Ches Dragon

22nd December 2002 03:52 UTC

WVS Remix Contest
Ok, so making presets only goes a certain way. We just love to remix files.

I made an AVS about 4 months ago called 'Nuclear Daze' Its really simple, funny looking, and slow.

GREAT ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENTS,

I am holding a contest to see who, can make the greatest remix out of this AVS,
I hope everyone gets involves has fun,
And I hope we get some cool results!

dirkdeftly

22nd December 2002 05:48 UTC

No offense, but it's a really simple preset; remixing it [well] would be virtually making a new preset.

Also, when mixing red, green, and blue light, you get yellow (red/green), cyan (green/blue), and magenta (red/blue), as well as white - as well as shades in-between, depending on color levels. Orange is made with 2 parts red and 1 part green (bright orange = 256 red + 128 green), purple is pretty much just half magenta (128 red + 128 blue).

Ches Dragon

22nd December 2002 07:03 UTC

No actually without being a smartass, you can be an AVS artist without superscopes.
Most of you are so stuck in this idea that if an AVS isnt complex it isnt good?!.
Try anyway,
I have made a couple, you can make some interesting things.

Or perhaps Ill post a new AVS for you to try out.

Ches Dragon

22nd December 2002 07:05 UTC

I guarantee youll have more fun with this,
And by the way, I forgot to apologise for the code ripping off,
But in my upcoming pack, Dragon Dreams,

Ie learned to code for myself finallY :D :cool:

UnConeD

22nd December 2002 13:52 UTC

We don't use superscopes because we think the existing components suck, but because code gives us more control. Why settle for a 'moving particle' when you can write it yourself AND control it the way you want?

The fact that people regard scoped and dm'ed presets higher is because it shows that the person spent a lot of time with his preset and performed a conscious effort with it. Anyone can throw together a bunch of random stuff and hope it comes out nice (no offense btw).
However you can spend just as much time tuning existing components.

In general, the rule in free publishing societies is that the perceived value of an item is determined by its uniqueness w/ regards to other items.
That's why modern paintings, which usually don't hold up in visual quality when compared to e.g. old realist paintings, still attract people: the painter tried something different and unique.
And what about mondrian? Some of his paintings are purely based on his ability to perfectly draw solid areas and straight lines. Is it artistic? Well considering they're scattered in museums around the world, yes.
If you take a bucket of paint and throw it on a canvas, you're doing essentially the same as the first action painter, but your stuff won't be put up in a museum.

dirkdeftly

22nd December 2002 19:28 UTC

Somehow I guess saying "Gee, thanx for calling me a smartass for no apparent reason whatsoever" doesn't really work...

Ches Dragon

28th December 2002 08:13 UTC

Well, to me, Art can be good without complexity, For example, Some of my presets, have been awfully simple yet quite nice, In my upcoming pack, Ive grown more complex, adding more Scopes and DMs, but Im just not good at maths, My coding is improving. Im stupid at maths, but good at english, essentially im incapable. I like my AVS though, perhaps you would too, check out my Anarchy pack.
Its on Winamp.com

mikm

30th December 2002 04:14 UTC

I agree more or less...my first preset (although unpublished) was only three moving particles (r,g,b), water, and blitter feedback. This looked neat though.

In the real world, modern art can be very simple- a black dot in the corner of a canvas.

Jaheckelsafar

30th December 2002 07:43 UTC

I think a lot of modern art in the world is worthless except for the name attached to it. Never did like it much. I always thought it looked pretty ugly. Call me uncultured, but I feel I should want to look at art and appreciate it for how it looks, not what it's supposed to represent.

AVS is all about making what you like to see, and damn what the other guy wants. It's all about self gratification. If other people like your stuff, great, good for them. If they don't screw 'em.

Anyway, I'm not much of a remixer of other people's stuff. Nothing from me for this contest.

dirkdeftly

30th December 2002 22:16 UTC

amen to that...a black circle in a white square is not art - it's just a black circle in a white square. ;)

UnConeD

30th December 2002 23:54 UTC

Modern art is like most art really... my opinion is that you either like a piece of art, or you don't. Most people walk through a modern art museum at variable pace, only spending time with the things that interest them.

And you might say that you like a 'real' painting better than the 'dot on a canvas', but when you walk through an entire museum of those classic pictures (try the Louvre :)) and multiply that by a span of a couple of hundred years, you'll understand why more unorthodox forms of painting (and art in general) sprung up.

One of the most modern forms of art is film. And then I'm not talking about the run-of-the-mill hollywood action flick or romantic comedy, but real visual masterpieces that use video to its fullest and not just a story-with-pictures: to see what I mean, watch Avalon (Mamoru Oshii). Probably too slow for many people, in terms of dialogue it is very minimalistic, yet manages to tell a complicated tale that is very contemporary. One of my favourite films.

Another cool one: Lola Rennt (aka 'Run Lola Run', Tom Tykwer). Intricately constructed and very cool to watch. Very flashy and fast plus it has one of the best, appropriate techno soundtracks in a film.

