Stop Microsoft
Miscellaneous => The Lounge => Topic started by: GoodwillMan on 24 May 2003, 20:13
-
Macman said that programming is not "art" well, then Photoshopping is not art. I decided not to post this in the GRAVE YARD thread because well. I just made a new thread because I can :)
Who is doing the work? In Photoshop (And GIMP and all the others) most people make images using filters, scripts, and other crap, and they do a bit of cropping and soforth. (Yes I know there is a bit more). And who writes all the code that can do these cool effects, who writes the ultra trippy screensavers that x comes with? PROGRAMMERS.
If you have an argument to this (and not just "x11 fuck off") please make it.
(I posted this because I think an argument may bring some life to the forum and soforth, and because im bored).
-
x11 fuck off
-
Yea! you're giving Apple a bad name! (http://www.apple.com/macosx/x11/)
[ May 24, 2003: Message edited by: The all Microsoft hater ]
-
X11, you can twist anything to look any way, but that will still never make you right.
-
Looks like I win the argument, gee that makes me feel good. This forum is fucked because everybody is to pussy to bother with a nice flame war.
-
Or maybe its because we just don't care about your idiotic opinions. You think you've won a flame war and you're still not happy? What was the point of starting the "flame war" then?
[ May 24, 2003: Message edited by: Macman: HAS 1000 POSTS ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Thy killer of thee good threads:
Macman said that programming is not "art" well, then Photoshopping is not art. I decided not to post this in the GRAVE YARD thread because well. I just made a new thread because I can :)
Who is doing the work? In Photoshop (And GIMP and all the others) most people make images using filters, scripts, and other crap, and they do a bit of cropping and soforth. (Yes I know there is a bit more). And who writes all the code that can do these cool effects, who writes the ultra trippy screensavers that x comes with? PROGRAMMERS.
If you have an argument to this (and not just "x11 fuck off") please make it.
(I posted this because I think an argument may bring some life to the forum and soforth, and because im bored).
Let me explain why people who use photoshop are creating art. Lets look at a painting. It starts out as several different colors of pain that are splotched onto a canvas in an organized manner. Th fact that paint is on a canvas does not make it art. The fact that it is organized and appreciated by it audience makes it art.
The same goes for photoshop. No the person didnt physically create the artwork, but they organized it in a way that was structured and appreciated by an audience. Ive included the definition to the word "art". Things created under photoshop seem to adhere to the definition.
# Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature.
#
1. The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.
2. The study of these activities.
3. The product of these activities; human works of beauty considered as a group.
# High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value.
# A field or category of art, such as music, ballet, or literature.
# A nonscientific branch of learning; one of the liberal arts.
#
1. A system of principles and methods employed in the performance of a set of activities: the art of building.
2. A trade or craft that applies such a system of principles and methods: the art of the lexicographer.
#
1. Skill that is attained by study, practice, or observation: the art of the baker; the blacksmith's art.
2. Skill arising from the exercise of intuitive faculties: "Self-criticism is an art not many are qualified to practice" (Joyce Carol Oates).
#
1. arts Artful devices, stratagems, and tricks.
2. Artful contrivance; cunning.
-
quote:
Originally posted by ThePreacher:
Let me explain why people who use photoshop are creating art. Lets look at a painting. It starts out as several different colors of pain that are splotched onto a canvas in an organized manner. Th fact that paint is on a canvas does not make it art. The fact that it is organized and appreciated by it audience makes it art.
The same goes for photoshop. No the person didnt physically create the artwork, but they organized it in a way that was structured and appreciated by an audience. Ive included the definition to the word "art". Things created under photoshop seem to adhere to the definition..
So what is the difference between colors being organized in a way that pleases the audience and code that is organized in such a way that pleases the audience. I don't see the difference.
I'm not a programmer, but the slight amount of programming I have done (i personally wouldn't consider art) but a select few programs I would call art.
