, and movements from various continents as it pertains to fine art, architecture, and commercial art, and how it relates to the culture of the time. By doing this, we take in the information it took those artists entire lifetimes to come up with.

We learn the theory, techniques, the tools, and are able to guide ourselves through meaningful experimentation and insightful application of these things to grow as artists.

As we move into our specific sectors of the art world, we learn the history of the specific artform. For me, that artform is cartooning. I spend as much time (if not more, as of late) reading researching and exploring theory and history of cartooning, comics, and animation, as I do enjoying comics, animation and cartooning itself. It's part of being an artist.

As someone who is used to seeing people just be plain stupid, it still amazes me that people call themselves artists in the same breath that they show that they know absolutely nothing about the art and could really give half a s**t about knowing anything about the art.

There is a recent thread that sparked the interest in this topic. It's so pathetic that it goes beyond being sad. We all have phases of our "serious" art training/hobby/interest before it moves out of its infancy, where we are fixated on some trait that we find influential. For some, it's super hero comics. We don't actually learn about the artform that comics are, but rather look at the entire collective as a simple set of obvious traits. I can't begin to tell you how many times in the last 15 years I've been told, "Oh, I draw comics." And been shown a sketchbook consisting entirely of the same picture of Spawn and/or Spiderman that was committed to memory and just wretched up on page after page with all the skewing and distortion of someone who never took time to actually learn how to draw. You can substitute Spawn/Spiderman with whatever the flavor of the month is in anime. Back in the day it was Ramna/Lum. Sailor Moon/Goku. InuYasha/Naruto. The list goes on and on. How often have YOU seen someone post art copied from official/professional work? What rough percentage of that time was it anime/manga? What percentage of the time was it Marvel/DC/Image? What percentage of the time was it something else?

People simplify the artform to a set of superficial, trivial traits that they thoughtlessly regurgitate endlessly. They shuffle their deck of traits and deal their crap. How many galleries/sketch dumps have you seen where it's all the same character/pose/shot/colour scheme/use of line/use of shape (or lack thereof on both sides).

There are 52 cards in a deck. Two colours. Four shapes. You like red. Remove what's not red and you've removed half of your shape options. Remove what's not a heart and you're lost all shape options. You've gone from a trait set of 52, with three possible means of making variation, to 13 possibilities, leaving the most subtle difference as the only means of variation. Say red is the trait that defines your art. You've exponentially reduced the possibilities in your work before you've even made a mark on the page.

The same people are critiquing others by slapping a redline rubber stamp over more expressive, insightful, and/unique work than theirs has ever been. They encourage fledgling artists into the same sinkholes that they are so deep in they can't even see that there is a world outside of the pit. They discourage experimentation, exploration, and problem solving as they suggest tutorials and quick tools that appear to soothe symptoms of s**t art rather than looking deeper to cure the disease that causes the problem. They thrive on tutorials and redlines that allow them to copy another's work, rather than seeking to understand where theory that makes the techniques in the tutorial effective. (And this is being VERY generous. Most tutorials the average artist online makes are s**t out after eating already regurgitated s**t. That's what focusing superficial traits will get you.)

These people have no appreciation for the power of image, because they don't understand it. They don't care. They just want to make something that shows them those superficial traits they so admire.

I'm sure most of us have had some kind of dance with this devil, regardless of how long or short. I, the wonderfully skilled artists I know, and many professionals I admire are no exception. The difference between an artist and a so-called "anime artist" is that they've seen the bullshit for what it is, felt their shame, and started to give a s**t about the what's under the surface. They explore in their art. They evaluate. They research. They create with purpose. They grow. Style is irrelevant. If your artwork has an anime inspired look to it, it doesn't matter when you're an artist FIRST.

There are plenty of people that argue about what makes someone an artist. I think art is as simple as a thoughtful creation with the purpose of engaging an audience. Even if that audience is just yourself. The key words in this are "thoughtful" and "engage". Regardless of what you create, you should be an artist before you are any other qualifier. I call myself a cartoonist, because that best describes what I am most likely to do and most capable of doing, but "cartoonist" is the tail of the funnel while it's head is "artist".

