Tools and Art (split from GD Italy topic)

[mahon]

Just managed to check out the photos and wow they are good and super original!!! Great GD... I noticed to much airbrushing dependence but top entries.

is this a bad thing? is this not just the ability to use the right tool for the job?
like while people use metal sculpting tools, would it be bad to use clay/color shapers?

if you can use airbrush to make your models look better - good for you.
but what you say may mark the advent of a new period in miniature painting...

[NAVARRO]

is this a bad thing? is this not just the ability to use the right tool for the job?
like while people use metal sculpting tools, would it be bad to use clay/color shapers?

if you can use airbrush to make your models look better - good for you.
but what you say may mark the advent of a new period in miniature painting...

Neither bad but neither good just a different thing, let me explain my position regarding this.

First your comparison... Right tool for the job? that assumes automatically that the results are better a thing I don't agree with... and will develop on that further on this post.
Metal tools vs clay shappers? nope mate, its more Traditional hand sculpting vs 3d printed miniatures or Presmoulded vs traditional sculpting... its not the tool its the technique here and both have direct impact on artist final expression.

For me someone painting figure miniatures ( and not vehicles or airplanes thats a different category IMO) is someone showcasing its painting expertise and achievements and in the process communication his own personal expression... for example blending with a acrylic brush VS airbrush... with the brush to achieve a perfect blending you need lots of experience and time and the results are always with mistakes, THOSE mistakes and the way a person handles them is the beauty of painting figs because every person is different it handles things differently and THAT communicates a bit of his soul there....

With a airbrush you don't need much time or experience ( in comparison with classic brush) to achieve perfect blending, in fact all it takes is less than 10 minutes to do that and here's the kicker... since the blending is most of the times immaculate there's no mistakes to fix, no artist expression or input... In short all blends look samey, boring, underworked and really fake.

You may call it a revolution of painting or a new painting period I just call it a expertise downgrade that when used to the exhaustion will lead most artists to a dead end, they will not develop expertise and all their results will be the same today and the same in 10 years... so yes good for them if they can disguise the fact they cant blend by being totally dependent of a tool/ technique...

In short when a tool or technique takes you hostage just because its easier and faster that does not mean its a good thing if you want to evolve as a full complete artist.

More examples... Look at scibor and the pressmoulding, the guy is totally hostage of that, yes its faster and easier but the results after so many years are exactly the same then and now , he did not evolve...compare him with fellas like Tremanor and its like million years apart.

3d printing results are faster to reshape and tool and its perfect example of how the technique is depriving artists from personal expression and making everything look fake.
Theres lots more examples but I think you get the picture

So to conclude, its a valid technique, I don't care if any artist chooses that path or not its his choice but the final results are quite different in the end... since one looks achieved and with lots of cool mistakes and the other looks like something totally bland and communicates zero of the artist personality and capacity... In the end blends all look the same from all the artists who airbrush and thats a thing not interesting to see.

[mahon]

that assumes automatically that the results are better a thing I don't agree with...

nope.
never said it, never meant it.

what I meant is: you want to apply primer - you use a can of spray paint. you paint freehands - you use a thing brush, you want to apply a smooth coat of paint on your model - airbrush is a right tool. or CAN be a right tool

but even despite using a tool which makes you work faster or easier, your work can still be less impressive than others, created with sub-optimal tools.

I don't think that GW models have to be painted with acrylics - use oils, use watercolors, use inks, whatever... as long as the final effect impresses me.

you don't have to use a brush at all - you can use a pointy stick or a crayon. your choice - just be able to impress me.

For me someone painting figure miniatures ( and not vehicles or airplanes thats a different category IMO) is someone showcasing its painting expertise and achievements and in the process communication his own personal expression...

For me miniature painting contests are about creating the most impressive work using a miniature as your canvas. It's more about creativity to me than about skills. Because you can compensate for the latter with a choice of tools, and you can't substitute the artist's view, ideas and creative mind with a tool.

