Love your definition.

I didnt know this thread existed!

Heres a recent dab of mine...with ref of course.


And a little fantasy with The Pavillion photo hehe...


Hellboy (first one) from a screenie



Tribute to The Thunderbirds



This post has been edited by maranello55: Oct 31 2008, 11:09 AM

very good work.
remind me of my early trained style.



i think i know u
hint: proud fellow countryman

This post has been edited by cymon: Oct 31 2008, 01:05 PM

hmm your work's very familiar
did u post this in another forum?
nice work

---

Added on October 31, 2008, 5:33 pmheh guess you could put it that way

This post has been edited by Benny-T: Oct 31 2008, 05:33 PM

very big fan of everyone here.

Here's something i did using photoshop, i was learning to do the whole picture coming outta the polaroid thingy. Not sure if its worth being posted up but oh well



oh yes would any of you recommend Bamboo Fun as a good tablet for beginners? more for a hobby than a job.

Check out my updated signature! Draw and made it myself with paint.net. What do you think? Took me an hour for the left pic and two hours for the right.

This post has been edited by LeechFever: Nov 1 2008, 03:57 PM

very much agreed. for artist, they can go miles until they are satisfy with the painting.. if not, they are willing to start back from scratch...

Im not really that agree with azarimy statement... To me good or not good painter/artist/ or an architect/engineer who draw/paint is determined by the work they done, not by the time they need to do their work. Dont just put all architect or engineer as same category as yourself. Everyone is different and I believe anyone with any job can do their best at their drawing. Limiting time to draw is only one person preference..
Example are this engineer who draw many artwork which some of them takes month to complete. http://getty.deviantart.com/

Instead of thinking what I can archive in limited time, I instead keep doing the artwork till I satisfied. along the way I also learn how to do this and that as some object I would like to draw is not in my knowledge yet.

So a this point of time, im try my best to improve my drawing as much as possible, then after I acquire neccesary knowledge I'll then keep practicing until I can complete a drawing in short time.

Its the same concept as learn how to type on a keyboard, or even when we cook. At the first time we learn how to chop the onion.. then after a few month (or maybe years) u can now chop the onion very fast just like professional chef..

I'm striving to work as an animator, so I also need to do my artwork in very limited time. Imagine drawing 8 frame per second as a standard of japan animation, they still can archive very good quality (even in High Definition BluRay quality) in very limited time. that what im trying to archive now..

first of all, i'm not generalizing all architects or engineers. i'm saying that i let my discipline determine how i work. other people may switch between an architect/engineer/whatever into artist mode as freely as they want. me? i'm governed by the principles of my discipline.

but architects, being in architect mode, are entirely ruled by time. it's not something u can argue against. the primary rule about being an architect is the ability to work within time. it's what u can do within the time that really matters. even in architecture education, students are measured by the work they produce by deadline. they wont be measured by "what he might have done if he was given more time". anyone can score an A if u give them all the time in the world. heck, malaysian architects can design KLCC or KLIA if they were given all the time (and money) in the world.

but it doesnt work that way, unfortunately . so architects are always trained to measure themselves against time. achieve the best within the given time.

it's just as u said:



architects can become good if they train alot and get more experience. but there must be an objective on what u do. do u want to learn to chop onions very fast? or do u wanna learn to serve 60 people within 1 hour? even professional chefs MUST work within a time limit. if not, people will walk out of ur restaurant and u wont get paid.

whatever it is, some people switch between being who they are and being an artist. some people let the artist within to take over their life. i'm an architect and i will always will be. u asked me why i work within 4 hour limit. hence my answer .

Okay these shows that u have your own displine but its not generally an architect discpline isnt?



Hello there.. manga artist for example need to complete their work within a specific time too.. artist also need to obey time limit u know.




Every student need to complete anything within deadline... programmers, architect, artist student all are same in this case..


time is not everything, knowledge is the one who determine whos the best. btw, FYI the design of KLCC (only the design) are not created by an architect which is by Tun Mahathir.. its design is actually a islamic square which is famous in masjid grills when looking from above. He meanwhile only need pencil and paper to design it.



as I said before everyone works within time. But in this case You and I are clearly different because Im assuming you are working now isnt? Im meanwhile am a student who dont have experience with real job situation yet. Archive the best within time only applicable when u are in working situation which is true only for the work which is related to the job.. not ur hobby or drawing or cooking or anything. Im asking u now do you really apply ur "architect attitude" to any work u do? Cooking within lets say 4 hours limit, or cleaning house within 4 hours limit?