Long story short, learn about what you're taking an interest in. Learn about the theories that make what you do work. Learn about the methods, tools, and techniques. Explore and experiment with them. Learn the culture of your craft. Knowledge is power. Your "s**t art" factor is inversely proportional how much you know. If you haven't learned to appreciate the power of image/word/sound, then chances are, you're a s**t artist/writer/musician.

You make wonderful points.

I think thoughtfulness is second nature to artists. It's something we can't help. Even when we aren't thinking about it, we're thinking about it. We just stop noticing. If you just start scribbling on page after page, you may notice that you slow down and the scribbles become more ordered, page after page, and after enough pages, you may begin to imply scenes, objects, people, or ideas. You're not thinking about it, but you are. You're just not actively deliberating on the choices anymore. The question, decision, and result all happen simultaneously. (We're talking many pages, of course.)

Now, this is just MY opinion, but if you're not to the point where you're thoughtful in your creation, be it actively or passively, then you're being awfully generous when you call yourself an artist. (People in general, you, not you you. xD)

When you draw or whatever you do, do you just randomly make marks on the page? Do you go in with no intention?

Do you say "I'm going to draw this" and try to draw it?

If and when you say, "I'm going to draw this?" do you think about what you want to get from looking at it? Do you think about what you want others to get from doing it?

It's an issue of why you are creating that particular creation. Not why you draw in general. That's got nothing to do with it.

My intent is usually based on engaging the viewer. Be it myself or someone else. I am thoughtful in how I execute the image so I meet my intended goal, so I am rewarded with the expected result.

Also, read it again. The first sentence groups profession and hobby. I am not a professional artist yet. I'm a hobbyist that is breaking into the profession.

It sounds like you don't give yourself much credit.

Don't let insecurity rob you of your self worth and determination as an artist. I just had an... interesting run in with an insecure artist that had a meltdown in PP because her being insecure caused her to see information as insults.

I'm not saying what they think of your art. What you want them to get from it. What you want them to think when they see it. Not about the quality of the art.

If you want to draw a melancholy, but whimsical picture of a kid with an ice cream cone, you know that you want people to get the idea that it's a sad moment, but you also want them to find it pleasant and light hearted. Whether they think it's pretty or not doesn't come into play. Got a better idea of what I meant by what you want people to think? That the intent. Thinking about the things that will make that happen is the thoughtfulness. Coming up with a way to do it in a novel way or adding dimension to that is insight.

I was just thinking something along these lines actually. It wasn't about hobbyists or artists or pros or anything but about redlines.

I, once before, wondered about who was qualified to give critiques on art. Some people claim that you don't have to be able draw or obey your own critiques so long as you have studied art. Others argue that they only wish to receive critiques from artist they deem better than them. And that itself brings up an entirely different discussion.

This week I had to say, "I am an artist, and I'm in FFA" for a promotional video. I could never get away with saying that on the internet. The opinion of me on the net is a low "you can't draw anatomy so you can't draw anything-- that includes anime." For the longest time I wanted to draw a comic and now I have to force myself to even think about it. I think people that wish to draw well are attacked before they ever get the chance to grow. The internet is not a good place to begin your art life.

I have never formed an opinion on the critiquing thing but now I am pondering redlines. Redlines are supposed to be helpful tools for people to use to grow. What do people base their redlines on though? The idealistic shape of the human? And what if you do happen to be drawing anime? The ideal shape of the anime human? Drawing well and then understanding what you drawing is definitely important, but if people keep getting pushed in the same direction art will all end up being the same.

People are forced to develop ideas sooner than they should. For example, if a piece of art is flamed. Suddenly someone is saying something and the "artist" feels the need to argue about things they are unsure about. Now they have begun to think they are correct or that they can't do it. This makes for a very troublesome art life.

The very thing that always gets me is how willing people are to argue such things. And I think Ghost in the Shell is amazing so I don't even know how they are discussing that in that thread. But did no one mention Shin-chan? (GITS = Shin-chan= The Rugrats to me. Can't we all just get along) Honestly, I have yet to find something I dislike (other than inappropriate things and Justin Timberlake). The thought that I could someday have 1/1000 of Caravagio's skill is enough to make me accept any art form.