Art And Technology Podcast- Digital Scanning And Traditional Sculpture

An Interview With Dan Gustafson Next Engine Scanner and Traditional Sculptor Mark Byrd
Art and Technology 0006

Dan Gustafson- Marketing Director at NextEngine-3d Scanners

LISTEN NOW from your browser

Using digital technology such as scanning and milling in the traditional art studio is what I refer to as Tra-digi art. Dan Gustafson of the NextEngine Scanner and Traditional Sculptor Mark Byrd spend time with me talking about using the NextEngine scanner in the creating of life size traditional bronze sculptures. What are the advantages of using the scanner? What are the pitfalls to watch out for when incorporating this technology in your own studio?
Some of these concepts of digital scanning and printing were featured in chapter 7 of the Mudbox book.

* Listen to the podcast from our podcast player on the nav bar at Digital Sculpting.net
* The direct link to this podcast segment- should you want to put it on your website or blog http://media.libsyn.com/media/artandtechnology/Art_Technology_006_Scanning_and_Milling_in_the_Tradtitional_Studio.mp3

More photographs to come

The Art and Technology Podcast listen from the Digital Sculpting.net website or Subscribe to the podcast in itunes

If you are reading this blog post from facebook and do not see the videos and or photographs visit https://creativesculpture.com/blog

____________________________________________________________________

Frankensteinian Art?

Victimless Leather by the Tissue Culture and Arts Project

My studies of researching digital technology and incorporating it into my traditional sculpting processes is part of what I am doing for my graduate degree at Goddard. It has taken me to places I would have never dreamed of going.   Several months ago while researching 3d printers I began to realize that individuals were pushing anything they could through the printers to see what would happen, metal, ceramic, even glass.  It was then that I wondered about biology. And I was certainly thrown for a loop when I found that they were printing bone, skin and now even organs.  I wrote about this and had several links to articles about the subject in the October 28th blog article, I’m a genius! 3D Printing of the Human Organs?

I did, at that time, however, happen upon another artist’s work that after finding and reading I quickly clicked off of.  The project has haunted me since then.  There was such uneasiness when I first happened upon it that I didn’t even put it in my college bibliography. I am wondering now, why. Why am I so uneasy?  It was exciting for me to find that science is now printing biology, and that someday, if I need a kidney I might be able to have my own kidney printed.  But incorporating this other type of biology into art left me feeling uncomfortable.  The topic has come up more than once since this first encounter with Stelarc’s art piece The Partial Head.  The Partial Head is a prosthetic portrait of the artist that is computer generated and can talk to the viewer.  This portrait is digitally printed and then seeded with living cells.  Of course, the artwork needed a bioreactor/incubator circulatory system to survive.  It only lived a week before becoming contaminated and “died.”

The Partial Head website acknowledges the collaboration of, The Tissue Culture & Arts Project (TC&A).  http://www.tca.uwa.edu.au/  In a Leonardo Journal, article entitled, Growing Semi-Living Sculpture: The Tissue Culture & Art Project by Oron Catts and Ionat Zurr it state that they use “living tissue to create/grow semi-living object/sculptures and to research the technologies involved in such a task.”  I need to examine, in my own mind, why creating organs to extend life, and using living cells to create art feels so different to me.  Though both remind me of the scene from the movie Frankenstein.

Victor Moritz: Henry – In the name of God!

Henry Frankenstein: Oh, in the name of God! Now I know what it feels like to be God!

Is it my cultural upbringing that makes me uneasy about this?  I have warned myself to be careful.  Some fear is healthy; it does keep us from danger, however, it can also keep us from exploration.  The difficulty is in knowing when have we gone too far.

Doctor Waldman: You have created a monster, and it will destroy you!

Another Sterlarc’s project consists of growing a 1 /2 scale ear. In another piece of art titled. Victimless Leather The TC&A project works at initiating a discomfort in the viewer as they digitally print a miniature coat over scaffolding with tissue that looks like — human skin.