And really, what is the problem with X11, he doesn't seem to be doing anything wrong. So what if he trolls, and fucks with your guys' heads. We are all here because we don't like Microsoft. He is here because he doesn't like Microsoft. Let's leave it at that. We don't have to attack his character (he doesn't have to attack ours either)
Just my 2 cents
[ May 25, 2003: Message edited by: Billy Gates: Mac Comrade Captain ]
-
I personaly belive programming ican be an artform. It involves much skill and creativity and allows you to express yourself uniquely. To a programmer, good, clean, efficient code, does have an asthetic value (http://smile.gif)
And a usefull programm can easely be apreciated by it's audience. Ya, proging is an art.
-
i guess programming is an art. but that depends on your definition of what art is. art is order in chaos to express a feeling. art is not logical, and not merely pretty colors and composition. look at Jean Michel Basquiat. pure emotion and no order. programming is not like this. programming is structured and can be perfected. its the difference between the left brain and the right brain.
-
I suppose anything could be conceived as art, but the kind of art photoshop creates and the kind of art programming creates are two different kinds. Am I right?
-
quote:
Originally posted by Macman: HAS 1000 POSTS:
I suppose anything could be conceived as art, but the kind of art photoshop creates and the kind of art programming creates are two different kinds. Am I right?
yep. anything can be called art. i forget the names, but there was this guy who shit in bottles on the 70's, and people started snatching them up recently calling it "brilliant" or something. there was also a guy who would arrange garbage in a room, and got a show at some big mueum. the janitor 'cleaned' that room at night thinking it was actuall garbage. needless to say, the museum heads were not pleased. so, yeah, anything can be art. and that drives me insane.
-
quote:
Originally posted by ecsyle:
yep. anything can be called art. i forget the names, but there was this guy who shit in bottles on the 70's, and people started snatching them up recently calling it "brilliant" or something. there was also a guy who would arrange garbage in a room, and got a show at some big mueum. the janitor 'cleaned' that room at night thinking it was actuall garbage. needless to say, the museum heads were not pleased. so, yeah, anything can be art. and that drives me insane.
Ya, alot of people don't like the post-modern stuff that's been around since the 60's. But to be fair, who's to say their wrong? Who's to say they don't actually belive in their work?
I mean Van Gogh was concidered a hack all his life, and no one liked his stuff till long after his death. And in Van Gogh's writtings we can see a man with deep convictions who actually had strong ties to the work he created. So who's to say Garbage guy is wrong? I mean, I don't like it, but if he belives in it, and is somehow expressing something he needs to express, then why isn't it art?
This is like one of those eternal questions with no real answers. Art is what you make of it, I really think that. One generation may concider one thing art while another not.
For example, the Romans thought that the Egyptian busts (the egyptians first developed them) were severed heads! They thought the sculptures grotesque. It wasent until later generations that the romans adopted the bust and recognized it's asthetic qualities.
Who's to say that in 10 years or so we all won't want some shit in a bottle, cuz darn if that just ain't prety :D ...
hehehe...
But back to topic:
I think programming is like a paintbrush, and painting techniques. It's what you create with it that is art.
-
quote:
Originally posted by psyjax: plain 'ol psyjax:
Ya, alot of people don't like the post-modern stuff that's been around since the 60's. But to be fair, who's to say their wrong? Who's to say they don't actually belive in their work?
I mean Van Gogh was concidered a hack all his life, and no one liked his stuff till long after his death. And in Van Gogh's writtings we can see a man with deep convictions who actually had strong ties to the work he created. So who's to say Garbage guy is wrong? I mean, I don't like it, but if he belives in it, and is somehow expressing something he needs to express, then why isn't it art?
This is like one of those eternal questions with no real answers. Art is what you make of it, I really think that. One generation may concider one thing art while another not.
For example, the Romans thought that the Egyptian busts (the egyptians first developed them) were severed heads! They thought the sculptures grotesque. It wasent until later generations that the romans adopted the bust and recognized it's asthetic qualities.
Who's to say that in 10 years or so we all won't want some shit in a bottle, cuz darn if that just ain't prety :D ...
hehehe...