And if you don't mind a film filled with sarcasm and general finger-pointing at most aspects of modern society, try Ghost World (Terry Zwigoff).

In any case, a lot people like the mentioned movies, and as many hate them. Which is exactly why they are so cool :).

Jaheckelsafar

31st December 2002 01:17 UTC

Ah, I tend not to stick movies in with art. I lump them with literature as stories (with a few expections). To me, art is pretty much something static; which is why I don't consider ASV as art.

dirkdeftly

31st December 2002 02:05 UTC

art is a generalized term for anything that pleases the eye. art doesn't have to be static, nor does it have to be two-dimensional. however, you shouldn't judge something on it's 'hidden meanings', as you can make hidden meanings for any randomly generated string of words - 'smells like teen spirit' comes to mind :)

btw, unconed, do you know of the quatsi series? powanisquatsi, powasquatsi, i think konanisquatsi - probably all speeld rong, but who cares ;)

EnDurA

3rd January 2003 11:25 UTC

Art is basicly everything and anything that gives the person viewing or listening a disired feeling or memory.

legohead

5th January 2003 23:28 UTC

art is??
Art is being able to do what you want to do by combining skills with an idea. I.e. a painting is just a manifestation of an idea. A white circle in a black square can have a very powerful meaning.

For example an article I've read in TIME magazine. It had a large black box at the top of the article. Underneath it said - 'this square is white'. The column then went onto explain how communism and other social/political structure control thought and destroy the power of free thought (by creating a unified thought which was not allowed to be questioned). For its application - the black square was a very powerful image when applied to this philosophy.

If .avs is art (which I believe it is) - it is simply being able to create your idea using the available tools. Using knowledge to make an idea work - that is art. You don't have to be a michelangelo (who used paint methodology, brush technique, a philosophy of the human form etc to create his art).

If the dude has created something with a few dots - thats fikn wicked. Could he be a better artist if he knew superscopes and maths? It depends on his ideas.
Instead of telling him its crap and whats wrong with it - try telling him a better way of doing it.
That is how all great artists have learn't.

Good artists borrow - Great artist steal - Brett Whitley

dirkdeftly

6th January 2003 00:06 UTC

Yes, but the piece itself doesn't have a meaning whatsoever. If the artist wished to convey that meaning, they should do it explicitly (or at least semi-explicitly).
One of my favorite quotes (the originator of whom I have no idea) is "Just because nobody understands you doesn't mean you're an artist." Speaking of which, that "good artists borrow..." quote is more of a proverb than a quote - I could probably list a thousand (famous) people who have said that publicly, from the 1400s onward...

legohead

6th January 2003 03:12 UTC

art and meaning
Well in that case I guess he really lives up to what he says ' correct? :)

Ches Dragon

6th January 2003 03:23 UTC

For hells sake, The whole point is that art doesnt have to be complex to be good. And AVS is no exception,
I dont care if its not copmplex, On my Music PC, I just ahve so many AVS packs always in random that you can never look at one for over 30 seconds, who cares, ITS JUST SUPPOSED TO BLOODY LOOK GOOD!
AVS doesnt get chicks, earn jobs or make money,
IT JUST LOOKS GOOD,
You dont have to try so hard to make these things which only 0.00001%
of the population gives a hoot about! :mad:

Jaheckelsafar

6th January 2003 05:44 UTC

But you're talking to the 0.00001% of the population that does care. It just so happens that the 0.00001% of the 0.00001% thet are here now tend to like the flexability the SSC and DM afford them.

True, most people don't care how much work goes into making these. But for some, that's what it's all about.

dirkdeftly

6th January 2003 18:57 UTC

But he does have a point...we're here to learn, not to try to define the meaning of the word 'art' :p

anubis2003

6th January 2003 22:38 UTC

The whole point is that art doesnt have to be complex to be good.

You dont have to try so hard to make these things which only 0.00001% of the population gives a hoot about!

Tuggummi

8th January 2003 19:23 UTC

Not to impress others? Does that mean "not to get any feedback"? I don't think anyone of us would make avs presets if we wouldn't get any feedback about it... i don't think i would be writing this today if nobody would ever say: "Hey, i enjoyed your work. Good effort." or "I would suggest that you...". I mean good or bad, we all like to get comments about our work. Our wanting to make avs is to please others and to get critisism and learn of our mistakes. The number of downloads (which some people consider top priority) to your avs pack tells you how many people have downloaded and installed it into their system, but a comment tells you wheter or not the person liked your work. And that is what drives me forward. I would be lying if i would say that i would still be making presets even if people wouldn't enjoy my work. If people hate your work, what point is it to do it? To piss off the person who wasted his time downloading, installing and viewing your presets?

Oh and a black dot on a white canvas does have only one meaning. It makes you think what the hell it should present or mean! :D

anubis2003

8th January 2003 21:05 UTC

Personally, I don't care whether or not others like it, as long as I like it. If they want me to change something in one of my presets and I agree with them then I will change it, but if they don't like what I'm doing and I don't agree with what they want me to change then I won't change it. I'm not doing this for their pleasure. If I was, then I would expect some sort of payment in return. I'm doing it for myself and if others like it then more power to them.

legohead

8th January 2003 22:13 UTC

I design avs to integrate into my vj lineup.
Its awesome to get feedback from the crowd - but its even more fun just making avs, or putting a show together, or even just doing some deco.

dirkdeftly

8th January 2003 22:52 UTC

now, really...AVS is NOT the thing to run at parties; try katafx or the hypnogenic screensaver.

