Talk: GIF->ASCII: Is it Art?

In article <199...@acad.drake.edu>,  <pk6...@acad.drake.edu> wrote:
>> I'm sorry, call me ignorant, but where is the challenge behing using a 
>> converter (I am asuming that is what is indicated by "GIF->ASCII") to create 
>> this "art" when it is such basic forms, someone could most likely do them 
>> real easy, freehand????  
>> I mean, is it art to use a photocopier when you could use a pencil???
>> Sorry...I just don't understand...
>> aDRIAN.
>
>You are absolutely right.  Given unlimited time and sufficient experience
>and imagination any number of pre-existing artworks could be redrawn in
>ascii chars.  Not to mention any number of NEW artworks (usually the most
>impressive anyway :-).
>
>However, the number of available ascii drawings is totally dwarfed by the
>number of available bit-mapped graphics, and if you want to create a few
>pics for display on non-graphics terminals conversion is one way to do 
>that.
>
>Anyway, my experience is that after people play around with the conversion
>program for a while they understand its limitations and not that much
>converted art gets uploaded.
>
>For the many non-graphics-terminal users out there it comes as a big WOW
>when they see a 'picture' on their screen for the first time.  They
>aren't sophisticated enough to appreciate the difference between converted
>and hand-drawn pics.
>
>As for what 'art' is... 

   Art is whatever creates a, usually, desired impression.  Clouds are 
art, splattered paint is art, arrangement of objects is art.  So is page 
making, cooking, making hot air balloons, architecture, music, and 
anything else you can think of.

   My comments on GIF conversions is that they serve their purpose.  
Somebody who is not that talented, can make a picture that may give 
pleasure to those who view it.  Great.

   And BTW, making a 'good' conversion isn't necessarily that easy 
either.  If you read about it in the FAQ, you have an understanding of 
it, even without doing it.

   Here's to all kinds of ASCII art.

--
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
//////##### //### //#### //##### //#### //### /##### ///#### //## /## /## /
////## /////## ///## /## /## /## /## ///## ///## /## /## /## /## /## /## //
////#### //## ///###### /##### //#### /## ///##### //## /## /## /## /## ///
//////## /## ///## /## /## ## //## ///## ///## ## //## /## /## /## /## ////
/##### ///### /## /## /## /## /#### //### /## /## //#### ///######## //////
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Bob Allison (bob...@wwa.com) wrote:

: In article <199...@acad.drake.edu>,  <pk6...@acad.drake.edu> wrote:
: >> I'm sorry, call me ignorant, but where is the challenge behing using a 
: >> converter (I am asuming that is what is indicated by "GIF->ASCII") to create 
: >> this "art" when it is such basic forms, someone could most likely do them 
: >> real easy, freehand????  
: >> I mean, is it art to use a photocopier when you could use a pencil???
: >> Sorry...I just don't understand...
: >> aDRIAN.
: >

[deleted]

: >As for what 'art' is... 

:    Art is whatever creates a, usually, desired impression.  Clouds are 
                                                              ^^^^^^^^^^
: art, splattered paint is art, arrangement of objects is art.  So is page
  ^^^
I can't agree, here.  A picture of clouds might be art, but not the clouds
themselves unless they are man-made.  I think that the one requirement of
art is that it is a product of human activity.  If you look at the Indo-
European root of the word 'art' which is related to the word 'arm', it 
means 'to make.'  So an arrangement of clouds or a sunset may be beautiful, 
but they are not art.
 
: making, cooking, making hot air balloons, architecture, music, and 
: anything else you can think of.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No, it must be the product of human activity.

[deleted]
B

In article <34ecqn$be...@gagme.wwa.com> rl3...@netcom.com (Zeus Paleologos) writes:

>:    Art is whatever creates a, usually, desired impression.  Clouds are 
>                                                              ^^^^^^^^^^
>: art, splattered paint is art, arrangement of objects is art.  So is page
>  ^^^
>I can't agree, here.  A picture of clouds might be art, but not the clouds
>themselves unless they are man-made.  I think that the one requirement of
>art is that it is a product of human activity.  If you look at the Indo-
>European root of the word 'art' which is related to the word 'arm', it 
>means 'to make.'  So an arrangement of clouds or a sunset may be beautiful, 
>but they are not art.


Compare to the word ARTificial.........


Adrian.

From article <34ecqn$be...@gagme.wwa.com>, by rl3...@netcom.com (Zeus Paleologos):
> 
> Bob Allison (bob...@wwa.com) wrote:
> 
> : In article <199...@acad.drake.edu>,  <pk6...@acad.drake.edu> wrote:
> : >> I'm sorry, call me ignorant, but where is the challenge behing using a 
> : >> converter (I am asuming that is what is indicated by "GIF->ASCII") to create 
> : >> this "art" when it is such basic forms, someone could most likely do them 
> : >> real easy, freehand????  
> : >> I mean, is it art to use a photocopier when you could use a pencil???
> : >> Sorry...I just don't understand...
> : >> aDRIAN.
> : >
> 
> [deleted]
> 
> : >As for what 'art' is... 
> 
> :    Art is whatever creates a, usually, desired impression.  Clouds are 
>                                                               ^^^^^^^^^^
> : art, splattered paint is art, arrangement of objects is art.  So is page
>   ^^^
> I can't agree, here.  A picture of clouds might be art, but not the clouds
> themselves unless they are man-made.  I think that the one requirement of
> art is that it is a product of human activity.  If you look at the Indo-
> European root of the word 'art' which is related to the word 'arm', it 
> means 'to make.'  So an arrangement of clouds or a sunset may be beautiful, 
> but they are not art.
>  
> : making, cooking, making hot air balloons, architecture, music, and 
> : anything else you can think of.
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> No, it must be the product of human activity.
> 
> [deleted]
> B
> 
    But art is everything...and everything is art.
-- 
Grant Severn                    Internet: gse...@scu.edu.au
Southern Cross University
Lismore NSW Australia

Art is a word that most people disagree on the definition of.  It's 
pointless to argue "no, no the word art means THIS" because there simply 
is no consensus.

Regarding the merits of GIF -> ASCII conversions...  As I understand it,
this newsgroup is simply a place for pretty-to-look-at things to be posted.
Just like with pictures in any other medium, a variety of techniques are 
used to produce the images.  If I enjoy looking at it, I don't care which 
one of them was used.

                               -- Dr. Cat

In article <354la3$cj...@gagme.wwa.com>, ca...@bga.com (Dr. Cat) writes:
>Art is a word that most people disagree on the definition of.  It's 
>pointless to argue "no, no the word art means THIS" because there simply 
>is no consensus.
[cut]
>                               -- Dr. Cat

This seems like a really close discussion to the "Is photography art?"
discussion.  As usual, when any new form of 'art' appears, it is often
rejected as such by the contemporary art establishment.  It looks like
the GIF->ASCII conversions could be criticized by the "true" ASCII
artists in the same way that photography was criticized by the painters
early in its history (and somewhat today).

I took a class last year which spent an entire simester discussing this
topic, and I can see this thread going on for ever, as long as people
maintain interest.  =]  If anyone would like some text references for
articles about photography as art (if you would like to try and apply
them here or something) I can probably dig up some notes.

     Sean Lambert     sum...@cs.montana.edu