Thursday 6 November 2014

COP 1 Lecture - Ilustration

After this weeks Lecture I have learned never to make the mistake of calling a simple drawing an "Illustration"

The three requirements something must have in order to be classed as an "Illustration" is Context / Image / Concept. 


FOR EXAMPLE! Here is Tony the Tiger, but it is not just a drawing of him, it could be seen as an Illustration because it has all three of those factor. (making me hungry for Frosties) This lecture has made me think more about the correct term to use for a drawing, and made me hungry.

COP1 Seminar - Auteurship and the avant - garde

Whats Auteurship? - "Having a distinct style" and the french term for "Author"

Whats Auter? - "suggests great film directors are artists in their own right on a par with great novelists."

In this week's COP Seminar we got on to the topic that nothing is completely original, because if we think about it, everything is inspired by something. Artists are always paving the way for other artists to follow after. There is a persistent view that "Animation" is mainly for the view of children. Which would lead to a very heated discussion.. This lead to us going on to talk about the different ways artists go about things, for example Fine artists would most likely go about their work in a totally different way in comparison with us Animators. In fact their is a habit of scrutiny amongst contrasting areas of art. We found in this seminar that a lot of us shared a similar view that some fine art can be too metaphorical and sometimes the expiration for somebody putting a brick in the middle of the floor and calling it art can be "blagging" This doesn't mean that this art work isn't appreciated, but there is certainly a difference of opinion amongst artists. However I will say, if something you see has encouraged you to interoperate it, then it has done what it wanted you to do.