Why u are treating everyone (in this case architect) equal? as I said before knowledge is the one which is important. if they can get the knowlege and skill within short time they CAN become good. If they can only get the knowledge and skill longer than others they also CAN become good. It does not necessarily need to train alot though..

This clearly show u are in working person perspective. As I dont have the knowledge yet so I will try my best to get the best result as possible as I currently dont have a proper deadline yet. BUT in art perspective if I can draw very fast but the result is just so so, people will not appreciate my work and I also lose my business too isnt? so in my previous post Ive said that I'll improve my work till he best then only I try to practice to shorten the time to do the artwork. But this doesnt show that neither u or me is in a wrong way.. its just our perspective of thinking is different.



Your word quite make me angry a bit but I take it positively okay.. I dont know how to tell this in proper word but does that mean if u want to draw u became an artist, when u cleaning ur house u became orang gaji and when u fixing ur car u became mechanic? no right? of course people have their own standing and influence and I belief there is nothing wrong with your way of standing.


hope this will clear all the argument and hopefully u take it positively ok..

Below is my latest work done today after frustration of final exam... Im currently studying stones and rock surfaces so Ive came to use various screenshot from the anime as a reference. The character pose are also from the screenshot.





Attached thumbnail(s)

okay let me stop u right there. i shall explain my position for u to be REALLY clear about what i'm saying.

i'm an architect by training and profession. i'm also a lecturer of architecture. i also hold a masters in virtual environment which involves alot about programming and digital architecture. and finally, i'm currently in my final year of my doctorate, specializing in architecture education, which hopefully by the end of next year makes me a specialist in educating and developing an architect.

now lets go over ur points:



yes, it shows my discipline, but also any architect's discipline. it's central to the architecture discipline, which i've explained briefly.



i never said others didnt work by deadline. dont add things that i did not say/write .

architects ARE measured by deadline bcoz if they couldnt complete it, it's still can be measured. which is difference from other courses, where if u cant finish it, u FAIL. an incomplete work cannot be measured/graded. there's a big difference here.

also, regardless of working or studying environment, people arent gonna wait for the architect to produce his BEST design. that'll take forever, coz the stop point of work is deadline, not perfection. artists would prefer to stop at perfection.



mahathir did not design KLCC. it was design by the cesar pelli, an argentinian architect based in the US. he specializes in hi-rise buildings bcoz his firm also houses a number of engineering experts. the usage of the islamic pattern is also caesar pelli's idea, which mahathir agreed upon. mahathir suggests that it has islamic image to it, which pelli interpreted by using the pattern. feel free to find books on caesar pelli and read about him.



we do everything within a time limit. life has a limit. architects just made this central to their life. architects are lateral thinkers, they juggle between numerous tasks in the same time. usually architects work with 3-4 different projects simultaneously at different stages. if u dont work within the time limit, u just wont be able to function.

yes, i'm working. but the architecture education is actually very similar to architectural practice. architects learn by doing. the design studio is a direct simulation of the architect's office, bcoz the best way for us to train an architect is actually to dump them in the office and let them learn by doing. so the design studio in universities are actually a simulation of the real world. they just take out the risks involved and also substitute the reward (payment/salary) with grades.

i dont switch off the architect in me. so why do u keep arguing?



i didnt say everyone is equal. i didnt even generalize. architects are who they are bcoz the training is the same all over the world. however, the training is different from what u normally see in other fields. just ask any architect friends. see if they disagree with me.

i didnt argue that knowledge is important or not. the measure of the architect is the output, not input. this is different from other types of education. during SPM, u're measured based on what u store inside ur brains. u memorize everything, put a bit of analysis on it, and u should be able to regurgitate everything and get a good score. architecture doesnt work that way. it's what u do with what u have to maximize output that's important. a person could read less but still produce outstanding results.

what i'm saying here is, it doesnt matter about how long it takes for an architect to gather knowledge. architects are known to extend their studies by 1 or 2 semesters. it's normal. but like i said, we're not measuring input. it's the output.



sorry, but in respect to architecture, there is only one perspective. u just see more the higher u climb.

i'm not sure why u're getting too worked up. like i said, there's nothing wrong of being or thinking like an artist. they strive for perfection irregardless of resources. i'm saying that architects have a very different frame of mind. and i dont understand how that upsets u.

we've already established that architects and artists view things differently. which i'm sure u agree right now. u wanna work on ur art for however long u wish. perhaps u're still viewing it as a hobby. but hey, that's how artists work, which i've said several posts earlier. but that's NOT how i work. so i would appreciate that u dont tell me how i work, or how architects supposed to think or function .