Of course, growing things can be found everywhere.  How is this technology any different than growing a topiary over a metal structure that becomes a living thing that will grow and I must tend? There are many ethical questions raised with TC&A ‘s project.  For example, “Do these entities contribute to the objectification of living organisms?”  In my previous comparison I honestly don’t feel that I am objectifying the ivy on the topiary. Nor do I feel I am killing portions of it when I prune the art.  How is this different?  Are we enthused with our control over the living material?  This Frankensteinian idea towards art was also expressed in a recent Art and Technology podcast that I conducted with Robert Michael Smith. It appears these questions will continue to be raised and that artists that are presented with tools to push their creative limits and to initiate a reaction in the viewer will do so.  It has certainly initiated a reaction from me.  It will continue, and we just may see more art that for lack of a better word, can be referred to as Frankensteinian.

TC&A also examines, “the gap between the fast pace of development in science and technology and the slower pace of cultural understanding and adaptation.” They are indeed pushing the limits of acceptance both socially and culturally. They hope that the term “semi living object/products and sculptures” will make the art more palatable. “Our art challenges many people to examine their perception of the boundary between the living and the inanimate:”  Their goal is get these projects to a point where the art can live out of their contained environment and provide tactile interaction with the viewer.      I’m sure this will not be the last you hear about this subject on this blog, or the Art and Technology podcast.   But I’m interested in knowing what other people feel about these works of…  “art?”

Look! It’s moving. It’s alive. It’s alive… It’s alive, it’s moving, it’s alive, it’s alive, it’s alive, it’s alive, IT’S ALIVE!

Henry Frankenstein

( Oron Catts will be one of my up and coming interviews ( INTERVIEW) on the Art and Technology Podcast listen from the Digital Sculpting.net website or Subscribe to the podcast in itunes )  This podcast was recorded May 23, 2010 and will be up at the http://www.digitalsculpting.net website by May29th.

If you are reading this blog post from facebook and do not see the videos and or photographs visit https://creativesculpture.com/blog

Antiquities, Masterpiece, Rights of Ownership and 3D Scanning

I have been spending some time looking at historical artifacts and the copyright and ownership issues surrounding them.  The reason why this topic has created some interest to me is that I’m curious about the advancement and tremendous increase in 3D scanning of artifacts.

It seems there are benefits in the 3d scanning of these precious items.  There may be information captured by the scanner that will help scientist know more about the item.  It offers an opportunity to document and make accessible the information.  For example, the tomb of Tutankhamun is being scanned in hopes of preserving it so that the experience and information can be made available to those interested  without actually having to make it accessible for individuals to experience it.  This is important because the experiencing of some artifacts causes more damage to them. And it can be an asset in the restoration of an artifact.

Recording the tomb of Tutankhamun from factum-arte on Vimeo.

I have been cautioned not to  just embrace all of this new technology without trying to thoroughly examine it. So, I must ask myself, what are the cons of having the artifacts scanned in 3D?  Before I answer that, I thought it would be appropriate to look at some of the issues and questions revolving around the artifacts themselves.

For example:

  • Is it ownership that is important or access?
  • If I own land and I dig something up on my land.  To whom does it belong? It will depend on the country you are in and the laws within that country. The antiquity may not belong to you. If it did not, would I report it or would I be more inclined to cherish my treasure without saying a word ?
  • Many laws are developed in hopes of preventing looting of antiquities. Do they actually accomplish this?  How do these laws effect poorer countries?
  • How do I feel about cultural property?
  • If something is taken or looted what happens to “the loss of context?”  Having a coin but knowing where it was found or what the people who had this coin did, ate, where they slept, is important. It is not just the object that is researched, but where it was found.

How important is it for individuals to be exposed to the cultures and antiquities of those around the world?  Should countries horde their antiquities?  If antiquities can be distributed through trade, what happens with countries that have nothing to trade?  How do they expose their people to the cultures around the world?

According to an article that I read, if I happened upon a stolen or found object and it ended up on the desk of an archeologist and it had something of importance on it, that information cannot be published. How difficult it must be for the archeologist who happens upon this. The reason—  it has no legitimate provenance and the Archeological Institute of America forbids it. Why? If the archeologists should transcribe it and publish it, then they would be determining its authentication and making it more valuable.