But back to topic:
I think programming is like a paintbrush, and painting techniques. It's what you create with it that is art.
yeah. it depends on your definition. my definition of art is different than yours. its a matter of opinion. i do not think shit in a bottle is art. but that doesnt mean its not. i understand that. i can see how programming is an artform, but i cant appreciate it as an art. maybe because i am not a programmer, and do not really understand. i don't know. fuck it. opinions cannot be disproved.
-
A work of art is a unique creation of a certain aesthetical, historical and cultural value. I don't agree that programming is an art form especially since no human emotions are involved in the process. This is just me though and I see that a lot of you disagree with that, as I happen to disagree with you. (http://smile.gif)
-
quote:
Originally posted by Panos:
A work of art is a unique creation of a certain aesthetical, historical and cultural value. I don't agree that programming is an art form especially since no human emotions are involved in the process. This is just me though and I see that a lot of you disagree with that, as I happen to disagree with you. (http://smile.gif)
It depends though what kind of program you write and for whom you write for.
For example, if you write a program for a bank simply because your boss told you so, even though the program it self might be something to admire its not art.
But if for example you write code for an application that really makes your skip a beat (Adding features to KDE, or improving the AI, or creating/improving a code that really breaks new grounds) that is art in the grounds of that you have a concept that is dear to you and you made it happen. You gave it life and its one of a kind.
Here is a good example.
All the extras in Lord of the rings the two towers that are in the background fighting, they are all computer animated.
Did you know that each character had its own AI and the fighting bewtween them was not predetermined or predesigned? Now that for me was art. Art that was complimented by excellent graphics. And creating graphics is an art form as well. No doubt about that.
[ May 27, 2003: Message edited by: bazoukas ]
[ May 27, 2003: Message edited by: bazoukas ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by bazoukas:
It depends though what kind of program you write and for whom you write for.
For example, if you write a program for a bank simply because your boss told you so, even though the program it self might be something to admire its not art.
But if for example you write code for an application that really makes your skip a beat (Adding features to KDE, or improving the AI, or creating/improving a code that really breaks new grounds) that is art in the grounds of that you have a concept that is dear to you and you made it happen. You gave it life and its one of a kind.
Here is a good example.
All the extras in Lord of the rings the two towers that are in the background fighting, they are all computer animated.
Did you know that each character had its own AI and the fighting bewtween them was not predetermined or predesigned? Now that for me was art. Art that was complimented by excellent graphics. And creating graphics is an art form as well. No doubt about that.
[ May 27, 2003: Message edited by: bazoukas ]
[ May 27, 2003: Message edited by: bazoukas ]
Again, I tend to disagree, mainly because we share a different definition of what art is. (http://smile.gif) And that's really the beauty of it. ;)
-
quote:
i forget the names, but there was this guy who shit in bottles on the 70's, and people started snatching them up recently calling it "brilliant" or something.
I think I'll stick with acrylic. (http://users.adelphia.net/~xita/kitten/barf.gif)(http://users.adelphia.net/~xita/kitten/puke.gif)(http://users.adelphia.net/~xita/kitten/barf.gif)
-
quote:
Originally posted by Panos:
A work of art is a unique creation of a certain aesthetical, historical and cultural value. I don't agree that programming is an art form especially since no human emotions are involved in the process. This is just me though and I see that a lot of you disagree with that, as I happen to disagree with you. (http://smile.gif)
Have you done programs in C++, java (bleh), fotran?
-
quote:
Originally posted by bazoukas:
Have you done programs in C++, java (bleh), fotran?
Nope. Keep in mind that I'm not a coder nor do I intend to be. :D All I know is HTML, XHTML and some PHP. (http://smile.gif)
-
Well my point is that, half of the unoriginal bullshit done in photoshop is called art, then there is a lot of real art done in photoshop.
I think that everyone in this thread had a useful opinion, except... (drum roll) mac man.
-
quote:
Originally posted by X11: BTFH:
Well my point is that, half of the unoriginal bullshit done in photoshop is called art, then there is a lot of real art done in photoshop.
I think that everyone in this thread had a useful opinion, except... (drum roll) mac man.
(http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:spXaBdCYzdMC:www.deansplanet.com/images/flipoff.jpg)
[ May 30, 2003: Message edited by: Macman: HAS 1000 POSTS ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by bazoukas:
Have you done programs in C++, java (bleh), fotran?
