Woo we released again and in fact if you don't wanna waste time dling packs goto http://www.creators.org
Where a full pack preview is online and available.
So if you Don't mind what are some of your comments? I personally would like to hear some feedback from outside of Cia.
By Leonardo.iCE (gatekeeper2.monsanto.com - 199.89.234.124) on Thursday, March 11, 1999 - 09:35 am:
I was kind of disappointed with CiA's hirez this month. I didn't see very much freehand art at all. subsonic's renders were O.K. There were a few photomanips I liked: bd's "ghetto" ikarus's stuff is always intriging. fh_* weren't bad either. I didn't like most of the logos either. gf_brge.jpg looked like it was drawn in a matter of minutes.
Leo
By fat-ass (darth.nls.fi - 195.156.38.2) on Friday, March 12, 1999 - 01:45 am:
logoworks like mg*.* & 42*.* should have released
5 years ago. well, i can't say nothing to most of the photomanips (or bunch of pluggywork with heavy layering). all i know is they are easy'n'fast so i dont appreciate 80% of 'em at all.
By BD ( - 198.64.44.36) on Friday, March 12, 1999 - 04:50 pm:
i can't say nothing to most of the photomanips (or bunch of pluggywork with heavy layering). all i know is they are easy'n'fast so i dont appreciate 80% of 'em at all.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
First off, have you ever tried a photomanip? Second, heavy layering? Um hello mcfly everything done has tons of layers, Photomanips are no exception, airbrushes have tons of layers too!
Third: Easy and fast? Not hardly I cannot speak for other artist but it sure as hell took me a long time on all my pieces. In fact the last month i probably have spent the most time on those photos. So before you make certain assumptions why don't you do a little research :). (Note if this was a retort in anger you would know it so don't treat as one) As far as quality goes tho I will say our last pack could have been of higher quality I will admit that.
on a sidenote why don't you just use yer real nick one of these days or do you got something to hide ?
By God among Lice (bootp-231-230.bootp.virginia.edu - 128.143.231.230) on Friday, March 12, 1999 - 11:30 pm:
I believe that's fat pacifist.
By BD (dyn49-t1.twistercom.com - 207.235.39.99) on Friday, March 12, 1999 - 11:56 pm:
Well its hard to see who your talking to yanno :)
By Funbaby (209-239-212-108.lax.jps.net - 209.239.212.108) on Saturday, March 13, 1999 - 11:49 pm:
You're making assumptions too, BD. :)
Airbrushes have tons of layers? Not necessarily. I rarely worked with more than 3 or 4 layers on my airbrush pieces. And I rarely use any floaters at all on my Painter pieces.
I've talked to a few photomanip guys, and they've said that often, a pic takes only a few hours. I know a QUICK painting/airbrushing takes 10 hours for me.
By RaD Man (pc-93-162.corp.3com.com - 139.87.93.162) on Sunday, March 14, 1999 - 08:06 am:
I'm disappointed that during peak hours in #CIA not a single body could manage to produce a working copy of CIA 61 disk A. Just referral upon referral to different sites with more bad copies.
:-(
-R
By napalm (pc7edn07.fcc.net - 207.198.222.126) on Sunday, March 14, 1999 - 04:11 pm:
gee, thats too bad, my copy works fine.. maybe its just because no one in #cia LIKES YOU CHRIS! HA! I know there was a zip error in one of the versions of the packs floating around, but it wasn't anything disabling that wouldnt let you unzip it in winzip or whatnot. I checked the versions i have for dcc on irc in both windows and linux zip programs.
By RaD Man (pc-93-198.corp.3com.com - 139.87.93.198) on Sunday, March 14, 1999 - 08:48 pm:
Is this some sort of twisted indirect way of telling me you want me to release THE photo?
Try harder.
By atom (korea-188.ppp.hooked.net - 206.169.225.188) on Monday, March 15, 1999 - 03:57 pm:
hah. ive heard all about THE photo. I think you should release it either way.
By massive (ti18a24-0102.dialup.online.no - 130.67.226.102) on Tuesday, March 16, 1999 - 11:31 am:
wtf is THE photo ?