Identity, self esteem, illicit digging, artifacts, private/market all of these words initiate a tremendous amount of passionate opinion in the information that I was reading about this subject.

Should there be a cultural common? Shared information and artifacts between countries, museums and collectors.  The  Brooklyn museum is making some of their artifacts, for which they hold the copyright,  available on a Creative Commons License.  Those who want to use them for non commercial use can do so.  But, how is this policed?

I would suppose that the same questions and concerns that are found with traditional masterpieces and antiquities will apply to 3D scanned artifacts.  Who owns them?  Should they be reproduced?  And my biggest thought is, that it is much easier to steal a data file than it is a physical dated fossil.

I also wonder about the artists who might use these artifacts as part of their own work. In the case of artists Barry X Ball, whose work I absolutely love, I have questioned this.  Ball has taken digital scans of two Braoque pieces, “Masterpieces in the permanent collection of Ca’Rezzonico, Venice— La Purità (Dama Velata), by Antonio Corradini, and La Invidia by Orazio Marinali, as well as Hermaphrodite Endormi from the Louvre, Paris.” and he has digitally scanned them.  Then he recreates them using digital milling in another substance.  Does he sell these?  Can he sell these? Is this art?  Can he copyright this as his own?

So I ask the question, What are the pro’s and con’s  and more importantly, what are the questions I should be asking when looking at this new technology of 3D scanning as it pertains to masterpieces and artifacts?

( I do hope to cover more podcasts on this subject. Looking for lawyers working with antiquities)

If you are reading this blog post from facebook and do not see the videos and or photographs visit https://creativesculpture.com/blog

Art And Technology Podcast – Foundry of The Future

Paul and Bridgette
talk about the
foundry of
the future.

An Interview with Paul  Effinger – Foundry of the Future Art and Technology 0005

Paul Effinger is a digital sculptor who is exploring different methods of bronze casting other than the lost wax method of bronze casting.  He is exploring z corp printing in a cellulose powder, infiltrates and others.

Sculptor Bridgette Mongeon is the host of Art and Technology podcast

Effinger worked 13 years in the gaming industry creating for published titles as lead Character Artists and Animator and contributed to many others as an independent contractor. He strives to see some of his creations into physical forms and loves the feel of bronze. This has caused him to explore in different areas of 3d printing and investment casting.  The processes and pitfalls of 3d printing are featured in chapter 7 of the Mudbox book.
( Paul is featured in my 2015 book 3D Technology In Fine Art and Craft: Exploring 3D Printing, Scanning, Sculpting, and Milling.

Paul’s experiment with digitally printing
his sculpture shows the stair stepping.

LISTEN NOW from your browser

* Listen to the podcast from our podcast player on the nav bar at Digital Sculpting.net
* The direct link to this podcast segment- should you want to put it on your website or blog

____________________________________________________________________

The New Podcast Art and Technology is Up- Feel Free To Use Them On Your Site

Sculptor Bridgette Mongeon is the host of Art and Technology podcast

“A fire side chat where innovation, creativity, technology and science meet.”

Art and Technology Podcast

The art and technology podcasts are up. And you are welcome to include them on your site.  Check out the link at the end of each post here.  You can listen to the podcast at http://www.digitalsculpting.net.  Once there, press on the link in the upper nav bar that says “podcasts.”

The podcast has been submitted to iTunes and we will let you know when you can subscribe to it in iTunes. We would, however like to have you stop by digital sculpting.net to listen and reply on the forum threads for each post. It is a great way to create a dialogue on these topics.

I’ll also put a direct link to the new podcasts below so you can listen right from your browser.

You can see a player and listen from this website at Videos and Podcast page of this website.

Here are the podcasts that have been recorded to date:

____________________________________________________________________

Host of the Art
and Technology
Podcasts and
author of Digital
Technology in Fine
Art and Craft:
Exploring 3D Printing,
Scanning, Sculpting,
And Milling.

Art and Technology 001- Introduction
LISTEN NOW from your browser

An introduction to the Art and Technology Podcast. Host Bridgette Mongeon and illustrator/writer Mike de la Flor talk about their hopes for digital sculpting.net, the Art and Technology podcast and the new book Digital Sculpting with Mudbox: Essential Tools and Techniques for Artist.

