This course blog is where we communicate as a group, share responses to assignments, and post our work. You are required to publish posts according to assignments found on Moodle, and are encouraged to share images, make comments, and pose public questions throughout the semester.
First off, I commend your experimentation with these tools. This image is unique in its translation of our assignment, which can really be an asset in the creative process. In a way, this approach reminds me of Nick Briz's definition of glitch, as using a tool in the "wrong" way. That said, I think this images is missing some of what Photoshop, and the various techniques that we explored, is useful for. Photoshop is great for combining elements of images from various sources, photographic or otherwise, and finding ways to stitch them together. Photoshop is not, however, a great tool for blank-canvas construction. The problem with trying to get Photoshop to behave like a paint brush or pencil marking is that it is essentially made to respond to existing pixel data, as opposed to generate it. Of course it CAN do both, which is why creating an image that might employ painterly elements within a larger context might be really unique and effective. In this case, I think your image needs a bigger variety of sources and textures so that your painterly hand may be contrasted with other elements. Some examples: If we are to understand the scale to be such that a car could drive up to what appears like an impending wall of refuse, why not insert a photographic image of a car to then distort, effect, or even alter with the brush tool? If the upper-left corner is meant to serve as an indication of depth, why not use a photographic cityscape, or even a scan of a painted environment? Every composited choice carries its own character and narrative about source, which would make for more formal and conceptual diversity within the image. I'm very impressed with your motivation and experimentation with this new medium, and I hope you keep pushing the boundaries of our tools, while considering the ways in which you might engage with their inherent nature.
The use of some color on an otherwise monochromatic scene makes the scene more interesting to me.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I commend your experimentation with these tools. This image is unique in its translation of our assignment, which can really be an asset in the creative process. In a way, this approach reminds me of Nick Briz's definition of glitch, as using a tool in the "wrong" way. That said, I think this images is missing some of what Photoshop, and the various techniques that we explored, is useful for. Photoshop is great for combining elements of images from various sources, photographic or otherwise, and finding ways to stitch them together. Photoshop is not, however, a great tool for blank-canvas construction. The problem with trying to get Photoshop to behave like a paint brush or pencil marking is that it is essentially made to respond to existing pixel data, as opposed to generate it. Of course it CAN do both, which is why creating an image that might employ painterly elements within a larger context might be really unique and effective. In this case, I think your image needs a bigger variety of sources and textures so that your painterly hand may be contrasted with other elements. Some examples: If we are to understand the scale to be such that a car could drive up to what appears like an impending wall of refuse, why not insert a photographic image of a car to then distort, effect, or even alter with the brush tool? If the upper-left corner is meant to serve as an indication of depth, why not use a photographic cityscape, or even a scan of a painted environment? Every composited choice carries its own character and narrative about source, which would make for more formal and conceptual diversity within the image. I'm very impressed with your motivation and experimentation with this new medium, and I hope you keep pushing the boundaries of our tools, while considering the ways in which you might engage with their inherent nature.
ReplyDelete