There have been a bunch of posts of just the hair from the various MLP characters posted agaisnt a flat black background. Seriously? Even shitty art is still art, but that's no effort, no talent hack work. Why?

123easy said:
There have been a bunch of posts of just the hair from the various MLP characters posted agaisnt a flat black background. Seriously? Even shitty art is still art, but that's no effort, no talent hack work. Why?

Shuuuuun the easy art, shuuuuuun. But in all honesty, I dunno, it's lazy, but it's not breaking any rules so I won't flag it.

Well, with a little effort, he/she could improve the pictures to be semi-decent, by making the background into their actual color. But hasn't that been done before? Idk

But if it's just the hair, then it's not really the character and in fact depicts no one, and lacking a character at all is "irrelevant to the site."

Don't mind me, I'm just playing devil's advocate.

RedOctober said:
But if it's just the hair, then it's not really the character and in fact depicts no one, and lacking a character at all is "irrelevant to the site."

Don't mind me, I'm just playing devil's advocate.

Well, no, the art is still clearly in the shape of each particular ponies head, and it's instantly obvious which one they are to anyone who's watched the show {Or put up with us long enough that it's been drilled into their heads} so its still ponies, and thus, still relevant by technicality.

well. The idea *is* wallpaper for them... one of them was a repost, and I deleted it... some of them are more awesome then others:

post #137680 post #142709
are both pretty awesome looking wallpapers and are now in my folder :)

post #142698 may not work as well, but I like being complete and someone may like it :)

Well, with a little effort, he/she could improve the pictures to be semi-decent, by making the background into their actual color. But hasn't that been done before? Idk

it kind of has: post #137678 post #137674

But the black ones are nice for people like me who go "darkness plz" :D

Actually, that's pretty decent MLP art, considering what other MLP stuff we often get.

Princess_Celestia said:
Well, no, the art is still clearly in the shape of each particular ponies head, and it's instantly obvious which one they are to anyone who's watched the show {Or put up with us long enough that it's been drilled into their heads} so its still ponies, and thus, still relevant by technicality.

Oh I seeee, it's a silhouette. Carry on, then.

Bottom two? relevant and good. Others? No (thought he Celestia one is on the line just because of how much space the hair takes up). If the main focus is going to be the hair and the background, a matte black background doesn't cut it. If there was anything- some styling, shading, etc. going on- then i could see it. But not the matte black presented. It's just cut and paste hair onto a black background.

RedOctober said:
Oh I seeee, it's a silhouette. Carry on, then.

Yes, its that thing that I can never ever spell properly. *Nodnod*

I'd call relevant if there was really anything to them but the hair. But it's like those iPod commercials/stills, taken to the point where it's not even a proper full silhouette. if it was asketch, or a quick drawing 9where they deliberately sacrifice detail and form for speed) then whatever. but this wasn't even that. Like I said, cut and paste of the hair to a black background. if you want something like that so badly, crop it yourself, isntead of posting it here.

Normally I'm all for posting whatever under the grounds that anything can be art, but this is one of the few points where I draw a personal line. It's like soemone tryuing to pass off shit in a can as art (which it isn't) or a photo of a statue of christ in a jar full of piss (which AGAIN is NOT art).

we won't get into a 'what is art' discussion because it won't be pretty. Let's already agree to disagree on that.

But. So. If I drew a character and placed them on a black background, it's bad. but if I do something like this:

post #126649 post #113149 post #98373

it's not?

This series of pony wall papers is a good idea. Good ideas don't need complicated execution. the point of the image was pony hair on blackness and it performs it awesomely.

Not everyone has the software or skill to cut, crop, and form those images. these area good execution of them. and only a handfull will be made and then they'll be off the front page and you won't have to worry about 'em.

SnowWolf said:
This series of pony wall papers is a good idea. Good ideas don't need complicated execution. the point of the image was pony hair on blackness and it performs it awesomely.

I admit they actually look pretty cool, even though I don't care much for the ponies.

The first two have SOMETHING, even if it's just a simply alternating pattern. I feel the same about the third as I do about the partial-silhouette pony pictures, tempered slightly (and I mean SLIGHTLY) in that it is a tattoo-style pattern, which needs a basic background to be able to be transferred to if it is a tattoo proper. Because it is just a piece of digital art, though, it doesn't excuse it; It could have a simplistic background with an outline around the entire piece, and be cut and pasted onto a blank sheet or have the background filled in or even left alone and only the actual center printed out for the tattoo.

I don't care if this was painted by the most talented painter or some hobo: http://tinyurl.com/3ewak96 isn't art. it's a canvas painted almsot completely black. http://tinyurl.com/y9xanlm is the same. Or abstract art that's a bunch of lines with no cohesion, no rhyme or reason- a meaningless scribble. Stupid stuff that gets lauded as art only because so=called artistes need to feel wanted and contemporary, as well as make money. It's like watching any modern fashion show, with their absolutely insane designs that no one would reasonably be caught dead wearing, like http://tinyurl.com/5warxg4 or http://tinyurl.com/5rwfgkb or http://tinyurl.com/6akk8l9 .