A bit about the host Bridgette Mongeon

Bridgette is a traditional sculptor and a writer. She has been creating podcasts for two years on various topics and looks forward to exploring art and technology with the community at DigitalSculpting.net. Her passion for this subject is fueled by her ongoing graduate studies. She is also coauthor of the new Mudbox book and co-administrator for the digitalsculpting.net website

Interview with Mike de la Flor
Mike is a medical, illustrator/animator, instructor and writer. He is the author of several CG titles including the popular The Digital Biomedical Illustration Handbook. He has written dozens of articles for 3DWorld, Computer Arts, and MacWorld among other magazines. Mike is also the co-administrator of the DigitalSculpting.net website.

* Listen to the podcast from our podcast player on the nav bar at Digital Sculpting.net
* The forum for this topic. You may add your comments and thoughts
* The direct link to this podcast segment- should you want to put it on your website or blog
http://media.libsyn.com/media/artandtechnology/Art_technology_001.mp3

____________________________________________________________________

Robert Michael Smith was our first interview

An Interview with sculptor Robert Michael Smith. Art and Technology 0002

Please see previous post for more information about Robert Michael Smith 

LISTEN NOW from your browser

* Listen to the podcast from our podcast player on the nav bar at Digital Sculpting.net
* The forum for this topic. You may add your comments and thoughts
* The direct link to this podcast segment- should you want to put it on your website or blog
http://media.libsyn.com/media/artandtechnology/Art_technology_002.mp3

____________________________________________________________________

An Interview with Joris Debo from Materialise .MGX Art and Technology 0003

LISTEN NOW from your browser

Joris Debo of Materialise talks about new technology in 3D printing and investment casting

An Interview with Joris Debo from Materialise .MGX discussing some of the highest quality of 3d Printing.
Joris Debo from .MGX, a division of Materialise talks about the technology of large scale 3d printing and investment casting that their company is offering to the traditional and digital studio. .MGX works with 3D printing technologies and some of the top designers in the world.

Check out the .MGX catalog for some very inspiring artwork
This link lets you download both catalogs

* Listen to the podcast from our podcast player on the nav bar at Digital Sculpting.net
* The forum for this topic. You may add your comments and thoughts
* The direct link to this podcast segment- should you want to put it on your website or blog

http://media.libsyn.com/media/artandtechnology/Art_technology_003-_Interview_with_Joris_Debo.mp3

____________________________________________________________________

Interview with Kevin Gillespie Art and Technology 0004
LISTEN NOW from your browser

Kevin Gillespie talks about copyrights and 3D

Kevin Gillespie pioneer in CG, talks with Host Bridgette Mongeon about 3d technology and copyrights- from a personal viewpoint.  How can we protect ourselves as artists?  How can we be more aware? Copyright in 3D is an  emotionally charged issue.

For more information on this case, copyright issues and other information as well as a discussion of this topic please visit the digitalsculpting.net website.  We would love to hear what you think about this heated topic.

* Listen to the podcast from our podcast player on the nav bar at Digital Sculpting.net
* The forum for this topic. You may add your comments and thoughts
* The direct link to this podcast segment- should you want to put it on your website or blog
http://media.libsyn.com/media/artandtechnology/Art_technology_004_Interview_with_Kevin_Gillespie_on_Copyright_and_3D.mp3

MORE INFORMATION ON THIS TOPIC

Article Not a Model Decision a wonderful blog article by a lawyer

Article  Important Case ( maybe): 10th Circuit on Copyrightability of Digital Model

____________________________________________________________________

So who is next?
Some great guests are planned:

Andrew Silke– From the Guerilla CG project

Adrian Bowyer– the developer of the REP RAP

Next Enginedigital scanning

Oron CattsThe Tissue Culture & Arts Project ( this is a strange one, you must listen)

____________________________________________________________________

I Am So Excited. I Just Scored Two More Interviews For The Art And Technology Podcast!

Each person I ask is because I am very interested in what they are doing, researching, or their place in this field. Do you want to know the two? Yes, more global interviews courtesy of Skype!

