Random Vexel
Vexel of the Week
Text Link Ads
Vexel Article - vector/vexel portraits: art or not? - by [DeletedUser]
[article deleted at owner's request ]
Please read discussion whether vexels are "art" in the comments.
Please read discussion whether vexels are "art" in the comments.
Comment on this article
You must be registered and logged in to comment.
Comments (53)
Tell_Tale♥ |
i think that it takes a lot of time and dedication and whether or not someone sees it as art shouldnt matter if its something that you enjoy doing i enjoy seeing ones that arent photorealistic just because they show more creativity of the person who vexeled it so it has their personality in it but i also love seeing photorealistic ones because they are really hard to do and they can come out absolutely beautiful |
| [DeletedUser] | [ Comment deleted at owner's request ] |
Raelynn |
I think what puts some people off about vexelling as an art might not be so much in the tracing aspect, but because we do not create the entire thing ourselves. I sometimes even have a hard time calling my own stuff art, even though anything I create from my own photos I definately consider art for my own sake. That being said, there are many art forms out there that aquire already created elements for use in the form. Such an example is typography, which I consider an art, which sometimes uses typefaces created by other people. And I dont agree with the definition that art is anything that someone consider beautiful, because there are many things out there that I think of as art that aren't pretty at all :) |
| IAmTheWalrus | Good article, thanks nemesis =) Closing was very encouraging. Personally, I just see vexelling as a hobby, and I don't really mind how other people define it as long as I can continue doing it. Vexels=art, cool, I'm making art. Vexels=not art, oh well, it's fun anyway. |
| lacirquedevie | people are getting so picky these days it almost ruins art as a whole =\ |
| Echoia | Some people are calling it copyright infringement ; ) http://www.vexels.net/mbtopic.php?id=1283 |
Mascara |
Its Got all the Elements of Design, and we dont Trace, Just Look at the Competeitions - theres Creativity and Unique-ness. I call it Art. |
gingham_pirate |
I wouldn't class it as 'fine art' but it's still art to an extent. There's colour, tone, shape, line, shading, pattern, texture all to account for in a vexel/vector. I CAN draw, I COULD draw and scan every photo I used beforehand, but what is the point? It just wastes time. I guess I'm lucky, most of my friends are arty, and none of them have questioned my digital art as not being art. They're just amazed at the concept, since most of them use traditonal media. However, I've just taken and vectored some original photos of my own, and it's ten times more rewarding to do, so I'd recommend it. |
| grrlissa | In one of my college class for illustration we were taught to trace to get the basic reference right, then enough of our own talent/style shows through in the piece to make it unique enough to call it our own. Like the vexel contest...everyone vexels the same image...if no one could title them something unique...could they still pick their own out? Absolutely!There's no definite way to define art since everyone's reality and experience is different. There are so many different styles and techniques on here and even though I may not be able to do them all, it makes them no less valuable or meaningful. |
| Tasha25 | So, by what you're saying, someone can poor their heart, mind, and soul into something creative, and it's NOT art? Alright, I surely got something wrong along the line. *rolls eyes* I personally think that ANYTHING you deem as creative is art. Vexelling is creative. Heck, finger painting is creative. Sowing is art, knitting is art, photorealistic vexels are art, even painting a door is art, if you think it is creative (which yeah, I do :p). Meh, oh well, think what you want, but I still believe anything deemed creative by at least yourself is art. |
artisticdork |
emphaqist; you asked if anyone thought that Natalie's peice "wanna study" is art, and YES!!! i do, that peice even though it is again photorealistic and probably was traced, she took an artistic license and added parts, subtracted parts, meshed together and all that good shtuff, that IS art, its not just recreating the same thing. I didn't know my simple comment would make sucha big "hoo ha" I just think that there are different standards for what is art and what isn't art when it comes to different mediums. I understand alot of time and energy was put into making her vexels and i can totally give her that, and yes they do look beautiful, but then again they look exactly like the photos. and like ohsofatal said, a traditional artist and a vexel artist do use their eyes, but do you think a traditional artist while painting a model is mixing the paint color, putting a dab on the brush and runs over to the model and puts the brush right by her eye to make sure the colors match? no, they use their eye, and take it for what it is. A vexel artist will most likely use the eye dropper tool in the program and pick the exact color and use it to make sure it matches. I will say I wish i had the talent and patience that natalie has, but I dont. and yes her vexels are beautiful and stunning but art is not what it is :/ |
