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

blu_22 May 29 2007, 02:16:35 UTC
I don't exactly see icons/banners/etc as FANART even though I know people do them mostly for their favorite fandoms. I see icons as an art form all their own. Fanart mostly to me is the artists personal rendition of the characters in a situation/setting/pose of their choosing. It's something that's DRAWN in some medium. I usually don't consider photographs or any manipulation of them as fanart.

Reply

glockgal May 29 2007, 19:36:28 UTC
Fanart mostly to me is the artists personal rendition of the characters in a situation/setting/pose of their choosing.Yes! My original belief as well! And then ( ... )

Reply


djinnj May 29 2007, 05:43:59 UTC
*snerk* I once had a professor ask the class (it was an aesthetics course) to define "art" and we were pretty much stuck. The only thing we could agree on in the end was that subjective opinions of quality had nothing to do with classifying something as art, although most people get hung up on quality as a determining factor.

So, basically, everything you listed is art, whether I like its manifestations or not. That it be "fan" art would require that it has some sort of fannish intention behind its creation, though, and not just something adopted as relevant.

And, for your delectation, I offer one of the rare manips I've done, because I think it's funny. And although it fits my definition of art, I don't consider it "good" art. :D

... )

Reply

glockgal May 29 2007, 19:45:30 UTC
As always, the voice of reason and correctness. *snoogles you*

I agree wholeheartedly. There are a few of the stuff I've listed that while can sometimes be quite clever (ie, your photo manip - HEEEEE! So subtle! So effective!), they simply aren't very skillfull/talent-oriented. Every now and then we get some artistic genius is blessed with both clever/wit and skill/talent, but that's not always the case.

Of course, talent in itself can be such a debateable thing! *hee* This was definitely an interesting and fun poll to pose!

Reply


kayen May 29 2007, 07:54:36 UTC
Ehm, to clarify slightly...
1. Vectors that are just a copy 'painted' on top of a photo... annoy me. More artistic vector graphics impress me. :)
2. I didn't admit to making manips. Because I only did one out of desperation. XD And manips made by other people usually make me go 'huh?' They're only rarely entertaining. ;)

Reply

glockgal May 29 2007, 19:48:26 UTC
More artistic vector graphics impress me. :)

AGREED! Wholeheartedly. :D :D

*hee* I tend to find manips entertaining, but usually for the wrong reasons. Or rather, the reasons the manipper did not intend, fwahah. *point to your icon* I saw that in hp_fringeart, I think! That's a good case in point - is that icon considered fanart on its own? Or is it just the manip itself that should be considered fanart, and the icon a graphic (fangraphic)? Fanart within a fanart?

Ohhh, I'm feeling so Hamletian, ahahah!

Reply

kayen May 29 2007, 20:03:32 UTC
*laughs* I don't think I'd consider it fanart at all, just a silly excuse for posting at hpart (where I assume you saw it) and so pimp a poll for my litcrit essay. XD

But at least I have a new 'HP' icon now. ;)

Didn't even know there was such a thing as hp_fringeart. I feel so out of touch with fandom. It's like a foreign country now. XD

Reply


mieronna May 29 2007, 08:15:37 UTC
For me fanart is what (in traditional sense) is art: created from scratch by the creator - that is drawn, painted, sculpted etc by the artist - either digital or traditional. Icon, banners, photomanips and all that are graphics. While graphics are (or can be) artistic, just for me, I don't count them as fanart. I don't really have any opinion about 3D art, simply because I have no idea how it's made.

So basically, what cathybites said - fine art (illustration) and graphic art. Keep them apart, people.

Reply

glockgal May 29 2007, 19:51:46 UTC
I also like the idea of keeping 'fanart' and 'graphic fanart' as two separate categories, as well. I'm also a stickler for fanfic writers specifying 'movie canon' or 'book canon' in their notes/descriptions, when it comes to fandoms like HP, LoTR, comicbooks, etc. :D

Man, I'm such a bureaucrat, ahaha. Yay categorizing everything!

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

glockgal May 29 2007, 19:55:03 UTC
You mean you DON'T enjoy people taking Dean's head and pastede it on the body of some gay porn dude's body that happens to not even be the same skin tone as Dean's hed? OH BUT WHY.

On the other hand, without the fine art of photomanip, there would be no picture of Jared with that pancake on his head. Which was truly pure genius in so many ways, if I didn't tell you that already. XD

Reply


Leave a comment

Up