Jaheckelsafar

9th January 2003 04:54 UTC

I don't see anything wrong with AVS at parties. It's decently stable, looks cool and, with an uber-system, decently fast.

dirkdeftly

9th January 2003 05:39 UTC

That's the hard part - getting an uber-system. Anything decently different will be too low-rez anyway.

VisualAgnosia

9th January 2003 12:12 UTC

now, really...AVS is NOT the thing to run at parties

Raz

9th January 2003 16:13 UTC

Is this thread going to drag on forever, changing topics as it goes along?

3dino

9th January 2003 17:22 UTC

I make a wallpaper and an useful movement:

legohead

9th January 2003 22:20 UTC

VJ
Actually I only use .avs for portions of the set - usually when Im running around organising the rest of the party!
Im trying to get my hands on a cheap video mixer, learn open gl, build a video library etc - so that I can do alot more. However programs like motiondive, visual jockey, arkaos vj etc are fikn great for mixing 2d effects with video, opengl renders etc.

Has anyone else checked out the zynth demo yet?

VisualAgnosia

14th January 2003 06:52 UTC

To set the record STRAIGHT
Hope no one minds me bringing this up. If they do, just ignore it. I didn't read the initial posts before my reply but I just did then and I almost had a fit.

I am a highly studied artist I have won three significant festival prises. My father is a highly recognised (but not rich)-->(means something) artist that has dedicated is life to it and being bought up by him I have learnt and infintesible amount from him, from when I can remember.
I know that making a career in art is pointless and even if I decided to do that you have to sellout before you can make money before you die ! except for perhaps 1 in a million ppl eg. Like AndyWorhol etc etc. I've always been scientificly minded and I apprecite the work of
Ned Kahnwho is my idol.
check it out and you'll see what I mean. So I'm studing science because it's one of the things I'm good at. Along with art. I'm a more experienced artist than scientist which I've just started. Dont ask what sort of art because there's too many to mention here.

Two things

1. For people arguing about what art is and not one person came up with the correct answer ..(its liable for major argument which has been done for centuries) the consensus and If you care is that ..
Art = an installation dont bother argueing that becuase you may aswell argue that the speed of light is as fast a finely groomed pitbull falling out of a helicopter.

So yes Art is AVS, and if you set up a dining table put an anvil on it then throw up all over it and put a little sign on it called "My vision of night, by Fred Smith" Then it is art. If you want to argue with me you wont win. Wheather you like it or not doesn't matter.

2. Infulential POWER ;;;;;;;

Minimalism ... the strongest force in the artistic universe. Best way to describe in is, it's like using a machine gun in a battlefied where everyone is fighting with swords. It you use it correctly you can overcome and bewilder large amounts of people but then again if you use it wrong you can end up (killing everybody including all your own people, in that analogy ) and basicaly having everyone look down on you as if you are shit.

The reason Minimalism is so powerfull is because of CONCEPTUAL CONTRAST, as far as any artistic concept and other phylisophical concepts are concerned too. The conceptual mechanics are hard to describe in text in a few paragraphs but it's kind of like explaing the quantam nature of leptons. Minimalisim is the best template to start a masterpiece. Minamalismic intent can produe enourmous amounts of emotion, feeling, realisation, and many other states of mind. One of the best hexamples is Orchestra( like movie soundtracks too ). The use of minimalism and then complexity to invoke emotion, or other combinations for different feelings, each posibility of combination for each concivable state of mind .

There are an infinate amount of states of mind - An infinate amount of different forms of Art even in each genrea. An infinate amount of forms of intent. My father said " a blank page has an infinate amount of different posibilites of what you can draw on it". An empty AVS screen and code Has an infinate amount of possiblities of what YOU can put in it.

As far as mininalism is concerned with the white canvas with a black dot, it is a matter of grasping an freezing the state of mind where the initial stages of production are concerned and let the viewer's mind do the rest to where the person viewing, is inclined to go. I could say SO much more but, even a three year old could do that right?.

I'll stop now because I don't know who actually cares about this sort of thing. But if you do AVS and concideryour self NOT an artist then I pity you. There are many other programs out ther specificaly for maths or science. AVS is intended to go along with one of the oldest most popular forms of art

MUSIC :winamp:

Seriously check out Ned Kahn (search engine) if your interested in both science and art. He made an indoor whirlwind generator (frickken amasing) amongst other things.

Viz:igor:ual:igor:z:igor:Gone:igor:Abs:igor:tracT

dirkdeftly

14th January 2003 19:57 UTC

If you argue with me, you won't win

VisualAgnosia

15th January 2003 03:27 UTC

Just something I've spent too much time on .. did you have a look at Ned Kahn??? I rekon you might like his work.