Adrian Bowyer- Bath
From Mr Bowyers website. “I am a senior lecturer in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Bath working in the Biomimetics Research Group on the RepRap Project and the Bioaffinity Applications Laboratory.”  I thrilled about this interview.  I have posted some wonderful videos about this man and what he has been doing.  I love the idea of the RepRap.  For those of you who don’t know what that is, a Rep Rap is a printer that prints objects in 3d, but no one that you are going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on. It is an open source project.  You could build one of these for your own office/studio.  I want one!   Oh yeah, Did I mention that the RepRap can print itself?

Andrew Silke- Sydney, Australia
Mr Silke’s webiste the Guerrilla Cg Project states, “Andrew Silke is a professional animator and founder of The GuerrillaCG Project. With over 8 years experience he has worked on major feature films such as Happy Feet, Scooby Doo, and James Cameron’s new movie Avatar as well as creating award winning short films like as ‘Cane-Toad’ (with David Clayton).”

“The GuerrillaCG Project is a free non for profit organisation that hopes to make it easier to learn high-end computer graphics.  We are building a team of volunteers to create videos, that describe in an easy and understandable manner, the fundamental concepts of computer graphics. ”  I love this site and Mr. Silke’s dedication to education. If you are new to digital technology or a traditional sculptor needing to begin to know about the process of digital technology this is a great place to start.

Subdivision Topology: Artifacts from The Guerrilla CG Project on Vimeo.

Just Bought a New Microphone, And Please Don’t Call Me Dumb!

I have been lusting after this microphone for a while. I know if I am going to lust after something I should probably lust after $800 mic and recording equipment instead of the MXL USB.007  But, I feel this is an upgrade from my Samson Co1U. Plus unlike the Samson this one is in stereo.

Adding the new podcast about Art and Technology on the digitalsculpting.net website made me feel a bit more comfortable about purchasing a new microphone.

I’m having some serious problems with sound quality and am hoping that this microphone will help to solve that.

PLEASE,  DON’T CALL ME DUMB

I have been having trouble with my Heil boom arm. For those who don’t know  what that is. It holds the mic so I can talk during podcasts. I’m not sure I would ever buy a Heil again and really,  I think I might like to switch to a boom arm extension so it come up and over my screen. But anyway, I would set the mic up and it kept slowly moving down as I talked. It drove me crazy, to the point that I was holding it up by wedging scissors between the arm and a cabinet. Then today I looked at it closely… there is a weight on the end of the arm.  Don’t call me dumb.  I took the weight off and now it  longer moves.   Now in my defense, when I move this mic over to my area during podcasts, though it is in front of my nose, and in front of my eyes, I’m not looking at it. Usually, I’m looking at the screen or my notes or whatever.  O.k. I feel a little stupid.

New Art and Technology Podcasts Are Coming. Here Is A Bit About Our First Guest.

Podcasting with Bridgette Mongeon
I spend a lot of time recording and editing.
The Art and Technology is my second podcast.
To date I have recorded and edited 68 podcasts.

We have been working hard all weekend to set up a new community at digitalsculpting.net. It will be a portal of information, tutorials, galleries etc on digital sculpting and the technology surrounding it. I encourage everyone to join. It is huge and will continue to grow, with people and information.  You can create your own profile, blog, gallery etc.

As part of this information community we are starting a new podcast titled,
Art and Technology

“A fire side chat where innovation, creativity, tech
nology and science meet.”

We are just waiting for our introduction by Jazz Legend Harry Sheppard, and then our podcasts will be up. I expect that to be next week sometime. In the mean time, here is a little about our first guest, Robert Michael Smith.

Robert Michael Smith

Robert Michael Smith our first interview on the Art and Technology Podcast

A complete bio follows:

Robert Michael Smith is a digital sculptor and Associate Professor of art and technology at New York Institute of Technology Fine Arts Department. Smith is also NYIT Middle East Fine Arts Computer Graphics Coordinator for Global Exchange Programs at Amman, Jordan; Kingdom of Bahrain, and Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Recently Smith has established a collaborative digital art gallery at Beijing, China.

