Halo_n_horns
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2005
- Posts
- 3,535
Saiyaman said:
Great Stuff, Saiy. I also signed up for the site that you have them posted at. Looks like an interesting place.
Artists of Erotica...
- Thread starter Halo_n_horns
- Start date
Great Stuff, Saiy. I also signed up for the site that you have them posted at. Looks like an interesting place.
TheLittleWolf
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2005
- Posts
- 281
pattydraws said:now that's one heck of a compliment.
http://www.creativespankedwife.com/images/after1.jpg
we could still share art though... I may be old fashionedly monogamous in bed, but I have few inhibitions sharing good erotica....
I'll be your Lancelotte and worship you from afar.
It's just so damn refreshing to see such increadable fine art as yours.
Your work inspires me. As always, I love this new piece.
<fill this space with lots of compliments about the artists talent and skill>
Well your knight in tarnished armor is off to go slay a dragon or something.
Oh wait is that a peasant girl holding a tankard of ale?
BlackSnake
Anaconda
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Posts
- 9,196
Saiyaman said:
Very very nice.
Halo_n_horns
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2005
- Posts
- 3,535
Here's a few old ones that somehow got lost in the chaos of the mosh pit that is my artistic life...
http://show.imagehosting.us/show/574547/23814/user_23814/T0_23814_574547.jpg
http://show.imagehosting.us/show/574555/23814/user_23814/T0_23814_574555.jpg
http://show.imagehosting.us/show/574557/23814/user_23814/T0_23814_574557.jpg
http://show.imagehosting.us/show/574547/23814/user_23814/T0_23814_574547.jpg
http://show.imagehosting.us/show/574555/23814/user_23814/T0_23814_574555.jpg
http://show.imagehosting.us/show/574557/23814/user_23814/T0_23814_574557.jpg
TheLittleWolf
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2005
- Posts
- 281
Nice spit and smudge on the shading
Halo_n_horns
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2005
- Posts
- 3,535
TheLittleWolf said:
No spit was harmed during the production of these pictures.
QuietlyMakingNoise
Experienced
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2002
- Posts
- 75
pattydraws said:
Patty, your artistry and sensuality shows through your sketches. You are VERY talented.
Paul AKA QuietlyMakingNoise
Halo_n_horns
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2005
- Posts
- 3,535
QuietlyMakingNoise said:
That's putting it mildly. I've been looking back through the works that she's graced us with in this thread. Its not just the people she portrays but also the settings and ambience that she places them in. As an artist I rarely stop to even care about the surrounding of my subjects, but she really takes it all the way and leaves you wanting more in a good way.
Great works, Patty. 'Hope to see more soon!!!
QuietlyMakingNoise
Experienced
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2002
- Posts
- 75
Halo_n_horns said:That's putting it mildly. I've been looking back through the works that she's graced us with in this thread. Its not just the people she portrays but also the settings and ambience that she places them in. As an artist I rarely stop to even care about the surrounding of my subjects, but she really takes it all the way and leaves you wanting more in a good way.
Great works, Patty. 'Hope to see more soon!!!
You are so right. I've just stumbled onto this thread and my wife and I have been looking at her art and it's amazing. She truly has a gift and I am glad to see her postings. One of them would go sooooo well with my latest story I published. It's very, very good art.
Thanks to you for starting the thread. And to Patty for sharing her amazing talent.
Paul AKA QuietlyMakingNoise
Brinnie
Adm¡n
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2005
- Posts
- 8,234
Halo_n_horns said:That's putting it mildly. I've been looking back through the works that she's graced us with in this thread. Its not just the people she portrays but also the settings and ambience that she places them in. As an artist I rarely stop to even care about the surrounding of my subjects, but she really takes it all the way and leaves you wanting more in a good way.
Great works, Patty. 'Hope to see more soon!!!
Indeed. She's a genius.
Halo_n_horns
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2005
- Posts
- 3,535
QuietlyMakingNoise said:
By the way, welcome to Lit.
BlackSnake
Anaconda
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Posts
- 9,196
Halo_n_horns said:
I really like this one:
http://show.imagehosting.us/show/574555/23814/user_23814/T0_23814_574555.jpg
Halo_n_horns
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2005
- Posts
- 3,535
I don't blame you. I had those three in in frames for the last several years. They're faves of mine, but were somehow misplaced for a while.
QuietlyMakingNoise
Experienced
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2002
- Posts
- 75
Halo_n_horns said:By the way, welcome to Lit.
Halo, thanks for the welcome to the thread. I've been posting stories here since 2003 and find this thread one of the best I've seen.
Paul
AKA QuietlyMakingNoise
Halo_n_horns
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2005
- Posts
- 3,535
QuietlyMakingNoise said:
That's very kind of you. It couldn't be so without the contributions of the other artists.
Black Tulip
Not so delicate flower
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Posts
- 5,945
Ok, this place seems to be the right one to raise a question.
I know the timing is stupid, because I'm leaving tonight for a weeklong holiday, but it will hopefully give me something to read when I'm back.