By massive (ti18a21-0081.dialup.online.no - 130.67.224.209) on Tuesday, March 16, 1999 - 11:50 am:
ok, i read further up on this thread, and i noticed the 'virgins talking about sex' syndrom...like, people who don't do photomanip talking about photomanips....
time:
a photomanip, is, PHOTO manipulated. of course it doesn't take as much time to take a photo of a face, then it takes to draw it...like, to be a good photographer you need to be good in the moment, yer skills needs to be elite in the 10milliseconds it takes for the camera to take the photo...so, time is just a fucking stupid argument saying photomanipping is bad....also, who the fuck would call a bad painting any good, just because it took 13232 years to paint it? gesus, it's the OUTCOME that counts, not the time and effort it took. time and effort are how you learn photoshop...
easy:
sure...drawing is easy, like, everyone can draw a line, and everyone can do it..blah funbaby and tomi aint got no special skills at all....blah! that didn't sound so elite did it ? no, because, everyone can draw, and everyone can photomanip...but its hard to do it good, like funbaby and tomi does, or atom and solarpunk does...
im sick of hearing ppl talk down photomanip calling it "easy, and takes no skill, and its just ripping"..get a life, it's new, it's growing, are you guys afraid it'll take over the scene ? or what ? this discussion is soo similar to the racism discussion, fearing the 'unknown' and 'different', photomanippers beeing the minority, drawers beeing the majority...
By Funbaby (ip162.pom.primenet.com - 204.212.52.162) on Tuesday, March 16, 1999 - 12:09 pm:
I think because Photomanip IS new, and most people aren't familiar with the tools and techniques, it's difficult for many people to separate the good stuff from the crap, and to separate the stuff that takes talent and skill (not to be confused with "effort" and "time"), from the stuff that can be accomplished with a liberal application of cheesy filters.
Remember, newbies are often impressed with Eye Candy graphics.
I'll admit to being a bit jealous that you photomanip guys can get a nice piece of work done a lot faster than I can, too.
By atom (mcoeftp.marin.k12.ca.us - 199.88.112.211) on Tuesday, March 16, 1999 - 03:24 pm:
maszive- if i sent you THE photo, your monitor would crack....
fun- be jelous :) I can create a really good peice in a few hours, sometimes less :) my webpage interface took 3 days of sitting my ass at the keyboard when i should've been doing homework.... id say i gave that 6 hours, but i packed a lot of detail into it. On the otherhand, for the blue image in the links section (art related, i belive) i made that in half an hour...
By RaD Man (h1987.s86b1.baynetworks.com - 134.177.25.135) on Wednesday, March 17, 1999 - 01:35 pm:
Atom...
How did you obtain THE photo??
-R
By atom (korea-167.ppp.hooked.net - 206.169.225.167) on Wednesday, March 17, 1999 - 09:56 pm:
radman- i did radwoman a "favor"
By massive (ti18a21-0111.dialup.online.no - 130.67.224.239) on Thursday, March 18, 1999 - 04:12 pm:
send me THE photo atom, i'll risc the monitor:P
fun:time, yeah, as atom says..i've also done, good, images in half an hour, and equaly good images in up to 22hours :P i think that thats one thing that seperates drawings and photomanips a little, photomanips/photos reflects the idea much faster, and you'll get it down on 'paper' much more as it was in yer head. but with a drawing/painting you'll get more time to think through it, wich prolly have good effects, but prolly bad effects aswell....but, you can put time into a photomanip aswell...oh well, i dont really care :P hehe
By blup (butcherbird.uq.net.au - 203.101.255.2) on Thursday, March 18, 1999 - 08:43 pm:
Hrm, photomanip. Here's my mangling of Trent Reznor i did in less then an hour, or thereabouts.
http://uq.net.au/~zzgkrumi/trent.jpg
By mongi (cobalt.k.kth.se - 130.237.75.87) on Friday, March 19, 1999 - 02:57 am:
I like it! It looks cool. And it was done in less than an hour?! gee..