Smith has been an active pioneer of digital sculpture, 3D visualization/animation, Web design, virtual sculptures for the Web, virtual actors for computer gaming, as well as a significant art and technology educator. During 1999-2003 Smith was a Board Director for Manhattan chapter of SIGGRAPH. Smith was the Web Director of www.sculpture.org during 1997-2003 and a Board Director of the International Sculpture Center during 2003 -2005. Smith is President Emeritus of the Sculptors Guild, and a founding Board Director of Digital Stone Project.

Smith previously taught throughout New York City at Pratt Institute, School of Visual Arts, The New School for Social Research, Parsons School of Art & Design, The Sculpture Center, as well as University of the Arts at Philadelphia, University of North Dakota, University of Hawaii at Manoa, and San Jose State University. Smith has also been a guest lecturer at numerous universities, international conference

s, and featured in several international articles and books including two chapters, “Digital Imaging” and “Digital Sculpture” in the recent Thames & Hudson publication “Art of the Digital Age”, by Bruce Wands.

Smith’s sculptures and digital art have been exhibited at prestigious New York City, NY venues including:
Sculpture Center; P.S. 1 Contemporary Art Center; Asian American Arts Center; Blum Helman Warehouse; and
The Corning Gallery at Steuben; The Rubelle & Norman Schafler Gallery, Pratt Institute, Brooklyn, NY; as well as National venues including: Pittsburgh Center for the Arts, Pittsburgh, PA; Chesterwood, Stockbridge, MA; Grounds for Sculpture, Hamilton, NJ; Rockland Center for the Arts, Nyack, NY; FermiLab, Batavia, IL; Exploratorium, San Francisco, CA; Downey Museum of Art, Downey, CA; Tucson Museum of Art, Tucson, AZ; Honolulu Academy of Arts, Honolulu, HI; Sculpture Tour, University of Tennessee / Knoxville; Nave Museum, Victoria, TX; Leigh Yawkey Woodson Art Museum, Wausau, WI; North Dakota Museum of Art, Grand Forks, ND; Muskegon Museum, Muskegon, MI; Tyler Museum of Art, Tyler, TX; Edwin A. Ulrich Museum of Art, Wichita, KS; University of Alabama Art Gallery, Birmingham, AL; The Alexandria Museum, Alexandria, LA ;The Plain’s Art Museum, Moorhead, MN; The Rourke Art Gallery, Moorhead, MN; Hillwood Art Museum, Brookville, NY; Southwestern University, Georgetown, TX; Robert Fullerton Art Museum,
San Bernadino, CA; The Alexandria Museum.

“Virtuaclabiabyte Tongue Twister Sister”
A sculpture created in Mudbox and
digitally printed in ABS plastic with the
Stratasys Dimension RP machine.

Alexandria, LA; University of Oklahoma Museum of Art, Norman, OK; Alaska State Museum, Juneau, AK; University of Alaska Museum, Fairbanks, AK; Anchorage Historical and Fine Arts Museum, Anchorage, AK; Fine Art Museum of the South, Mobile, AL; Gaston County Museum,

Dallas, NC; West Bend Gallery of Fine Arts, West Bend, WI

International exhibition venues have included: Art Cologne, Germany; Supermarket 2008, Stockholm, Sweden; Foresight Art Center, Amman, Jordan; Museum of Science and Industry, Manchester, England; Museo de Monterrey, Monterrey, Mexico;
UTS Gallery, Sydney, Austr

alia; Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkey; Snowhite Gallery, Aukland, New Zealand;
Taiwan Museum of Art, Taichung, Taiwan; Kaohsiung Museum of Fine Arts, Kaohsiung, Taiwan; Queen’s Square, Newcastle upon Tyne, England; Galleria Arte Mod

erna, Forte di Marmi, Italy; Gallerie Graphe, Paris, France;
Conseil Général de Meurthe-et-Moselle, Nancy, France; Isla Center for the Arts, Mangilao, Guam.

During 2008 – 2009 Robert Michael Smith was a featured artist along with Bruce Beasley, Jon Isherwood and Kenneth Snelson in “Digital

Stone”, an exhibition sponsored by Autodesk that toured at contemporary art museums throughout China, including Beijing Today Art Museum, Shanghai Duolun Museum of Modern Art, Jinse Gallery at Chongqing, and Art Map Gallery, Wenzhou. A sculpture by each artist was purchased for the permanent collection of China National Museum of Fine Arts at Beijing.

