 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04-Sep-08 23:39, Shay wrote:
> The second meaning required the extra work. All of my images are hand-coded,
> but this one was done without the use of Python. No Python = no class(es).
> One last time with pure POV sdl.
I doubt that. ;)
> Wanted to show what could be done just by opening up the POV editor[1] and
> typing. Got as crazy as implementing divide-and-conquer delaunay triangulation
> in POV sdl.
Perfectly normal behaviour I would say (at least for that Shay that I
know from p.b.i)
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Very cool
>
> Thank you.
>
>>> This is my last image. It's been real.
>>
>> What???? I have been missing seeing your images up here lately - was
>> wondering if we'd see more of your magic. :-)
>
> If only it were magic. This was months of work, and the reaction to all
> who have heard that has been "what took so long?" There's a joy in
> discovering the just-right look for a particularly challenging type of
> corner, but that is a *very* expensive high, and no one can tell the
> difference in the finished image - especially when POV goofs up my
> triangles.
>
> I'm having dinner later this month with a successful professional artist
> and former gallery director[1] to discover the value of a wooden
> sculpture of this model. My family have a laser engraver capable of
> cutting out the dozens of necessary pieces. IF that works out, I may
> design more.
Funny, when I saw this I immediately started wondering if this was one
piece or a couple of pieces. And if the latter, if you could physically
separate them. BTW I do have access to a 3D printer in ABS plastic (see
e.g. last item on
http://members.chello.nl/a.c.linnenbank/visitekaart/en/ceramics.html).
Possibly other materials as well if I really want to, but that would
cost money. Can that laser engraver thing do rounded edges? If not you
could employ a 5 axis milling machine or something like that.
Knowing you, I guess you want total control of what happens with your
designs, but if you think some rapid prototyping could help, drop me a line.
> I could have designed this as a wooden piece in 1/5 the time.
Only if they are separable but not too loose. That is a fine line. OTOH
somehow I think you have already checked that.
Just in case that was not clear yet: I really do like your work and
approach.
Aside: in my ceramics class nearly all seem to think that things should
not be perfect because otherwise you might just as well buy them in a
shop. I am really glad that at least somewhere on this planet there is
one other person thinks that that is total nonsense. Keep up the good
work and don't slow down. Sorry, I mean: don't speed up.
>
> -Shay
>
> [1]michelleywilliams (dot com)
hmm slightly different style.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Charter wrote:
> That worth should be manifest in the result alone, should it not?
It should not have to be. If that were the case, why have collage? or
sand-painting? or whittling? or glass blowing? or print-making? or the
butterfly stroke?
What is required to fully appreciate these things is a knowledge of
their difficulty. Any idiot can tell that drawing a picture with sand is
more difficult than taking a picture with a camera, but many wouldn't
appreciate the difficulty of, for instance, lacquer painting.
And all of this is not to say that the worth *isn't* necessarily
"manifest in the work alone." It may very well be, but, Christ, Jim,
allow that the worth may require, at the very least, a second look to
reveal itself. :) If showing the 'dirty linen' gets a second or third
look, then I see no shame in at least giving the patron a peek.
> You have always concerned yourself with latencies in artwork,
> latencies often beyond craftmanship alone. It is the common
> thread, to my mind, in the various work I've seen you do over the
> years.
Thank you.
> *Craftsmanship is quite important to me though.
Craftsmanship, process, journey, ............ and shoes. All themes I
have recognized and appreciated in your images.
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> BTW I do have access to a 3D printer in ABS plastic (see e.g. last
> item on
> http://members.chello.nl/a.c.linnenbank/visitekaart/en/ceramics.html).
That's how you did it. I remember seeing these in p.o-t, but don't
remember an explanation. Very cool. My mind is flooding with possibilities.
> > I could have designed this as a wooden piece in 1/5 the time.
>
> Only if they are separable but not too loose. That is a fine line.
> OTOH somehow I think you have already checked that.
