Does art require any hard logical type of thinking? I get that

At is 100% random strokes so you should probably do something else.

There isn't really any hard separation between logic and creativity. That's a myth. Any creative endeavor requires a lot of logical thinking if you want it to be good. Just like a lot of practical problems require a lot of creativity to solve.

Yeah art is very imprecise. I can see how it would make math autists would go insane.

>>2895659
This. The actual execution of art takes the same amount of dexterity required to write your name.

The skill of it is based on understanding, knowledge, and mastery of the concepts.

If you've mastered anatomy and perspective, you're still just putting lines on paper.

OP's pic is literally just a masterful arrangement of cursive squiggles.

File: 9343994159c13a20a0ee1008721c6774.jpg (964KB, 1600x1125px) Image search: [Google]

964KB, 1600x1125px

>>2895665
>art is very imprecise.
It doesn't have to be. I mean look at the way Scott Robertson draws.

>>2895669
>Feng thinks this is better than him

I recommend a job as a 3D artist if you were to pursue something where you just wanted to be the producers puppet and enjoyed problem solving without having to come up with design like 2D guys have to do. Studio jobs in general aren't artsy at all, but if you want to focus on just technicalities, it might be best to avoid 2D work, since it's mostly used (as in people hire for these jobs) for design, such as concept art. Whereas 3D has more variety with technical jobs and some of them, if you specialize, require not a single creative thought during your work hours.

You should know, creatively coming up with something is a logical problem solving process, but I'm replying based on the idea that you don't want to have to make shit up either. So to answer your question: yes, there are some very mundane, tedious jobs where you just apply technical skill and nothing else. The "logical" part comes from figuring out the technicalities and how to best approach the subject itself, especially if you are working in film and trying to make the most realistic piece you possibly can.

Get into 3D and push to specialize in something so you can get the hell away from modelling and you've got yourself a nice "logical" job.

>>2895692
What's a good amount for 3D portfolios? Ten models?

>>2895701
I'm definitely not the person to ask. I haven't had to worry about making a portfolio in at least ten years. I'm outdated at this kind of thing. You should be making a reel in any case, especially if you're new to 3D. My first reel only had three models and I haven't had to make another one since (works been coming to me, I haven't had to apply anywhere).

I think most graduates only have a few models in their reel by graduation, due to time constraints. Ten would be too much for them, and if you're new to the industry, they are your competition. If you were to ask me, I'd tell you to focus on quality over quantity, because that's how I first got hired. Unless of course your ten models all look superb, then by all means.

>>2895654
Art's a combination of logic and intuition. Lighting is, for example, logic based; whereas the planes that are perpendicular to the direction of the light-source receive relatively the most light. Expert intuition on shading occurs from practicing the logic aspects so that you'll be able to tell something is off without needing to think about it, however you arrive to that level of skill through thinking of it logically.

This happens across the board. You start with the logicality of the principles and you eventually arrive at an expert intuition of the principles. For example, in animation, the principle of spacing. Less spacing represents slower movement, and higher spacing represents faster movement. "I'm going to draw fast movement, so I need to space them apart more than my previously slower movement." Eventually you can become intuitive about this as well.

You're always going to have things you have to think about logically. You can't master everything and make everything automatic. And when you are having problems in a picture, which happens for nearly all professionals frequently, it helps to think logically or slowly about why it's not working, rather than throwing our 'intuition' at it.

You can differentiate these two types of thinking as 'fast' and 'slow' thinking. Art, at least professional or entertainment/storytelling-oriented art, is a masterful combination of the two.


>>2895668
How do you quantify the dexterity necessary for art? It's different depending on what kind of art you're producing. There are certain aspects of art that are difficult to do and require much more concentration to control the dexterity aspect.

>>2895654
>"right-side of the brain" is required
This triggered the /sci/ in me.

File: image.jpg (40KB, 720x491px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 720x491px

>>2895654
Do you mean in comprehension or formal execution? I find it takes a lot of logical study to fully understand how other artists manage to inflict their vision upon an audience, particularly in what some people consider a "post-metaphysical age". Eventually you may feel as though you could write essays on many contemporary artists.

Drawing certainly requires a high degree of organization, which was probably the greatest value associated with the academy system. Recognizing great statements and separating them from individual notions is also very important for a serious artist. Logic, or the objective mind, is always working in tandem with your subjective mind.

oh god just shut the fuck up and fuck off oh my fucking god

I don't think someone who knows how to draw necessarily has any logical faculties whatsoever.
But, I do think that people with those faculties will find that they have a knack for it.

>>2895744
>How do you quantify the dexterity necessary for art? It's different depending on what kind of art you're producing. There are certain aspects of art that are difficult to do and require much more concentration to control the dexterity aspect.

This is true, but like cursive, all those strokes can become muscle memory and learned through repetition. The dexterity aspect is based on how much control you have over your hand. Art is 50% an exercise of telling your hand where/what to put on the canvas. Different speeds of strokes, different pressures, and steady handedness produce different results. you figure all this stuff out by drawing and painting a bunch. A lot of people refer to this as Hand skill. You can theoretically mindlessly grind hand skill forever by just practicing strokes on canvas.
Left brained people have an easier time expressing things through the abstract so a lot of them attain this relatively quickly.