I agree that art (and if we consider miniature painting a kind of art) is a process of communication between the artist and the audience. But mechanic tools also allow to communicate.

You say airbrush kills a part of the communication because it allows to avoid some mistakes, which are a part of the final effect. Believe me, one can make a huge lot of mistakes with an airbrush and you surely know it.

And just like an airbrush can be used instead of a traditional brush, one can use a dremel instead of sanding their miniatures manually or drilling with a manual drill.

I often resort to using mechanical tools in my process of preparing miniatures (which is about as important as painting itself, because a mistake made here can ruin the final effect of the best paintjob) and I don't think they're any worse or any better than if I used sand paper or manual drills. It is simply faster...

And just like one can create music on a guitar or a piano, they can also use synthesizers and electronic keyboards. Does it make their music any worse? No, they just use different tools to achieve impressive results. And there's a matter of taste - one can prefer one thing over another. That's sure.

Now let me state one crucial point:
- somebody who can achieve smooth blending with a brush surely can impress me more with their skill than somebody who uses an airbrush. that's easy and pretty obvious. just like somebody who smoothes a rock using their bare hands impresses me more than somebody who uses sandpaper or files for this.

With a airbrush you don't need much time or experience ( in comparison with classic brush) to achieve perfect blending

completely agree here

since the blending is most of the times immaculate there's no mistakes to fix, no artist expression or input... In short all blends look samey, boring, underworked and really fake.

if they look like this - they were poorly painted.
a good airbrush artist can make his blending HIS OWN. if you can spend months or years perfecting a traditional brush, you can also devote so much time mastering airbrushing.

the point is: these people rarely do. they spent time mastering traditional painting and never achieved the same degree of expertise with airbrushes.

I believe every tool can be used for artistic expression, but every tool needs time and practice to be mastered to impressive degree.

You may call it a revolution of painting or a new painting period I just call it a expertise downgrade

and I don't disagree. I think we agree but you may have misunderstood me a bit - be saying 'new period in miniature painting' I didn't mean 'progress', 'improvement' or 'great new quality' or 'fantastic discovery'. I simply meant change, and not necessarily for better. Actually I didn't even think if it's for better or for worse.

In short when a tool or technique takes you hostage

only if you allow it. only if you go for shortcuts all the time and forgo all the training you should be doing still

if you want to be an airbrush painter - train, practice, master the tool and technique
but don't think a few minutes of airbrushing will be as impressive as what brush painters learned to achieve for many many weeks/months/years

[NAVARRO]

I agree on many points but I will just quote some parts to make debate more clear for all to read ok?

I don't think that GW models have to be painted with acrylics - use oils, use watercolors, use inks, whatever... as long as the final effect impresses me.

you don't have to use a brush at all - you can use a pointy stick or a crayon. your choice - just be able to impress me.

Boils down to Blending with a airbrush does not me Impress me a tiny bit, even if its done very well specially if you compare with traditional blending... and lets not even talk things like OSl or terrain that also uses extreme doses of airbrushing... minis look so fake that its a tool that is really not changing things for the better IMO

For me miniature painting contests are about creating the most impressive work using a miniature as your canvas. It's more about creativity to me than about skills. Because you can compensate for the latter with a choice of tools, and you can't substitute the artist's view, ideas and creative mind with a tool.

I agree that art (and if we consider miniature painting a kind of art) is a process of communication between the artist and the audience. But mechanic tools also allow to communicate.

You say airbrush kills a part of the communication because it allows to avoid some mistakes, which are a part of the final effect. Believe me, one can make a huge lot of mistakes with an airbrush and you surely know it.

And just like an airbrush can be used instead of a traditional brush, one can use a dremel instead of sanding their miniatures manually or drilling with a manual drill.

I often resort to using mechanical tools in my process of preparing miniatures (which is about as important as painting itself, because a mistake made here can ruin the final effect of the best paintjob) and I don't think they're any worse or any better than if I used sand paper or manual drills. It is simply faster...