This post has been edited by azarimy: Nov 1 2008, 10:22 PM

Hmm okay..

you say :


but what is this ? :
unless u dont know what generalization mean.. : To speak in generalities, or in vague terms;
U are treating all architect the same... thats what I mean generalize..... If u think that way is the truth then its okay. You have more experience and lived longer than me anyway. Just to make sure Im are on my own I always say myself as "I", not as an artist. Saying Im as an artist is the same as making everyone as equal as me which is known as generalization.

about the KLCC.. okay about the KLCC my point is incorrect but the correct one is for the KLCC, Pelli envisioned two slim 88-storey towers, each with a 44-storey bustle or annex. The floor pattern was based on a 12-pointed star but this was later changed to an eight-point star on Dr Mahathir's suggestion, as being more representative of Islamic design. source : http://pmproject.doubleukay.com/klcc_hist.html

Your other points are also arguable but lets stop k. I said u have ur own perspective and I have mine. It doesnt matter if u have only 1 perspective or many who cares anyway. I see things in my own way and u in ur own way. Did I say ur way is wrong. If yes then I apologize for any argument i make okay. Im here just to brush my art skill and to gather more knowledge for my own ambition.

design, art or ideas are subjective.
it is base on individual.

thanks.

that's not generalization, when i speak of common characteristics.

it's like saying "all architects design buildings". are there any architects that DONT? is saying "all architects design buildings" a generalization? u see my point? all the stuffs u've listed i said are not generalization, but common traits, things that ALL architects do. like i said, all architects go through similar training and do the same things.

i cant really describe it in any other way. are u saying i cant say "all students study", bcoz it's a generalization?



suggestions from a client doesnt necessarily make them the designer. yes, it was taken into the design process, but it's the designer/architect's call to fully accept or reject the idea and make it his. it's going to be hard to deal with copyright and ownership issues if all suggestions from clients, consultants or anybody involved in a particular project had to be given certain rights.

i mean, lets look at ur artworks. lets say i suggest u to use "darker shadows". u follow and abide. does that make me part owner of that artwork? no, right? coz u're the artist. u can credit me for the suggestion, but u really dont have to.

well, when anyone disagrees with me, i always make sure he understands what he is disagreeing about and ensure he has all the right arguments to support his standings. hence i tabled out my arguments, to ensure u understand my points. but if u still disagree, then it's totally up to u. i'm always open to arguments .

no need for apologies, bcoz i'm not offended. although i should apologize coz i think somehow somewhere i've offended u.

generalize or "common characteristic", common traits whatever is just a play of word . What I said is u are traiting every architect the same. Some of things can be common but some are not. Your words " it's central to the architecture discipline", "architects just made this central to their life. architects are lateral thinkers, .....", "i'm saying that architects have a very different frame of mind." and etc are some points which are personal to certain human and is questionable wheter it is applicable to all architects or not. I strongly believe it is wrong to assume everyone (in this case architect) is the same in terms of personal behavior. Saying like "all architects design buildings" is meanwhile are not personal but a specification of what architect are as same as I say "All artist draws" and "All Painter paints".


Your point is correct and I believe this clears my confusion about KLCC designers. Before this I believe Tun Mahathir are the designers because of documentary of it on TV that I watch before.

Ummm? I thought this is art attack. Not Architect vs Artist war.

i'm sorry to be an arse, but i still disagree.

being an architect is not just being able to draw or design buildings. i dont like to name drop, but people like prof. nigel cross and prof. bryan lawson, both leading experts in architecture education, have helped established that architects have a very different frame of mind than most other professions. they've drawn research from educationists like john dewey and donald schon, both whom have done an extensive amount of work on psychology and education.

architects subscribe to the "designer protocols", a guiding principle that governs how they work, function and think. which is also what i'm a part of. medical practitioners subscribe to the hippocratic oath that governs how they work and live, but doesnt affect how they think.

it is not an assumption that architects "think" in a specific way. it has been established in academic journals, international symposiums and conferences. it is a characteristic of all architects to be this way bcoz of the training. i believe u have not met alot of architects or architecture students, have u? well, u'll understand this when u met a few of them. if u cant find them, try other designers like interior, landscape, graphic, industrial or even fashion designers. they all follow the designer protocols in one way or another, but it is more prevalent amongst architects.