I've been wondering for the past week. Is it art when you modify pictures?
No surprise were this is coming from, I guess. LOL
Taking pictures of myself turns out to be enormous fun, but playing around with them afterwards gives as much pleasure. And to me the result is sometimes very nice on the eyes. I keep calling it artsy, though. Which signifies that I don't feel it deserves to be called art in a proper way.
Any opinions on that?
I post an example to show what I mean. There is a lot to be learned about composition and background and such, I realize that. But it still looks nice enough, I think. Does it deserve a place in an arts thread though?
I know the timing is stupid, because I'm leaving tonight for a weeklong holiday, but it will hopefully give me something to read when I'm back.
I've been wondering for the past week. Is it art when you modify pictures?
No surprise were this is coming from, I guess. LOL
Taking pictures of myself turns out to be enormous fun, but playing around with them afterwards gives as much pleasure. And to me the result is sometimes very nice on the eyes. I keep calling it artsy, though. Which signifies that I don't feel it deserves to be called art in a proper way.
Any opinions on that?
I post an example to show what I mean. There is a lot to be learned about composition and background and such, I realize that. But it still looks nice enough, I think. Does it deserve a place in an arts thread though?
G
Guest
Guest
Last edited by a moderator:
TheLittleWolf
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2005
- Posts
- 281
BlackTulip,
In my opinion photoshop is just another tool for the artist.
I have photo shop and a whole room overflowing with pencils and paints.
It doesn't matter what "tool" one uses to make art it is the end result that matters.
There are lots of "artsy" looking works in the world some done in photoshop or some other like program and many more done with the more traditional mediums. Not every piece created will be art most are trash. I once had a professor say that only one in a hundred pieces that you creat will be good enough to show. I think this is slightly exagerated but I do agree with the notion that not every piece is worth showing. Some are more sucesful than others.
I got side tracked there...As for photoshop I use it as a compositional tool to collage photo's that I then draw from. I've never called a "finished" photoshop piece art. To me the "finished photoshop" piece is a step towards the final finished pieced which is done in a traditional media such as oil or water color, etc.
Prior to my learning photoshop I would collage images to create a scene to be painted or I would take these smaller pictures and hand draw them (scaling them up or down) to fit into the composition.
In my opinion photoshop is just another tool for the artist.
I have photo shop and a whole room overflowing with pencils and paints.
It doesn't matter what "tool" one uses to make art it is the end result that matters.
There are lots of "artsy" looking works in the world some done in photoshop or some other like program and many more done with the more traditional mediums. Not every piece created will be art most are trash. I once had a professor say that only one in a hundred pieces that you creat will be good enough to show. I think this is slightly exagerated but I do agree with the notion that not every piece is worth showing. Some are more sucesful than others.
I got side tracked there...As for photoshop I use it as a compositional tool to collage photo's that I then draw from. I've never called a "finished" photoshop piece art. To me the "finished photoshop" piece is a step towards the final finished pieced which is done in a traditional media such as oil or water color, etc.
Prior to my learning photoshop I would collage images to create a scene to be painted or I would take these smaller pictures and hand draw them (scaling them up or down) to fit into the composition.
QuietlyMakingNoise
Experienced
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2002
- Posts
- 75
Black Tulip said:
Tulip: Great Question. My wife's very much into taking pictures and doing some wonderful post pic editing to it and enjoying the results. I've been a happy receiver of her pics when I'm on the road.
I'd like to see some more of your work, the one you attached was very nice. I like the Blue mood of it.
Paul,
AKA QuietlyMakingNoise
Halo_n_horns
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2005
- Posts
- 3,535
BT,
This is one that I also have some pretty difinitive opinions on.
I started a bit of a ruckus in another thread once, because of my views on what is art and what's not. I don't believe that photography, alone, by itself, is art. Photography always will have one limitation that will seperate it from being true art: photography is limited to capturing what is in front of the camera. True art is only limited by the artist's imagination.
Apparently that opinion pissed off a number of people.
I do believe that modified photography can be artwork. Now you're taking it from what the camera was limited by, to what the mind is limited to. The reason that form of art is a "can be" instead of a definite "is" becomes a question of what the artist is capable of doing with an image that could only be captured in the finite world.
There's also another distinction that needs to be made on another artistic level: Art or artist's rendering. A number of the illustrations that I've posted are artist renderings because I was giving an artistic impression of a pre-existing piece of work. If I were the one who took the photographs of the models AND did the illustrations from them, then they could easily be classified as art because the photograph was only a part of a means to an end, instead of the end, and then used for reference by someone with artistic abilities to create a new piece.
While I could go on with this for some time, there is only one other distinction that I'd like to give an opinion on.
True Artist vs Artist. WHAT? you're saying. How could there be a distinction there? This is one where there are many examples of in art history. To set the precedent for this example I'll use a pair of contemporary artists: Boris Valejo and Frank Frazetta.