The pieces in the drawing are separable, but currently a bit loose. They
can easily be made tight because the individual pieces are so full,
unlike the finger-width tentacles of other polyhedral art I have seen.
There is another option of extending pieces to connect to one another on
the outside of the group. The connections would meet at 90deg angles. I
can make the whole thing very solid.
The end result would not be flimsy or spindly.
> Just in case that was not clear yet: I really do like your work
> and approach.
>
> Aside: in my ceramics class nearly all seem to think that things
> should not be perfect because otherwise you might just as well buy
> them in a shop. I am really glad that at least somewhere on this
> planet there is one other person thinks that that is total
> nonsense. Keep up the good work and don't slow down. Sorry, I
> mean: don't speed up.
Thanks! And I have to let you know that I got quite a few laughs from
your humor in this post.
>> [1]michelleywilliams (dot com)
> hmm slightly different style.
To be honest, I don't get it. I immediately think of some Rauschenberg
pieces I've seen. ... didn't get those either. But many people *do* get
it. She's had a lot of financial success. She left my wife a $600 tip once.
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05-Sep-08 23:31, Shay wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>
>> BTW I do have access to a 3D printer in ABS plastic (see e.g. last
>> item on
>> http://members.chello.nl/a.c.linnenbank/visitekaart/en/ceramics.html).
>
> That's how you did it.
yes, I get an idea, implement a user interface to adjust a group of
splines. Add the symmetry constraints. Write an export to blender,
compose a partial scene. Export to POV to see if it works. Get them
printed. Create molds and some other things to make ceramic copies. Find
out that they too easily fall over because I forgot to check where the
center of gravity is :( . Redo in a somewhat larger size adding a few
extra challenges. (these are not on the page yet. the other set just
above it is hand modelled an they don't fit that well, but much faster
to create)
> I remember seeing these in p.o-t, but don't
> remember an explanation. Very cool. My mind is flooding with possibilities.
Machine reads the STL format, basically yet another triangle format, so
that could be just your thing.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> I get an idea, implement a user interface to adjust a group of
> splines. Add the symmetry constraints. Write an export to blender,
> compose a partial scene. Export to POV to see if it works. Get them
> printed. Create molds and some other things to make ceramic copies.
> Find out that they too easily fall over because I forgot to check
> where the center of gravity is :( . Redo in a somewhat larger size
> adding a few extra challenges.
Whoa! And here I am belly-aching that I spend so much time sitting on my
butt staring at vim! A lot of work, but your results are one of a kind.
>> I remember seeing these in p.o-t, but don't remember an explanation.
>> Very cool. My mind is flooding with possibilities.
>
> Machine reads the STL format, basically yet another triangle format, so
> that could be just your thing.
Here's what I'm thinking: print a small sub-section of this
(http://tinyurl.com/5s5nbm) earlier model, make a mold around the print,
pour resin or ceramic (I've got a kiln), and glue the many pieces
together into a complete sculpture. What do you think?
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Shay wrote:
> A lot of extra work, but I couldn't resist the double-meaning of this
> title.
>
> The first meaning will be obvious to any who remember my "...geeks
> only?" or "high school math" post.
>
> The second meaning required the extra work. All of my images are
> hand-coded, but this one was done without the use of Python. No Python =
> no class(es). One last time with pure POV sdl. Wanted to show what could
> be done just by opening up the POV editor[1] and typing. Got as crazy as
> implementing divide-and-conquer delaunay triangulation in POV sdl.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Yep, some smudging in gimp to get rid of radiosity artifacts. Did as
> good a job as I have the patience to do.
>
> This is my last image. It's been real.
>
> -Shay
>
> [1] Don't want to mislead anyone. I didn't use the POV editor, which
> only comes with the Windows version.
Hi,
I have been going back and forth between your images and I must say that I'm
appreciating them more and more. Since I have no math knowledge what so
ever (it just eludes me) I'm just stunned by how you can pull something
like this of. Not taking away any from my understanding how much time this
can take.
I would honestly love to have your objects sitting on a display in my home.