i know it's hard for u to accept that architects or designers have a specific way of thinking. i totally understand.

i'm sure u have come across edward de bono's "lateral thinking" concept (1967), right? try digging a bit on de bono's works, u'll find that the concept of lateral thinking run parallel to donald schon's "reflective practitioner", a research on the architects way of thinking. nigel cross also have proposed that architects utilize very specific part of the brain actively than other people, and eventually bryan lawson coined the "designerly way of thinking" in the early 90s, cementing the concept of a separate and unique frame of mind that the architects have.



so there. i'm not generalizing nor playing with words. individual architects are unique in terms of style and abilities, but they all subscribe to a similar frame of mind. but like i said earlier, they could switch it on and off. but once they've gone through the training for 5 years, they'll have it embedded in their brains whether they like it or not. it is part of becoming an architect that makes them this way.

This post has been edited by azarimy: Nov 2 2008, 07:33 AM

Before I write my view I just want to mention I haven't read all the thread much so correct me if I'm wrong. This is MY opinion.

Look..... architect and artist can be a form of profession. So can they be a form of personal interest. If you choose to make them a profession, then they can be time-based (depending if the client wants fast result or quality) and vice versa.

Like I mention before (probably in another thread, I can't remember) art is very subjective. A pile a junk can also be an art depending on people's perception on it. Architect mostly involve designing "stuff" even a futuristic garbage truck for all I care. Architect may combine art into their design or they choose design for practicality sake like aerodynamic wise.

Also there are things call bad and good architect/artist. A bad one only design for the sake of convenience and money. A good one takes account of artistic nature of the design (of course takes account of convenience and money too but main priority is art and practicality). What does this mean? It means depending on which categories you are in, you may have your own idea of how it should be define.

My definition: Architect is one that uses their engineering knowledge (else we may a have possible 'london bridge is falling down' scenario by now) to design new "stuffs" be it mechanical, structural or etc which has a purpose in society (building to live in, car to travel with). They can choose to combine artwork into their work depending IF the client/boss he/she work for wants it. Artist do not need engineering knowledge. They can form their masterpiece out of anything. They can defy logic if they want to. Remember also "people perception" into the equation. You may think it's garbage but I think it's art.

This post has been edited by LeechFever: Nov 2 2008, 08:21 AM

i appreciate ur opinion, but that wasnt what the argument was about. well, atleast that part of the argument have been sorted out.

i'm just standing on my statements that architects subscribe to a specific mindset, which animous conveniently called "generalizing". i understand his opinion, assuming he's not familiar with the design world. so i elaborated my points further to illustrate that being an architect is not just graduating with an architectural degree. design is a mindset. it's an attitude .

Sorry if I misintepret. Like I said, I'm not a patient reader thus I did not read all the previous thread.

But regarding being architect, well...., probably you should put in the world "profession" in front of "architect" to clear up the "architect is not just graduating with an architectural degree". For me, I will only acknowledge those with a degree to be a 'true' architect. Hmmm still confuse? lets look at the some of the google definitions:

# someone who creates plans to be used in making something (such as buildings)
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

# An architect is a person who is involved in the planning, design, and oversight of a building's construction. The word "architect" (Latin: architectus) derives from the Greek arkhitekton (arkhi, chief + tekton, builder") . ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architect

# A professional who designs buildings or other structures, or who prepares plans and superintends construction; A person who plans, devises or contrives the achievement of a desired result; To design, plan, or orchestrate
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/architect

# A designation reserved, usually by law, for a person or organization professionally qualified and duly licensed to perform architectural services.
www.aiapvc.org/glossary.htm

# A person who normally functions as a creator, coordinator, author of the drawings and specifications and the general administrator of construction.
www.officefinder.com/glossary.html

# One who has completed a course of study in building and design, and is licensed by the state as an architect. One who draws up plans.
www.dadsconstruction.com/orange-county-remodeling-terms.html


bla bla and so many other definition. As you can see the word "architect" contains a lot meanings. It's like the word "garbage", a worthless person can be a "garbage" but you say it can only be used on physical object like a used pair of socks. Give it a rest. He/she may have see it in another perspective. Let's get back to the topic. Else create a new thread.

This post has been edited by LeechFever: Nov 2 2008, 08:37 AM