Miscellaneous > The Lounge
Programming vs Photoshopping
GoodwillMan:
Well my point is that, half of the unoriginal bullshit done in photoshop is called art, then there is a lot of real art done in photoshop.
I think that everyone in this thread had a useful opinion, except... (drum roll) mac man.
Pissed_Macman:
quote:Originally posted by X11: BTFH:
Well my point is that, half of the unoriginal bullshit done in photoshop is called art, then there is a lot of real art done in photoshop.
I think that everyone in this thread had a useful opinion, except... (drum roll) mac man.
--- End quote ---
[ May 30, 2003: Message edited by: Macman: HAS 1000 POSTS ]
preacher:
quote:Originally posted by bazoukas:
Have you done programs in C++, java (bleh), fotran?
--- End quote ---
Dont like java huh? Thats ok there is an alternative. Microsoft .NET
I wish java was as flexible as C++, and Im making it my personal goal to learn java so that I can create cutting edge applications(games) that will be usable on all platforms.
[ May 30, 2003: Message edited by: ThePreacher ]
Pissed_Macman:
quote:Originally posted by ThePreacher:
Dont like java huh? Thats ok there is an alternative. Microsoft .NET
I wish java was as flexible as C++, and Im making it my personal goal to learn java so that I can create cutting edge applications(games) that will be usable on all platforms.
[ May 30, 2003: Message edited by: ThePreacher ]
--- End quote ---
Good. Games being only available for Windows IS THE MOST ANNOYING THING IN THE WORLD!!! You should do a coup of Blizzard. They put out all their stuff for Mac, but I don't know about Linux. Plus they are literally gods.
[ May 30, 2003: Message edited by: Macman: HAS 1000 POSTS ]
solo:
I'm about to get emotional so bear with me.
Code is an art, but not a presentation art. It's a personal art, and in some ways a performance art. I code to satisfy myself, it keeps me sane. I don't code for anyone else, I create software for everyone else. The structure, flexibility, power, scalibility, and speed all come out to decide it's beauty. We cannot compare paint or pixels with ones and zeros because they are different fruit.
Art has a defined process. Definition, Creation, Review, Feedback. For most performance and presentation arts, an audience takes the role of Review and Feedback, but when looking at code as a personal art, the coder takes the role of all four, definition, creation, review, feedback. Looking at it as a performance art, it performs in a structured, but unpredictable manner. I dont mean unpredictable as in buggy unpredictable. Take for instance the World Trade Centers. I considered them beautiful before they were gone. To me that means that they were a work of art despite the fact that they are just as logical and unpredictable as coding.
In unpredictable I mean that you can't classify a piece of software and know what it will be like. It has distinct features, distinct behaviour, and a distinct look. It can be abstracted, but no more than any other art.
Art to me is admiration. A piece of art is something that is beautiful. I see code as beautiful because of it's precise stream. You know the resulting software will do exactly what's in the code, but that doesn't mean that by reading the code you will know what the software will do.
Code can do anything. It's not limited to showing pixels, or for showing emotion either. On the opposite end of the spectrum it's not limited to show only logic either.
Code can create chaos. If something could only be logicial, it could not create chaos. Code can attack other code, which can cause other code to fail, which takes away power from half of New York state.
Bottom line: Art is what is beautiful.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version