Sadly I can't afford to have you make one for me.
I'm in aw of what a bright mind and a texteditor can accomplish together :)
--
Ger
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Shay" <sha### [at] none none> schreef in bericht
news:48c151f1$1@news.povray.org...
>
> I wonder how the story ends. Does the patron buy the painting or walk out
> of the painter's studio shaking his head?
Good question. I don't know. I suppose this is left to the imagination of
the listener as a kind of moral fable.
In any case, I have great respect for your achievements and your dedication.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
news:48c17746$1@news.povray.org...
>
> Yes, but need you show the room full of 'dirty linen' every time just to
> prove the worth of the result? That worth should be manifest in the
> result alone, should it not? I think the painter was, at a minimum, very
> patient with his patron. Perhaps my impoliteness would be a poor thing,
> but in the painters place, I surely would have let the patron walk across
> the street and buy another artist's painting, if all he apparently wanted
> was a low price for a single stroke of the brush.
I think there are a couple of things playing here. First of all the attitude
towards painters and/or the painters craft, in imperial China. A bit similar
to the painters in Rembrandt's time who were considered artisans, not
artists: it was often the effort, the toiling, that was considered valuable
over the ultimate piece produced. The estethics of the final piece were
certainly appreciated, but more so through the awareness of shedded sweat,
so to speak. It is the way, not the goal, that counts.
Even today, such attitudes still exist. In the town I lived in recently, the
municipality had provided for several monumental sculptures in and around
town. A laudable effort. However, at the disclosure of one of them (A giant
child's top in stone) the municipality official in his speech told the
audience that the sculpture was indeed beautiful, but that in his opinion,
it would have been even more beautiful if it had been twice its present
size!
I think the story - in the sense of Confucius - is supposed to drive home
that you have to do your best to achieve something.... (?)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Shay" <sha### [at] nonenone> wrote in message news:48c1e358$1@news.povray.org...
> Here's what I'm thinking: print a small sub-section of this
> (http://tinyurl.com/5s5nbm) earlier model, make a mold around the print,
> pour resin or ceramic (I've got a kiln), and glue the many pieces together
> into a complete sculpture. What do you think?
Hey Shay, wonderful work, as always! Been meaning to say something since
you posted it.
I've been looking at the image in the link again, and I think you'll
have a job producing that one if the base component doesn't have a gap in
it.
With this one though, it looks possible, and I would make it out of
pewter and then you could soft solder the units together. You could make a
jig that holds two units at the exact angles you need, solder them together
and then have another jig that holds those subsequent units together, and so
on.
This is something you could do yourself and you wouldn't need a kiln,
just a propane tank, the right torch and some Delft Clay:
http://www.delftclay.nl/index.php?page=home&hl=usa
I've used it many times with silver and gold, and it casts well, but
you can only use it once per cast, but with pewter, because of its low
melting point, you'll probably get 5 components (maybe more) before you'll
need to remake the mould.
How many components are in this image?
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 14:15:13 -0400, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
>Craftsmanship is quite important to me though.
Firstly, Shay: your image is stunning.
I've had difficulty starting this reply (lie, I've had no difficulty starting
just keeping my thoughts in a straight line). As Thomas points out some art is
appreciated not just for its beauty but for the work that went into making it.
Knowing that an old artisan spent his entire life polishing one piece of jade
into a shape makes that artefact more "worthy" than if it were carved then
polished in a fraction of the time. I don't think so! Is it better to look at a
naturally beautiful woman (or man or sheep) than to look at one who uses
artifice to make herself beautiful? (Note the pejorative use of the word
artifice.)
thinking something is beautiful so it is subjective IMO ipso facto it must be
true 'cause I used a Latin phrase.
I say that Shay's work is beautiful whether he spent months working on it or
not.
But if he had not spent the time designing and developing it. It would not be
the same piece of work. He did what was needed in this case.
Art needs skill, juvenilia needs salesmen.
Shay, are you still on the rigs? And are you having fun during the hurricane
season?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