An Update On The New Art And Technology Podcasts

Many are waiting patiently for the new Art and Technology podcasts.

“A  fire side chat where innovation, creativity, technology and science  meet. “

We have completed our first four interviews. I think you will find the topics very interesting.  I have a couple more scheduled for this week, however, we are awaiting our introduction from Jazz Legend Harry Sheppard and for the new website digitalsculpting.net to be complete. The new Digital Sculpting.net website is a community site that we hope to offer many resources on.  It is still in the “construction” phase.  All of the podcasts will be housed there and you will also find accompanying articles and posts on the podcast here.  Podcasts will also  be available in iTunes. More information to come.

A Comparison Between Traditional And Digital Armatures— or Banging ZSpheres Into Submission

by Bridgette Mongeon ( this is a free article. You may copy it for your website. Follow information below.)

With traditional sculpture I can bang my
armatures into submission. Not so
with digital. HOLD ME BACK!

As a traditional sculptor who has spent 30 years of creating physical objects I am moving into digital technology and instead of just creating in my dusty studio, I am also creating within the box, the computer, that is on my desk, in my office. Presently I am working on the mesh or ZSpheres of a model in Pixologic’s ZBrush. I’m moving on to the 6th revision of this model. It is as tedious, if not more so, as the creating of a traditional life-size or monumental armature, but it is also just as necessary.

Picture this; you are in the throws of creating traditionally. The art is materializing before your eyes and you have all of the excitement that goes along with it, but without a proper armature for you clay to sit on; the traditional sculptor knows that you can walk into your studio one morning and find that your masterpiece has crumbled to the ground, sagged or broken into pieces.

A traditional armature
for The Newsboy
is created with pipe,
chicken wire and foam.

Here I sit. My tools are different. It is not a welding rod, spray foam, chicken wire and mallet. It is a Cintiq tablet and a stylus pen. I have pushed and pulled ZSpheres and struggled with the ZSphere model for a week. (Pixologic tutorials state that creating this digital armature would be much easier if I had ZBrush 3.5. Zbrush 3.5 is only offered to those working on the PC and not available to Mac users at this time. ) If I had it, then I would have access to ZSketch, a tool that the Pixologic web site states is, “A new technology based on the ZSphere which will let you freely create your models without restrictions.” This is supposed to be much more intuitive and more like traditional sculpting. It is supposed to make creating the digital armature model, or mesh easier. I would even resort to moving to a PC to create in the ZSketch if I had a copy of ZBrush 3.5 for the PC, and it was true about the miraculous ability of this ZSketch. Then I could bring the sculpture back into my Mac using ZBrush for sculpting.
The process of “easily” creating a model to sculpt on, from scratch, in either Pixologics ZBrush or Autodesk’s Mudbox, in this sculptor’s opinion, is the missing link in these “intuitive” sculpting programs. This is a huge hindrance for those traditional sculptors who might like to utilize these tools in their own workflow. Without an easy way of digital modeling your armature through pushing and pulling on the screen, it is necessary to incorporate other means of 3D modeling. That would mean learning a modeling program, such as 3D’s max, Maya, Cinema 4D, Lightwave, Carrara or blender. For me, these programs feel even less intuitive to the traditional sculpting process. Modeling in a software program does not compare to the traditional process of sculpting. Hiring someone to create a digital model for my artwork feels similar to the process of hiring someone to create a traditional armature and roughing in the design. To me, hiring someone makes the process feel less organic; I feel divorced from an integral part of the creative process.

Here I sit. My tools are different. It is not a welding rod, spray foam, chicken wire and mallet. It is a Cintiq tablet and a stylus pen. I have pushed and pulled ZSpheres and struggled with the ZSphere model for a week. (Pixologic tutorials state that creating this digital armature would be much easier if I had ZBrush 3.5. Zbrush 3.5 is only offered to those working on the PC and not available to Mac users at this time. If I had it, then I would have access to ZSketch, a tool that the Pixologic web site states is, “A new technology based on the ZSphere which will let you freely create your models without restrictions.” This is supposed to be much more intuitive and more like traditional sculpting. It is supposed to make creating the digital armature model, or mesh easier. I would even resort to moving to a PC to create in the ZSketch if I had a copy of ZBrush 3.5 for the PC, and it was true about the miraculous ability of this ZSketch. Then I could bring the sculpture back into my Mac using ZBrush for sculpting.

