[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > You also get the showing-off-the-tool syndrome. Yes, you can generate
> > some really flashy images in photoshop with almost no effort.
>
> That's because the programmer has done so much good work for you. The
> programmer is often being more creative than the end-user 'artist'. In my
> opinion the programmer is the artist in this instance. His ideas live in
> his code, and the graphic artist is reduced the role of channelling the
> programmers creativity.
>
This is a very familiar situation for me, I recently completed a degree in
computer animation, where we started off with an old in-house 3d package,
which relied heavily on the user writing scripts (in pascal!) and learning
about programming to be able to generate animation.
We all hated it, and slagged it off, until we got Maya in the final year
(what we had all been asking for). We actually found it less flexible - and
the work produced, although very flash and slick - lacked personality, and
became very generic.
My feeling is that the more buttons, menu options and gloss it has, the more
a piece of software actually forces you into it's way of thinking, rather
than your own.
Also, artists using computers are increasingly sheltered from whats going on
"under the bonnet". In all other forms of art, oil painting, sculpture etc,
the artists are encouraged to find out about the medium they are working in.
Art, or creativity has always florished around the restrictions in a medium -
solving problems, and coming to grips with solutions, I feel this is also
true with programming.
My little rant :)
Dave
