[tom]

take it easy frances i mean even there's no time to think about these...
it'd be better for everyone to keep working rather then thinking what to censor.
..and what if someone says "i could do her", this has no meaning since it's art and virtual.
do you think this is surprising and do you think if it's wrong?
we cannot reject our nature, i accept all...

[daros]

Frances says "Please try to show the subject some respect even if you don't respect the work."

Here in italy 90% of ancient art was created with Vaticans money.
Artists from Giotto to Piero della Francesca, from Brunelleschi to Michelangelo have worked for the church. For Piero della francesca may Vatican means money and not the house of god. May not.

But if i look at a Piero della Farncesca painting the last thing about i think is the subject. Or, to be more exact it's difficult for me to think about the subject as something different as Piero. I want to say that the subject painted by Piero is an inventin of Piero and has nothing to do with the catholic mean. All thinkable things are human. All wat is know is human. Even the history of crist is only a human fact. Even the universe, the human concept of universe (the only known) is human. I can't think about god if i read the bible. I can only think about the profets that have write the text.

This subject may it's a little different as other ones. This subject defines a human code. It's a very complex human code with so many means that it's very difficult for me to speak about it in english in this forum.
May it's impossible too, to undestand wat i just writed.

[DELETED]

DELETED

[rivoli]

i bet they will. don't forget tom's garters.

[Frances]

take it easy frances i mean even there's no time to think about these...
it'd be better for everyone to keep working rather then thinking what to censor.
..and what if someone says "i could do her", this has no meaning since it's art and virtual.
do you think this is surprising and do you think if it's wrong?
we cannot reject our nature, i accept all...

"I could do her" is a paraphrase of about 50% of the comments received for art of a particular genre over there. When I mention that the heroine appears to have two left feet, nobody cares. When someone mentions that a shader could be improved or a camera angle is wrong, they get flamed for being nit-picky (though not usually by the artist). A compliment (though nice to hear) is not a criticism unless you explain why it is good, and pointing at flaws is not being mean.

The owners of CGTalk get to make the rules because they own the place and it's their dime that keeps things rolling. It's up to members whether or not they want to join under those conditions. I'm saying that the conditions are not clear enough. Because of that, it looks like their policy is not excersized with consistancy.

For the record, I strongly disagree with their implied policy regarding religious-themed images, even if I understand it and will abide by it. I do agree with their policy regarding philosophical discussions - there are much better forums elsewhere for that and it would otherwise drain their resources having to support it.

CGTalk maintains it has never been about freedom of speech or expression. It's a private enterprise and they don't have to be if they don't want to.

[Frances]

And should it make a difference whether Leigh is male or female?

It was a really innocent information so you know "he" is in fact "she".
I didn't intended on starting a sex war...

No not that. It was just another opportunity to express my opinion of her.

[Mihai]

Well, it's pretty ridiculous to have an "Art Community" but banning art that deals with religious and political themes.....

Strange.......guns/violence/monsters no problem.....nudity and religion....sensitive......

[tom]

CGTalk maintains it has never been about freedom of speech or expression.

... but the art is!

CHECK THIS, THEY SAY:
Welcome to CGTalk, the world's largest online forum for the professional creative computer graphics industry!

AND MORE:
The CGSociety supports everyone from enthusiastic beginners to the industry leaders in every aspect of our community: pure artists, designers, animators, programmers, directors, producers and hardware developers.

... but now this is funny!
I judge this situation billion times and I find the same result.
They think they deal with art and artists but IMO they deal with what they want. Of course they have all rights to do anything they want but I just want to remind them, they should not be thinking they are dealing with art. They just deceive themselves.

[DELETED]

DELETED

[tom]

well 8etty, you're right, i didn't call it a masterpiece but i see it's technically enough to title it as "art" if my years of experience doesn't make me a game.
but ok the cucumber was much better

[daros]

I agree Mihai. It's ridicouls.
And it's almost impossible to define the limit between reglious and not.
I think religious is the persons approach and not the subject.
A cross is a absolutly normal wooden cross. Only if the person has a religious approach this wooden cross begins to have something to do with religion.

[rivoli]

tom, i think your definition of art is too vague

i'd really like to hear a non vague definition of art. nowdays people tend to consider art what is actually conceived and recognized (within an artistic context that is) as art. making art is a work that has some more or less precise rules: you work with an art gallery, people who write about art stuff write something about you in art magazines (art forum, kunstbullettin, frieze and so on), you do exhibitions (solo, group, it doesn't really matter), you sell your works to people who buy art pieces ...
posting 3d stuff at cgtalk actually is an activity which has nothing to do with art.

btw, i don't think that making it more a la koons would change anything.

[daros]

That is true baboule.
Now we must be more specific. No tortures, kidnappings, no car crashes, no war shenes, no crying kids, no pain... only cosmetics?

[tom]

and a glass of wine

[daros]

Ok. No posts from Goya, Benvenuto Cellini, Francis Bacon... I'm joking baboule.
I understand you intention. And i agree with you: this is a fantastic forum.