And just like one can create music on a guitar or a piano, they can also use synthesizers and electronic keyboards. Does it make their music any worse? No, they just use different tools to achieve impressive results. And there's a matter of taste - one can prefer one thing over another. That's sure.

I don't think its art ( another debate) When I mention the painter is expressing something and communicating something that something= painting tricks nothing more nothing less, he showcases his craft thats it... He can be creative with his painting and that counts a lot for me, yes... but the miniature never stops being just that a miniature.

The dremel example is not very good since it doesn't have such huge impact as airbrush or for example press mould has on the final piece... Airbrush is used and abused in much more than jut priming the minis these
days.

Are there different degrees with expertise while airbrushing? can people make mistakes with it? Sure they can but never on the traditional painting levels... someone painting a OSL by hand badly is much more valuable to me than someone painting OSL with a Abrush badly... One at least understands colors shifts while other only pushes a button with only one color for a couple seconds hehe

Music is also a bit different beast... lets just say errrr, I rather listen a guy in the metro that plays a music with a real instrument than the guy that takes a music box and pushes one button with pre recorded stuff

Now let me state one crucial point:
- somebody who can achieve smooth blending with a brush surely can impress me more with their skill than somebody who uses an airbrush. that's easy and pretty obvious. just like somebody who smoothes a rock using their bare hands impresses me more than somebody who uses sandpaper or files for this.

Nah I don't agree with the rock comparison is a bit extreme there... because again the smooth on the rock is different if you apply different ways of smoothing, the result is NOT the same and thats kind of my whole point.

But yes Im more impressed with the painter that spent a decade perfecting blending than the fella that pushes one button with one color, and then pushes same button with a different color afterwards...

Going to the smooth rock one thing is a rock sculptor that carves it with a hammer and a spike another thing is the "sculptor" that puts a draw in a machine and then watercuts it in one machine.

a good airbrush artist can make his blending HIS OWN. if you can spend months or years perfecting a traditional brush, you can also devote so much time mastering airbrushing.

the point is: these people rarely do. they spent time mastering traditional painting and never achieved the same degree of expertise with airbrushes.

I believe every tool can be used for artistic expression, but every tool needs time and practice to be mastered to impressive degree.

[/quote]

I also believe every tool can be used but when I look at mini and scream in a sec airbrush! Then the tool is taking both painter and mini as hostage.

Going back to press moulds, scibor as reached the ultimate level of press moulding... great! To me its so limitative of what a mini sculpt is intended to be and so fake to watch that I prefer not to buy things in that particular style... still a sculpt? yes, but expresses nothing to me... same like airbrush, still painting? yes, but I would not buy it and expresses nothing to me

Its a matter of taste and also a bit of philosophy.

[mahon]

All quotes are from you, NAVARRO, just to make quoting easier. OK?

Boils down to Blending with a airbrush does not me Impress me a tiny bit, even if its done very well specially if you compare with traditional blending...

Got it, agreed. Blending with airbrush is nothing very impressive, but there are other effects which take a lot of skill and training to achieve with an airbrush. But we're talking about being impressed by technical skill now, while I meant more of being impressed by the overall effect.

minis look so fake that its a tool that is really not changing things for the better IMO

if they do - the painter failed at using their tools and skills properly. not only poor art but also inadequate craft. agreed here?

I don't think its art ( another debate)

I know and usually agree with it. To me miniature painting is not art per se, but can happen to be art sometimes. Just like writing can be both craft and art, playing musical instruments can be both craft and art, etc.

Why I mentioned the issue at all? Because you mentioned miniature painting being a form of communication, expression. And that is where craft becomes art. If your painting is supposed to communicate something, to express something, you're moving from craft to art. Not always successfully, but sometimes you can cross the line.

Of course it's my take only and I am not educated in this subject.

But to quote some sources regarding definition of "art", let's refer to wikipedia:

"Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items CHECK! (often with symbolic significance) CHECK! in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses CHECK!, emotions CHECK!, and intellect CHECK!." - according to this definition, miniature painting CAN SOMETIMES be art.