| Vanilla Angel |
in my opinion it is art! some artist just draw some fruits like they lay on the desk. it´s also just "tracing", but the way how they draw it, which emotions they have doing that, thats what counts. sometimes i see vexeled eyes and could lose myself in them, then i see the original picture and it does NOT have this effect on me! |
| iloveyou | thats true, video game design is considered art, technecly, all they did for that tomb raider video game is trace angelina jolie, i think it'd be considered art? But then again, i'd have to say that in a way they do have a point, unless you change the picture, or make it from scratch. |
illogika |
Wow. I can't really believe that people think that vexelling is basically 'tracing a picture'. Take it from someone who can't vexel worth shit: it's not. |
ohsofatalx |
"i disagree. plenty of the most famous artists paint portraits that just look exactly like their models. do you still consider that art as well?" well... yes it is art. they are using their eyes to draw. they are using the talent that was given to them. the creativity to be able to draw something so beautiful with only using their eyesight. Now when you're vexeling and image and trying to make it look exactly like the photo its hard to decide if its art or not. traditional artists use their eyes to make art. vexelers use their eyes too. but only to see the reference photo, pick the right color, and overlay the posterized image. |
| Fergus | ....run home crying then |
| Hydra | Well...I would said a thing. Nowadays everyone could do art. Think at the Conceptual art, namely we can bring (for example) a pen and give it a personal meant. That's is art. I've got a sentence that my brother said me from a philosopher that is Pascal "The love has got its reasons that the reason doesnt know" |
| Tasha25 | Tracing is still art. Hello, you're still changing the original image and adding your own style to it. You're telling me everyone should create their art without reference at all? I mean, because even if you're just looking at a photo to see where things go and what shapes are like, it's still a way of tracing. Even some traditional artists use the same concept and that. I have seen many who will use a reference image of someone famous for their art. So the same applies to them. So yep, I think the internet would be void of artwork if we all couldn't trace or use a reference image. Not many people can draw humans and everything like clothes, etc, and vexel/vector it perfectly. :) Oh, and quit with the bashing of Natalie, her work is the best I've seen, and it is art, no matter how she does it. Tbh, you can call anything art, no matter how it's done. |
AcidDoll |
According to my dictionary, art is a: "Manifestation of the human activity by means of which it express a personal and disinterested vision that interprets the reality or fantasy with resources either plastic, linguistic or sonorous" I think a vexel does qualify with those parameters. But I gues art it's relative, right ?? So this whole discusion dosn't make too much sence too me. I agree with nemesis, though. You are able to rate the creativity of an artist with their vexels, because there will never be a vexel exactly like the photo. |
| [DeletedUser] | [ Comment deleted at owner's request ] |
| Raelynn |
Just to put a spin on the whole 'tracing' aspect, take a read of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camera_obscura. It is debated amoung some people that some very famous artists used this technique, which was tracing, basically. |
| Hydra | emphaquist yeah i know that most of people here doesnt do vexels without a rference photo, in fact i do vexels with reference pic too. But listen. Are u able to rate the creativity of an artists watching a vexel work ? If u r able to do it well....maybe i have to reconsider my ideas! |
Chloe |
@chratz: I would agree with you on the first point; they probably have never tried vexelling. However, I'm not so sure that they are jealous, and that's too much of a stereotype. Just because someone doesn't like rap music doesn't mean that they are jealous of rappers. @Hydra: So, basically, what you are saying is that the only way for vexels to be art is if they were 100% created without reference photos? That they had to freehand everything? Well if that's how you classify pieces as art, at least 95% of the vexels here aren't art then. |
Andrea |
I'm with emphaqist.. some people here are being kinda condescending towards Natalie's work and I don't get why.. this girl has got some talent - I haven't seen anything like her work on this site before. Sure, her pieces look überrealistic and all that, but yet very digitalized. It looks real, yet way different from the original. You wouldn't say 'oh I thought it was a picture the first time I saw it' right? To me it's digital art. But again, it all depends on what you yourself consider as art. People already said it.. it's a waste of time to argue about what's art and what is not. I don 't think a person has the right to go around and say someone elses work isn 't art. It's an opinion. It's not a fact. |