Boris Valejo does some exceptionally beautiful work. His art is based on a combination of true artistry, that being from the reaches of his imagination, and limited artistry, that being that he also uses his own photo-references. The men and women in his paintings are almost always models that he's photographed.
Frank Frazetta does some exceptionally beautiful work. His art is based in near entirety in true artistry. While I'm quite certain that Frazetta has used a model or two in his time, the mass majority of his works are pulled directly from the reaches of his imagination without the continuous usage of photo-references.
While I believe there are a number of differences between the two artists that create these distinctions, I believe that one of the greatest factors of seperation is probably confidence. Frazetta is comfortable in his own skin and even more so when he's creating. I do believe that Valejo could easily achieve this same true artistry status were he to put forth the effort. But, he's made a lot of money doing things the way he does, and money has a tendency of making people pretty lazy.
While this is pretty long and drawn out, pardon the pun, I do think that all these things are connected to your question.
I do hope that between myself and the others who have answered your request, that you have what you're after.
This is one that I also have some pretty difinitive opinions on.
I started a bit of a ruckus in another thread once, because of my views on what is art and what's not. I don't believe that photography, alone, by itself, is art. Photography always will have one limitation that will seperate it from being true art: photography is limited to capturing what is in front of the camera. True art is only limited by the artist's imagination.
Apparently that opinion pissed off a number of people.
I do believe that modified photography can be artwork. Now you're taking it from what the camera was limited by, to what the mind is limited to. The reason that form of art is a "can be" instead of a definite "is" becomes a question of what the artist is capable of doing with an image that could only be captured in the finite world.
There's also another distinction that needs to be made on another artistic level: Art or artist's rendering. A number of the illustrations that I've posted are artist renderings because I was giving an artistic impression of a pre-existing piece of work. If I were the one who took the photographs of the models AND did the illustrations from them, then they could easily be classified as art because the photograph was only a part of a means to an end, instead of the end, and then used for reference by someone with artistic abilities to create a new piece.
While I could go on with this for some time, there is only one other distinction that I'd like to give an opinion on.
True Artist vs Artist. WHAT? you're saying. How could there be a distinction there? This is one where there are many examples of in art history. To set the precedent for this example I'll use a pair of contemporary artists: Boris Valejo and Frank Frazetta.
Boris Valejo does some exceptionally beautiful work. His art is based on a combination of true artistry, that being from the reaches of his imagination, and limited artistry, that being that he also uses his own photo-references. The men and women in his paintings are almost always models that he's photographed.
Frank Frazetta does some exceptionally beautiful work. His art is based in near entirety in true artistry. While I'm quite certain that Frazetta has used a model or two in his time, the mass majority of his works are pulled directly from the reaches of his imagination without the continuous usage of photo-references.
While I believe there are a number of differences between the two artists that create these distinctions, I believe that one of the greatest factors of seperation is probably confidence. Frazetta is comfortable in his own skin and even more so when he's creating. I do believe that Valejo could easily achieve this same true artistry status were he to put forth the effort. But, he's made a lot of money doing things the way he does, and money has a tendency of making people pretty lazy.
While this is pretty long and drawn out, pardon the pun, I do think that all these things are connected to your question.
I do hope that between myself and the others who have answered your request, that you have what you're after.
pattydraws
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Posts
- 254
awww geeee how neat!!!!
Wow. What a nice group of posts to come back to....
Thank you Black snake
& H_n_h I will try not to stop posting on any account other than loss of a working internet connection or god forbid muse...
you are definately a knight Li'l wolf. thank you
Thank you Quiet. Very glad you like the drawings. Got some things doing in my in person world that limit my leisure time & therefore my online reading time. I promise to catch up in the first few weks of sept when I've booked vacation. Thank you for the kind words.
That's a particularly neat comment H_n_h. So often I get complaints because I cut off heads... I kind of like leaving the viewer with some freedom to live the image within their own fantasies, so I try to keep the mood & erotica without spoiling someone's context. But I love textures & like the challenge of making things like hair & fabric seem shiney ot smooth or course...
thanks brinny
You guys are neat, and may I say very good for a fragile artsy ego.
Wow. What a nice group of posts to come back to....
Thank you Black snake
& H_n_h I will try not to stop posting on any account other than loss of a working internet connection or god forbid muse...
you are definately a knight Li'l wolf. thank you
Thank you Quiet. Very glad you like the drawings. Got some things doing in my in person world that limit my leisure time & therefore my online reading time. I promise to catch up in the first few weks of sept when I've booked vacation. Thank you for the kind words.
That's a particularly neat comment H_n_h. So often I get complaints because I cut off heads... I kind of like leaving the viewer with some freedom to live the image within their own fantasies, so I try to keep the mood & erotica without spoiling someone's context. But I love textures & like the challenge of making things like hair & fabric seem shiney ot smooth or course...
thanks brinny
You guys are neat, and may I say very good for a fragile artsy ego.
pattydraws
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Posts
- 254
Halo_n_horns said:
pattydraws
Really Experienced
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Posts
- 254
Saiyaman said:
I am enjoying these. Thank you.
Similar threads