Britannica Online defines art as "the use of skill CHECK! and imagination CHECK! in the creation of aesthetic objects CHECK!, environments, or experiences that can be shared with others. CHECK!" - according to this definition, miniature painting CAN SOMETIMES be art, too.

When I mention the painter is expressing something and communicating something that something= painting tricks nothing more nothing less, he showcases his craft thats it... He can be creative with his painting and that counts a lot for me, yes... but the miniature never stops being just that a miniature.

so where's the border - painting on blank canvas is art, and painting on a sculpture or 3d object cannot be art? of course it DOESN'T HAVE to be art, and USUALLY IS NOT, but to me it CAN BE art. of course we can disagree on this, and I won't fight over it.

The dremel example is not very good since it doesn't have such huge impact as airbrush or for example press mould has on the final piece...

Inadequate preparation cost many a great miniature their chance to win a trophy... believe me. I've been judging in a few contest and have talked to many judges of other contests. Let's not underestimate the importance of preparation.

But if you prefer you can substitute prepareation with sculpting. Instead of chiseling shapes with a manual tool one could use a dremel - if they feel more comfortable with it. Will it be less artistic because of the use of a mechanical tool.

Are there different degrees with expertise while airbrushing? can people make mistakes with it? Sure they can but never on the traditional painting levels...

not mistakes with blending, because it's the technique that is best suited for airbrushing. but there are many other mistakes to be made with an airbrush..

Music is also a bit different beast... lets just say errrr, I rather listen a guy in the metro that plays a music with a real instrument than the guy that takes a music box and pushes one button with pre recorded stuff

well, you're talking to a person who's much more into traditional instruments than electronic music. so I won't disagree here, but many would for sure.
some will simply say that electronic music is not worse, just completely different. but in music rankings and toplists traditional and electronic music are compared next to one another...

Nah I don't agree with the rock comparison is a bit extreme there... because again the smooth on the rock is different if you apply different ways of smoothing, the result is NOT the same and thats kind of my whole point.

OK, less extreme: take a sculptor who sculpts in stone. Is it any different if he uses an electric tool or a manual chisel and hammer? especially for me, as the beholder of their works? not much. they use whichever tools they feel most comfortable with. I judge the sculpture only.

But yes Im more impressed with the painter that spent a decade perfecting blending than the fella that pushes one button with one color, and then pushes same button with a different color afterwards...

you seem to be focused more with technical mastery. would a writer be less of an artist if he uses a computer text editor instead of a pen and paper solution? the ability to use copy-paste, easier correction of errors and spellchecker - are these enough to make his books less artistic? less impressive?

I also believe every tool can be used but when I look at mini and scream in a sec airbrush! Then the tool is taking both painter and mini as hostage.

that's bad usage of the tool, lack of mastery and skill. if you can tell so easily which tool was used.

you said you're impressed by a brush painter who can blend smoothly - that's because he paints so well that you can't tell he uses a brush

if an airbrush painter can trick you into thinking he didn't use an airbrush - he's comparably good, isn't he?

Its a matter of taste and also a bit of philosophy.

now that's sure. and bear in mind I don't disagree that what we usually see from masters of brush-painting is more (technically) impressive than quickly airbrushed models. but I would like to see an airbrushed model which can impress me as much as those brushworks. if I can be impressed to say "this can be done with a brush???", I want to be impressed to say "this can be done with an airbrush???" one day, too!

[Maru]

so where's the border - painting on blank canvas is art, and painting on a sculpture or 3d object cannot be art? of course it DOESN'T HAVE to be art, and USUALLY IS NOT, but to me it CAN BE art. of course we can disagree on this, and I won't fight over it.

well actualy i will disagre
bouth activitis are Craft not art
a Michael Angelo whas craftsman a realy good but craftsman, end he consider himself a craftsman end whas member of Crafting Guild
- about that what is Craft what is Art dont decide a dyploma from academy (wich is like that now - end what is false) but opinion of Viuers who will apriciate it end decide if this is an Art or just good craft.