| Hydra | Chratz please dont post comment like the your one. "I believe that those are people that can't create vexels. they are jelaous, that's why they talk like that. just ignore them." I like the vexels and the vector art but i think that we called it "art" only to let the people understand that is a style used in the digital works. But i still believe that the vexels art is not a real Art but is a technique! Anyways i like to make vexels too, so please the next time be more intelligent befor posting a comment like the your one! Thanks! For emphaqist: sorry but i think that u wrong! Cause when a person tracing on a paper with pencil a photo that already exist......well...that'snt art! So the same is for the vexeling! Anyways i really like what Natalie do but(!).....in the vexels you cant see the creativity of a person!!!!! Thats the point! Its all about technique!!! |
| Chloe |
It's not fair for you guys to be bashing Natalie. Would you like it for me to post publicly that I think all your vexels are not art? I don't think so. Her work is stunning. And why shouldn't we call "tracing lines" as art? Think it's too easy to be art? Pah. Perhaps on paper simply tracing isn't art- but for vexelling, I think it is. And when you think about it, it's not all tracing. Natalie and all other vexellers had to work to get the right colors and such, use gradients when appropriate, etc. It is definitely NOT 100% tracing. I am //sure// Natalie altered all of her pieces in one way or another. & even if people didn't follow the original 100%, they could've just traced from another stock photo for their accessories. I am not saying that everyone HAS to use stock photos, but I mean, just because we referred to stock photos does not say our work is not art. Plus, there are so many different techniques for vexelling- and Natalie just happens to be on realism. And I think she's doing a damn great job with her art. BTW- would you guys consider her "Wanna Study?" piece as art? |
| ohsofatalx |
i agree with Hydra. if we are just tracing lines why should we call it art. you spend timeless hours working on tracing lines? honestly photo realism is not my favorite. instead of trying to make a replica of a photo why dont you show the world what you can do by taking a photo and transforming it so that it is still beautiful but something different. something that will make you look twice at it. yes its true you cant always go by what other people think. you do what you think is right. but when you're showcasting your work you depend on the audience. |
prettybaby |
trying to define art is like trying to define happiness, a waste of time. if you like it,you worked hard on it,it means something to you,and/or you can appreciate it,its art to you. simple. you cant depend on what other people think all of the time, sometimes its only your opinion that counts. |
| chratz | I believe that those are people that can't create vexels. they are jelaous, that's why they talk like that. just ignore them. |
| Hydra | Well......if we talk about vexeling is a thing, and if we talk about vector is another one. Is called vexeling when we pick a photo and trace shapes after a posterization of that one and after colorinh those shapes with colour that already exists. That's all about vexeling! Instead, if we pick a photo and we draw things that doesnt exist in this one, like ...i dont know...Spheres, circles and much stuffs...well i can call it art! Sincerely i dont think that what Akirichan do, could be called art. Yeah obviously she's more good...very good in vexeling and i would be great like her but... she only trace shapes better than other people.....I dont know if i explained my concept well but unfortunely i dont speak so well the english! Feel free to comment what i said. |
Sarah |
I suppose it all comes down to somebody's opinion of it. In all honesty, anything that can be created is art: Writing a novel is art, drawing a smilie face is art: if you can turn something into something else, hey, that's art too. The people who are probably critisising the idea that vexels are art are probably traditional artists who don't quite understand the movement of digital art. We're heading fowards in technology, and not a lot of people understand digital art. I have to explain vexels to everybody I see lately, because I am doing them for my major work for Art this year. To these people i'm describing them to, they still think of art as a canvas covered in paint. Then again, what IS art? Marcel Duchamp took a urinal ("Fountain"), wrote a seudonym on it, and submitted it to an art gallery? Can one call that art? Well, apparently so. ;) Art can be quite obscure. The best thing to do is push the meaning of art ;) Just like Duchamp did.  |
| [DeletedUser] | [ Comment deleted at owner's request ] |
| Andrea |
I don't care whether it's art or not, as long as I enjoy creating it and looking back on it, and some other people appreciate what I do. I don't care what's in the dictionary, to me art is something beautiful created by people. Art is something personal, everyone interprets it in their own way. To one a misplaced eye and nose can be art, to another it's just a weird sketch. Everyone has a different opinion on it, at least that's what i think. I don't think you can say that it's art or that it's not. It depends on the person.. |