The other 50% requires things that must be cultivated through repeated exposure. Anatomical knowledge, self critique, design sense, color sense, shape language, visual library, observational drawing skills, composition, judgement calls, etc. They require a lot of critical thinking and understanding of how things work. This can't be grinded, you have to honestly understand everything you're learning in order to use it effectively. It frustrates a lot of people, because it's as if you have to wait for your brain to understand stuff loooong after it is read in order for it to be useful. People refer to this as Eye skill.
Right brained people are at an advantage because they don't get burnt out as easily by critical thinking so a lot of them attain this early on.

If your hand can't keep up you end up with nothing but frustration. Likewise, if your eye can't keep up you end up with things like symbol drawing, samey subject matter, and polished turds. Mastery of both means you have Tech skill or good draftsmanship.

>>2895654
Of course. I don't see myself as an artist but a craftsman. I always analyze my work and study light and form (Both are based in science). What I do isn't art but it can be used to create art. But so can other professions like woodcutting or architecture. In fact any field can have a person that is considered an artist by his peers based on performance.

Even communication can be art and that's where many art universities have fucked up by thinking communication and painting is the same thing. There are other fields that are better suited on making you a good communicator unless you consider the attention that painting a picture in public with your ass would bring a success..

Ideally I don't see any self-proclaimed artists as artists. Only when I acknowledge a work as art will I refer to the creator as an artist. Sometimes I ignore that for the sake of pragmatism since I know others don't follow it.

How stupid and much of a pseud is op. Jesus christ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Du_%22Cubisme%22

>The question of whether the theoretical aspects of Cubism enunciated by Metzinger and Gleizes bore any relation to the development in science at the beginning of the twentieth century has been vigorously disputed by art critics, historians and scientists alike. Yet in Du "Cubisme" Jean Metzinger and Albert Gleizes articulate: "If we wished to relate the space of the [Cubist] painters to geometry, we should have to refer it to the non-Euclidean mathematicians; we should have to study, at some length, certain of Riemann's theorems."

>There was, after all, little to prevent the Cubists from developing their own pictorial variants on the topological space in parallel to (or independently of) relativistic considerations. Though the concept of observing a subject from different points in space and time simultaneously (multiple or mobile perspective) developed by Metzinger and Gleizes was not derived directly from Albert Einstein's theory of relativity, it was certainly influenced in a similar way, through the work of Jules Henri Poincaré (particularly Science and Hypothesis), the French mathematician, theoretical physicist and philosopher of science, who made many fundamental contributions to algebraic topology, celestial mechanics, quantum theory and made an important step in the formulation of the theory of special relativity.

>>2896388

look at this autismo getting worked up

I phrase my threads exactly so people like you can get triggered and deliver the juicy bits

you are simply an enfeebled mind against the intricacies of my ploys

>>2896388
>in no way is an explicit connection made between topology and cubism
>endless overworded drivel

I wonder if you can tell me which of Riemann's theorems have any bearing on Cubism? Art is basically an expression of taste, the "scientific" aspects are auxiliary and non-essential, and I say this as a scientist

>>2896446

No i don't understand any of that, i'm simply posting it cause i'm aware of it and aware that metzinger and the cubists were very involved with taking a lot of mathematical ideas and applying them to art, modern ones at that.

If you don't read his theories or atleast a summary then you'll really know nothing more then me on it.

>>2896446
>Art is basically an expression of taste

A lot of things are just an expression of taste. How you decorate your living room for example. I think that the work should at least have reached some sort of ideal level before you start calling it art. Just like any picture you hang on your wall isn't necessarily placed there for its artistic value. It can be a poster or some modern art you picked solely because it matched a color theme.

Basically just because something is entertainment (A comic) or recreation it doesn't mean it in itself is art. Otherwise even stick figures qualify and then the concept becomes meaningless as everything is potential art.

>>2895654
There is no such thing as creativity. It's intent exploitation of social cues and nothing more.
Then again if you're a mathematical genious but a sociocultural retard, it may as well be magic to you.

>>2896463
> the cubists were very involved with pretending to take a lot of mathematical ideas they didn't understand and applying them to art, in order to grant themselves credibility
ftfy

I have read his theories, and it's complete horseshit. Let's break down the ones from wikipedia

>multiple perspective
cool, but nothing to do with math, just make parts of the subject follow different perspectives and interleave them in the same painting

>effects of non-Euclidean geometry
>I drew things that aren't on a flat surface!

>Riemann's conception of space-time, blurring the distinction between space and time
>relativity of knowledge
utter gibberish

I like Cubism as a style, but pretending it has any deep connection to math is a marketing ploy

>>2896469
>muh nitpicking
taste is the essence of art, not the intellectual framework behind its execution (which I'm not saying isn't important, autismo)

>>2897086
Taste doesn't make it art, mr inflated ego.

>>2895739

how did you get your job?