Fanart, good god! What is it good for....Er. Anyway.

May 28, 2007 16:53

My journal is apparently only about polls. I can't meta, so I poll ( Read more... )

metajunk, fanart

Leave a comment

Comments 81

hp5freak May 29 2007, 01:02:34 UTC
I wouldn't say that I am a fanartist...more like a fancrafter.

*sheepish grin*

Reply

glockgal May 29 2007, 18:55:34 UTC
Craft is fanart, imo! Well, I included craft (at least I thought my wording would cover it, but apparently not) as the poll option "hand-drawn/handmade traditional (2D and 3D)". I figured hand made is hand made, whether it's 2D or 3D. Maybe I should have given craftwork its own special category; I didn't consider that people might possibly think 2d or 3d handmade isn't fanart! O.o

Reply

hp5freak May 30 2007, 02:34:09 UTC
Well, crap...

Apparently I need an icon that says, "Hello, I am a tool..."

Okay, if handcrafts counts, then yes, I suppose I am a fanartist...of sorts...*laughs*

Sorry...I misread stuff all the time. I oughta work on that...

I feel a bit like Homer now... "They have the internet on computers now..."

Reply

pepperjackcandy May 31 2007, 03:51:55 UTC
That's all right. I answered "other" to cover my fanknitting (though I've only done one or two pieces so far). 8-)

Must go back and change to "handmade."

Squee!

Reply


ex_ella_bane358 May 29 2007, 01:19:08 UTC
I enjoy most kinds of fan art. The only 'art' I truly don't like are photo manipulations.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

glockgal May 29 2007, 18:59:28 UTC
*hee* The grey area really fluctuates between people, I think. Which is of course a very cool thing. I made this poll mostly to satiate my own curiousity and also to show people all the variety of fanworks that different people in different fandoms consider fanart.

Some fandoms depend more on manips/graphics than illustrations/paintings, and therefore that is a person's primary vision of fanart.

At least, I'm guessing. For obvious reasons, I've never lasted long in that sort of fandom. *hee*

Reply


scarletscarlet May 29 2007, 01:42:43 UTC
The "something else": I think I'd mention fanvids in the "art" category (as opposed to "story") as well. Sorta closer to photo-manips, I guess, in that the person making it has to look for the right images from existing footage to do the thing they want. But then, it's all tied into the music as well... no, I still think it can be put under "fan art" rather than a category of it's own.

My own chicken-scratchings are done in PS, and I like best to look at 2d digital and traditional (so long as it scans/photographs in nicely) media.

Reply

scarletscarlet May 29 2007, 01:44:47 UTC
Oh - I'm using "art" as a catch-all for anything visual (I actually sorta hate the term), because skill and execution etc are just a matter of degree. Sometimes stuff is awesome, sometimes not so much, but a drawing is a drawing :).

Reply

glockgal May 29 2007, 19:19:32 UTC
I personally consider fanvidding is a category of its own. It is not a fanwork that is applicable to all fandoms, certainly; but the skillset used to make a fanvideo is, to me, so completely different to the skillset used to make any of the fanworks I've listed in the poll.

*thinks*

Of course, then we brush the realm of animation, which can be considered fanart and requires both an graphic/artistic/design sensibility as well as a timing/editing/tehcnical skill.

Fanvids most definitely have a welcome and delightful place in fandom and, when done well are simply amazing and well-watching, for sure! And perhaps if by 'fanart' one defines it as 'anything visual', then I can see that PoV. I choose to differentiate because of the vastly different talents/skills used.

Interesting point of view!

Reply

scarletscarlet May 29 2007, 19:50:30 UTC
Hm. If you think of the sort of things that end up in art galleries, though... I remember a Patricia Piccinini exhibition I saw last year sometime (I'm not a regular gallery-goer, but she stands out because of the massive variety of her work ( ... )

Reply


leelastarsky May 29 2007, 01:50:43 UTC
I wouldn't have included photomanips and icons under fanart, but they are I guess. They are made by fans and there's some artistic arrangement involved (even if it is someone else's art/photo/whatever). I've done a couple of photomanips myself that I probably would have slid into the pardody catogory until I really thought about it. And, I guess (in my snobbish way!) so many of the manips are so godawful that they're funny, and it's easy to consider those parodies as well. Even if they weren't meant that way! ;~P
I've definitely seen photomanips (Harry/Draco leap to mind) that would have to be classified as fanart. They go with a story etc.

I wasn't sure what you meant by vector drawn, but if you meant Illustrator, then, yes, I'd add those to the fanart catagory too, cos I've seen some fabulous Illustrator art (and have done some myself - see icon) Haven't done any myself in a LONG time though cos my Illustrator program disk is no longer readable for some reason! WOE.

Reply

glockgal May 29 2007, 19:27:15 UTC
Re: Vector - yes those things that people can do with Illustrator and they are so bloody brilliant I want to drool in wonder forver at them? YESSSS. :D :D

And see! I guess because we both have this fandomy background of consistently large fanartist communities (in HP and Star Wars and LoTR and comicbooks, etc), we've always had that kneejerk reaction that manips are present in the fandom world, but not exactly fanart.

It was only when I started looking in other fandoms (particularily TV and music fandoms) that I realized that fanart was either not prevalent at all, or mostly photomanips. And I was like O.o. And I swallowed hard and tried to see why people liked (and sometimes even preferred!!! over trad art) photomanips.

It's interesting how fanfic is pretty much an accepted thing pan-fandom, but fanart is really touch and go and hit and miss from fandom to fandom!

Reply


Leave a comment

Up