| artisticdork |
It all depends on the way the final peice is, alotta peoples vexels i dont consider art, like this [http://www.vexels.net/images/vexels/5664.jpg] peice I don't consider a peice of art because its just so close to the photo there wasn't anything creative about it. Now don't get me wrong, its beautiful and amazing but not art. now on the same line this [http://www.vexels.net/images/vexels/4966.jpg] I belive even though its really realistic and again beautiful is art because you can see the artistic nature of it. * the only reason i used who i used isbecause the vexels literally popped out at me, lol |
| chuckeroo | I totally agree =). Thanks for posting it. |
Zenith |
The Free Dictionary definition of art: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dict.asp?Word=art See definitions 1, 2, and 3. According to that, art is "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." It has nothing to do with creativity, but beauty. If you think your vexel is beautiful, and want to call it art, you have every right to do so. To me, my vexels are art. |
| adroit | I have often questioned the credibility of this art form, but i am with you, something that takes you a long time, u put passion into and emotion is an art form in my books! KEEP ON VEXELING!!! WE ROCK! |
| grrlissa | When someone says "thats so easy, it's just tracing" Ask them to do one.....then see how "easy" a decent one is to make. |
| Raelynn |
Im torn a bit. I find myself appreciating what I do more if Its MY photo that I create from rather than just some celebrity photo. I definately dont feel right sainyg what is art and was is not art. |
Rick |
An artist will use a photo as a guide to create, we use a photo to create. It all comes down to the same thing creativity. If you weren't bound by the guide lines here then you would sketch a picture then scan it, then using all the tools available in photoshop, to create a portrait. It still would be the same, you used your skills and creativity to complete the portrait. Edit---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I cannot do without something which is greater than I, which is my life--the power to create. ~Vincent Van Gogh |
| kilxover | That really pisses me off when I get a comment like, but isnt that tracing that just disregards all my time effort and not to mention creativity I consider myself a digital artist for the reason that I create digital art! I consider vexeling, art who is to say that it isnt, someone who has never even vexeled before or someone who is confused about the concept. Ok, first of all think about shazs comment about the Mona Lisa he was standing right in front of her trying to create an exact replica of the image in front of him. Now this goes even farther into digital painting about half of the people actually have the image as a layer underneath what they are working on and people consider that not cheating because it is a reference. Hello people isnt that the same thing |
| btmui | Like shelley said, art is opionion and only the artist can define their own work. what makes a vexel/vector any different than a charicature or a painting? both often involve copying a picture and adding one's own style yet they are called art without any doubts. Like any new form of "art", it takes a while to gain acceptance. Picasso's works were highly rejected for many years before critics finally decided it was "art". Perhaps that's just the case with vexels. Who knows, five, ten years from now these could be printed out and plastered all over museums. |
| shelley | I agree. Art is just all opinion. Only the creator itself should be able to define their own work as art or not. I mean, take modern art, for example; Some people might think a frigging toilet cover is a work of art, while others don't. It's just like "good" art and "bad" art; it's all just a matter of opinion, as everyone looks at everything through different perspectives. |
| [DeletedUser] | [ Comment deleted at owner's request ] |
| Echoia | Ya'll made me curious, and this was the most common result: Origin Originated in the British parliament in the 18th century as a contraction of 'hear him, hear him'. It is still often heard there although sometimes used ironically these days. (hear hear) ... doofuses |
| [DeletedUser] | [ Comment deleted at owner's request ] |
Carina |
Martswite- 'here here?' 'hear hear' :D. I agree with Linda and Echo. To me, it doesn't matter if it's art. I just call it a piece. |
Linda |