123easy said:
The first two have SOMETHING, even if it's just a simply alternating pattern. I feel the same about the third as I do about the partial-silhouette pony pictures, tempered slightly (and I mean SLIGHTLY) in that it is a tattoo-style pattern, which needs a basic background to be able to be transferred to if it is a tattoo proper. Because it is just a piece of digital art, though, it doesn't excuse it; It could have a simplistic background with an outline around the entire piece, and be cut and pasted onto a blank sheet or have the background filled in or even left alone and only the actual center printed out for the tattoo.

I don't care if this was painted by the most talented painter or some hobo: http://tinyurl.com/3ewak96 isn't art. it's a canvas painted almsot completely black. http://tinyurl.com/y9xanlm is the same. Or abstract art that's a bunch of lines with no cohesion, no rhyme or reason- a meaningless scribble. Stupid stuff that gets lauded as art only because so=called artistes need to feel wanted and contemporary, as well as make money. It's like watching any modern fashion show, with their absolutely insane designs that no one would reasonably be caught dead wearing, like http://tinyurl.com/5warxg4 or http://tinyurl.com/5rwfgkb or http://tinyurl.com/6akk8l9 .

Uhhh...What the hell are those girls wearing?

"Fashion".

Well, you have to admit that the first girl has a practical outfit. After all, you don't get something that handy just anywhere. Admittedly the design is a bit heavy-handed, but surely it's not that alarming. I imagine that people would avoid her for quite a radius, but I find the whole thing quite humerus.

I like them.

Shatari said:
Well, you have to admit that the first girl has a practical outfit. After all, you don't get something that handy just anywhere. Admittedly the design is a bit heavy-handed, but surely it's not that alarming. I imagine that people would avoid her for quite a radius, but I find the whole thing quite humerus.

I think I about died laughing XD

It could have a simplistic background with an outline around the entire piece, and be cut and pasted onto a blank sheet or have the background filled in or even left alone and only the actual center printed out for the tattoo.

You're... totally.. missing.. the idea.

by leaving a simple, plain color background, the eye is drawn to the variation: what's different. That's why the rainbow dash and celestia pieces work 'better'. The variation extends into the middle of the 'canvas' and draws your eye towards it. if you took that paw print design and filled the area around it also with design, you would have a horribly cluttered image that lacks the focus and visual impact that the current does. Would it still be pretty? sure, probably, but this way is more effective.

What what it's worth, I mostly agree about the minimalistic art, and fasionshows.

123easy said:
The first two have SOMETHING, even if it's just a simply alternating pattern. I feel the same about the third as I do about the partial-silhouette pony pictures, tempered slightly (and I mean SLIGHTLY) in that it is a tattoo-style pattern, which needs a basic background to be able to be transferred to if it is a tattoo proper. Because it is just a piece of digital art, though, it doesn't excuse it; It could have a simplistic background with an outline around the entire piece, and be cut and pasted onto a blank sheet or have the background filled in or even left alone and only the actual center printed out for the tattoo.

I don't care if this was painted by the most talented painter or some hobo: http://tinyurl.com/3ewak96 isn't art. it's a canvas painted almsot completely black. http://tinyurl.com/y9xanlm is the same. Or abstract art that's a bunch of lines with no cohesion, no rhyme or reason- a meaningless scribble. Stupid stuff that gets lauded as art only because so=called artistes need to feel wanted and contemporary, as well as make money. It's like watching any modern fashion show, with their absolutely insane designs that no one would reasonably be caught dead wearing, like http://tinyurl.com/5warxg4 or http://tinyurl.com/5rwfgkb or http://tinyurl.com/6akk8l9 .

While I agree fully that the shit in fashion shows these days is preposterous beyond words, I disagree that the "Black Square" isn't art. It's just shitty art. My definition of art is: something that conveys an idea symbolically. Whether it's poetry, sculpture, or music, if the intent is to make the partaker feel or think something, it's art. It is only good art, however, if the partaker feels or thinks the concept that the artist is trying to convey. People say e.e. cummings is an amazing poet, he's just misunderstood. By my concept of "art," the very fact that he's misunderstood means he's shit. He's not getting his point across. I think there are in fact correct interpretations of art, and those are the interpretations that the artist intended. If you get something else out of a piece of art, that's great and all, but the artist has failed and needs to try again. No, not everyone will understand every piece of good art, because each of us brings our own palette of personal experiences to the interpretation and that will color it. But a great artist will convey his/her intended message to a large audience.

That all being said, I don't think those pony images you brought up are art. They don't really convey any message, emotion, or story to me. They just fascinate by the use of color, silhouette, and the unexpected. We expect to see a pony, but instead we see a lack of pony, and that is attention-getting. It's a cool picture, but I don't call it art. However, this isn't an art dump, it's an image dump, and those are images with ponies, and so they're fine.