Dont like java huh? Thats ok there is an alternative. Microsoft .NET
I wish java was as flexible as C++, and Im making it my personal goal to learn java so that I can create cutting edge applications(games) that will be usable on all platforms.
[ May 30, 2003: Message edited by: ThePreacher ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by ThePreacher:
Dont like java huh? Thats ok there is an alternative. Microsoft .NET
I wish java was as flexible as C++, and Im making it my personal goal to learn java so that I can create cutting edge applications(games) that will be usable on all platforms.
[ May 30, 2003: Message edited by: ThePreacher ]
Good. Games being only available for Windows IS THE MOST ANNOYING THING IN THE WORLD!!! You should do a coup of Blizzard. They put out all their stuff for Mac, but I don't know about Linux. Plus they are literally gods.
[ May 30, 2003: Message edited by: Macman: HAS 1000 POSTS ]
-
I'm about to get emotional so bear with me.
Code is an art, but not a presentation art. It's a personal art, and in some ways a performance art. I code to satisfy myself, it keeps me sane. I don't code for anyone else, I create software for everyone else. The structure, flexibility, power, scalibility, and speed all come out to decide it's beauty. We cannot compare paint or pixels with ones and zeros because they are different fruit.
Art has a defined process. Definition, Creation, Review, Feedback. For most performance and presentation arts, an audience takes the role of Review and Feedback, but when looking at code as a personal art, the coder takes the role of all four, definition, creation, review, feedback. Looking at it as a performance art, it performs in a structured, but unpredictable manner. I dont mean unpredictable as in buggy unpredictable. Take for instance the World Trade Centers. I considered them beautiful before they were gone. To me that means that they were a work of art despite the fact that they are just as logical and unpredictable as coding.
In unpredictable I mean that you can't classify a piece of software and know what it will be like. It has distinct features, distinct behaviour, and a distinct look. It can be abstracted, but no more than any other art.
Art to me is admiration. A piece of art is something that is beautiful. I see code as beautiful because of it's precise stream. You know the resulting software will do exactly what's in the code, but that doesn't mean that by reading the code you will know what the software will do.
Code can do anything. It's not limited to showing pixels, or for showing emotion either. On the opposite end of the spectrum it's not limited to show only logic either.
Code can create chaos. If something could only be logicial, it could not create chaos. Code can attack other code, which can cause other code to fail, which takes away power from half of New York state.
Bottom line: Art is what is beautiful.
-
local
faust : PERSON
minutes : INTEGER
do
!!faust.make
faust.stand_up
from
minutes := 10
until
minutes = 0
loop
faust.applause(1) -- applaud for one minute
minutes := minutes - 1
end
faust.sit_down
end -- class well_said_solo
Well that wasn't art. I think it qualified as kitsch though! :D Anyway well said Solo. ;)
-
Programming is an art when done well.
In painting the artist takes pigments and arranges them on a canvas to form an idea. Note that it does NOT have to be aesthetically pleasing - in fact I think a lot of art that is ugly is better because it makes you think more. In programming the "artist" takes "pigments" (code lines) and arranges them to form a final work - just because it's functional does not stop it from being creative and artistic.
And to whoever it was that tried to prove arguments by quoting dictionaries:
1)definitions change from version to version
2)music doesn't seem to fit "neatly" into that definition either
3)dictionaries conform to a societies definition of a word, not the other way round
-
While we're at it, let's continue the Cheerleading, Sport of not, debate. And then for good measure, a Console Vs. PC one too. And for dessert, Religion Vs. Athiesm.
Monday night debate, ya'll.
-
im all on for a monday night debate, but lets make it involve porn
-
Cheerleading is NOT sport!
PCs are MUCH better than consoles!
And there IS no god!
-
Cheerleading is a sport, cosidering they have competitons, and dictionay.com states "An activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often undertaken competitively"
PC's are 1337
There's the small possibility of god, but who really give a shit.
-
quote:
There's the small possibility of god, but who really give a shit.
LOL