I can see what they're saying. What do we (vexellers) do? We take all of that hard work someone else has done, trace over it - yes, we trace over it and then get compliments about how cool the hair style or top is. We take for granted that there is cool lighting and stripey eyeshadow. When we see a vexel of someone at an unusual angle.. how many of the comments are "ooh I love the angle!" - is that anything to do with the vexelling? No! We are taking credit for someone else's creativity. However (of course there has to be one!). A lot of the vexels on this site aren't like that at all! People go all out to change the photos from the original. A great example would be Natalie's competition entry. She got the base body, each bit of clothing from somewhere else, the arm/books from somewhere else or basically made a collage of exactly what she wanted. This is what you can do when you're not a photographer or when you don't have the means to take the dream photo you want. Not all of us have a spare model hanging around. We do this for fun, it's not practical for us to go and hire a studio and a model and sit there taking photographs all day just so we can vexel them! If we wanted to photograph, we'd be a photographers.net. And of course there is the whole stylized thing.. many vexels look nothing like photographs and aren't meant to. I feel somewhat bad every time I submit a new vexel because I _am_ using someone else's creativity to my advantage and I get credit for it. But, I don't care if Joe Blow doesn't think it's officially "art", I don't care if I think it's "art". Art is just a word. I just make vexels because it's fun and I enjoy it. Art Schmart. |
Manda |
I agree with you 100%. I had shown a friend a vexel, she used to vexel. She said "It's good, but i want to do something more creative than just copying a picture. Well, it's not just copying. If it were, why do they all look different, right? |
| Shaz | Ok - I have to seriously rant on this on with you. Art is of course a matter of taste - it's opinion based and of course we all know that an opinion is neither right nor wrong - it's something we can either agree with or disgree with. It annoys me when people say - ah but you only trace the image, you rely on the original - I am sorry, but have you ever seen a vexel on this site which is100% like the photo? NO. Every vexeller has their own style and it's the style that makes it art. I don't care what people think personally - I call my work art and I regard myself as a digital artist. I put a lot of work into what I do and I invest time and emotion into. I get a lot from what I do and I would proudly display 80% of my _art_ on my walls - as it is to my taste. One of the most famous paintings of all time... the Mona Lisa... Da Vinci got her to sit infront of him in sessions... he was painting directly what was infront of him... I am sure should the technology had been around he would have taken a photo and used it as a guide at the side of him... he maybe would have finished it faster. I am certainly not comparing vexels to the same standard as Da Vinci's work - but you have to look at it at it's most simipliest forms... we use a reference image, our style is what makes it different. And personally... I prefer to put Shelley's Electric Girl or my Boys of Summer on a wall than the Mona Lisa. |
| Echoia | /edit/With this 'hard to make' thing so many people are throwing out I'm seriously coming to appreciate the beautiful art of ditch-digging. There's some hard art to make. I bet if people know anything about ditches they can see styles and techniques used to dig 'em, too, which just further goes to prove that it is art. And poop! There's all kinds of poop! Yes, that's right- I'm mocking people because I feel like it ; ) I'm ill, love me anyway./edit=die/ I don't consider the trace-vectors art really and I do not feel bad if someone says that they are not art. Nothing is more or less than what it is and words don't define the essence of something. Hard work does not always art make. Are you proud of what you have finished? If you are truly proud of it then you should find a place inside yourself to let it be where you do not allow the opinions of other people touch what you've done. If you're not proud of it and so peoples opinions will just remind you of that then don't put it out there in the first place to get torn down. Clearly they help to develop graphic techniques that can be used in innumerable future endeavors and if people do dare to get creative with their attempts then that is also good for breeding artistry but I still do not view them as art. Can you add artistic flair to something that is not actually 'art'? In my book, yes. Just because you change something does not really make it art to me, so I guess it comes down to what do you consider art. I'm way old school and I think that art should be something that comes from a person. I created a vector displayed here (of my eye) in which I took the photo intending to share something with a person in particular. I did not tell him so- I was sad and I wanted him to see me but I didn't know if he would pick up on it. I then vectored it in greyscale except for my iris which I made blue. Now, I'm not one to go around calling my own stuff art because it is relative but I had something to say and I used what tools I had at my disposal to say it. I did not just spray paint across it, 'I'm sad' because I wanted people to be able to relate to it however they might. My latest piece was done from absolutely nothing using techniques I've learned in the last 15 months, and it has a lot to say as well (which probably won't be revealed until much later). In the end I am proud of both of these things. Do they have flaws? Probably. I am proud of them though and whether or not someone wishes to call them art bears no weight on what they are. I am also proud of my trace vectors because whatever they amount to they have taught me skills that I cherish. |
Liz |
Amen. |
| martswite | Here Here |