A Zbrush armature using zspheres

Though creating armatures both traditionally and digitally is tedious work, it is this primal time of the creation that the “feel” of a sculpture presents itself and entices the artist to the creative dance. Another option to modeling is to rough in a small sketch, in traditional clay. A simple roughed in clay that shows form and gesture. Then, scan this sculpture with a 3Dscanner. We are using the Next Engine Scanner in the process. This process is what I call tra-digi art. I discuss it process in the New Mudbox book “Digital Sculpting with Mudbox: Essential Tools and Techniques for Artists” By Bridgette Mongeon and Michael de la Flor. It is necessary to note that scanning is still not a smooth transition. It will be necessary to retopologize this scan to be able to work on it in either ZBrush or Mudbox. The reason is that scanned models are in triangles, and it is necessary to have a model made with quads, or you will, once again, have artifacts and problems down the road. For a better description of why this is important check out this wonderful video on Subdivision Topology: Artifacts at Guerilla CG.

Learning how to retopologize is not as difficult as learning modeling in another program, but it is still work, and not as “true to the process of traditional sculpting.”

So, back to ZSpheres. The frustration of working with ZSpheres without ZSketch can be compared to the experiences I have downstairs in the traditional studio space. The only difference is when a traditional sculpture will not bow to my will; I will take a hammer from my closet of tools and bang the armature into submission. This technique is also an excellent relief of some of my own creative frustration. Working in ZBrush with ZSpheres allows me to push and pull without the physical effort or the clay under my nails. But my digital armature is far from being complete or correct and I am beginning to feel the need for a hammer.

With 30 years of experience in a traditional studio, I intuitively know what will or will not work in armature building. In the traditional studio, the type of armature I make and the type of clay used will depend on what final results I am after. Is this wet clay or is it wax-based clay? Will I be cutting this sculpture off the armature and then hollowing it out for firing or will I be sawing the armature apart with a reciprocating saw, dividing it up into many pieces to go to a foundry for mold making and bonze casting? These are questions I ask myself before beginning a traditional armature. The answers give me direction to create the appropriate support.

Zbrush digital armture shows the skin of the armature.

I do not have this same experience or intuition of digital armature building. I have no doubt that in the very near future, I will be working along on my digital creation, long after the building of the model or mesh and then I will find I cannot get the tool to work properly. An artifact or a bump in the sculpture’s topology—the underlying armature, will most likely be the cause. I will not be able to smooth and I will not be able to sculpt. I will wish I spent more time on creating a proper ZSphere model.

As with traditional sculpture, I must know what my final output will be. If this sculpture creation, that sits within the computer, is to be used in animation, then this armature or model needs to be created in such a way that the final piece can be animated. Bad topology or a bad mesh can cause problems in texturing and even the final rendering. In other words, I will not be able to generate an image of my creation.

My plans are to continue on with this digital model and invite a seasoned pro to my office to look at my digital armature, and perhaps give me some solutions and tricks in working with ZSpheres. Meanwhile, I check with the Pixologic website daily, to see if they are announcing the Mac version of ZSketch, so that I may prove for myself that it certainly does work more like traditional sculpting. And oh yes, I’ll keep the hammer downstairs in the traditional studio, just incase I get the urge to bang my mesh into submission and in doing so destroy my very costly equipment.

*

Bridgette Mongeon is a sculptor and writer and co-author of the new book
“Digital Sculpting with Mudbox: Essential Tools and Techniques for Artists”

She is also the host of a new podcast called Art and Technology
“A fire side chat where innovation, creativity, technology and science  meet. ” For more information visit the artists blog

*

This is a free article you are welcome to use it on your website or blog. It must incorporate the writer/artist credit above.
Please also download all of the photographs to your own server.