[mahon]

disagree with what? with my question "where is the border?"?

you say it's all in the eye of the beholder
I quite agree - to me it's much about causing some kind of emotions in the viewer. or something that Navarro nicely named "author communicating with the viewer". but I believe that authors of some painted miniatures can be communicating something and causing some emotional reactions in their viewers, while Navarro says painting miniatures cannot be art. why? only because it's painted on something which was produced by somebody else? well, just like canvas (unless you make it)

NAVARRO says: miniaure painting is not art
I say: miniature painting doesn't have to be art, but it sometimes can become art - depending on several factors: author's intention, viewer's opinion, etc.

just like many other activities: writing books is a craft but can become art, playing music is a craft but can become art, sculpting is a craft but can become art, directing movies is a craft but can become art, acting is a craft but can become art, etc.

but I am no expert and it's just my point of view...

[kacpero]

guys guys guys...
did you see any of miniature painters work on some of main art fair around the world? or even in art galleries, museums? Paris, Berlin, London, New York maybe?
author's intention, viewer's opinion it's still not enough.. art needs a dyploma from academy or acceptation of (hermetic) art community (other artists, critic, art dealers etc.)..
IMO miniatures painting hobby don't need such 'ennoblement'

[Maru]

art needs a dyploma from academy or acceptation of (hermetic) art community (other artists, critic, art dealers etc.)..

thats actualy is wrong way of thinking as Art dont become art by Diploma or by academy - it became becouse it ART

"Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items CHECK! (often with symbolic significance) CHECK! in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses CHECK!, emotions CHECK!, and intellect CHECK!."

Diplomas end academy is a way to ern money on legitimisation whats art end geting money of it - but thats not ART - thats Bissnes end whas created by Merchants not by Artists - Painting academys whas created end sponsored by art dealer as they whant to control market end got profits from that, berfore that Artists got ther own workshops end they own teaching studios end all incomes gose to them .. well ART merchants dont likethat so they create an Art Diploma
- dont get fulled by document it states nothing end especialy dont state if thing you are doing is art or not - thats is decided by " eye of the beholder" (especialy as meny "Artist" with papers create a lot of Crap .. wich is not iven consider good )

[kacpero]

art needs a dyploma from academy or acceptation of (hermetic) art community (other artists, critic, art dealers etc.)..

thats actualy is wrong way of thinking as Art dont become art by Diploma or by academy - it became becouse it ART

Art became art because its ART rotfl.. perfect definition of art
actually, you are trying to tell me you know better what is art and what is not art? I'm wondering what competences you have to judge this? are you artist / teacher / art critic / art dealer / curator etc?
I doubt that you are a person seriously connected with art community (correct me if I'm wrong), so your opinion is just opinion nothing more..

"Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items CHECK! (often with symbolic significance) CHECK! in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses CHECK!, emotions CHECK!, and intellect CHECK!."

Diplomas end academy is a way to ern money on legitimisation whats art end geting money of it - but thats not ART - thats Bissnes end whas created by Merchants not by Artists - Painting academys whas created end sponsored by art dealer as they whant to control market end got profits from that, berfore that Artists got ther own workshops end they own teaching studios end all incomes gose to them .. well ART merchants dont likethat so they create an Art Diploma
- dont get fulled by document it states nothing end especialy dont state if thing you are doing is art or not - thats is decided by " eye of the beholder" (especialy as meny "Artist" with papers create a lot of Crap .. wich is not iven consider good )

you know, almost every artist is trying to make money from its art, selling own works, earning money for living and working, its standard situation..
with diploma you gain a title so you are artist.. you can be bad artist or good artist but still you are artist..
ofc. there was few great artist without this document f. ex. Jean-Michel Basquiat, Francis Bacon.. but still you need acceptation of 'art world'
now you got oppinion of 'professional', don't know what more you need..
from my side it's the end of discussion..