Fine Art + CG = CG Society outrage?

I posted a thread on the CGSociety’s forum yesterday to try and find out if there was anyone out there who was fusing fine art and CGI. It provoked a few heated responses (as anyone who’s ever posted in a forum will understand) and some interesting suggestions/links which I’ll add here in time.

What came out of it was a feeling that the CG industry still holds sway over the type of work being produced by CG artists. There simply isn’t enough autonomy in the art form to allow reflection on what CGI can and does do. I also get the feeling that the software can be so complex for artists that it’s far easier just to make a drawing or a sculpture. There was also quite a bit of criticism of Craig Kalpakjian’s work (I suggested his work as an example of fine art CGI) from a technical, and artistic, perspective. His image of a CG turd might have been the straw that broke the camel’s back!

That said, kudos must be given to those CG artists who do break boundaries and experiment, a lot of whom are in the links to the right, another one here. It seems that to venture into the financially insecure territory of fine art CGI (CGI for it’s own sake) requires commitment and bravery. Too often, however, their innovative ideas become co-opted by brands who want an ‘edgy’ ad. Still, you’ve got to make a living.

I also recieved a really interesting message from a 'Maya Master’ - for those who don’t know what that is, see here . He was really disillusioned with the compartmentalisation of the CG industry (you generally specialise in lighting, rigging, modelling etc…) and felt that the current state of the CG industry didn’t faciliate independent creativity and experimentation.

So, despite the mauling, the thread had some interesting results.

Now I’m starting to consider posting examples of the work in the CG Society’s gallery to fine artists to find out what they think. It’d probably be equally as controversial.