Why do people only notice the BAD points of your video?

[SSJVegita0609]

The Matrix Sequals took 5 years to make, and they sucked...

Tim Burton spent 3 years working on Planet of the Apes, it sucked...

Star Wars Episodes 1 and 2 took at least 3 years each to make, and they sucked...

Shakespeare spent over 10 years writing Hamlet, is it his best work? Most people say no...

Conclusion? Time does not equal quality.

I don't know enough about classical art to give you any examples of still famous works that took very little time to produce... Oh wait, half of Picasso's stuff took him less than a week to produce.

I think what you mean to say Hatter, is that EFFORT yeilds quality. But time does not always imply effort.

[Rozard]

The Matrix Sequals took 5 years to make, and they sucked...Tim Burton spent 3 years working on Planet of the Apes, it sucked...Star Wars Episodes 1 and 2 took at least 3 years each to make, and they sucked...Shakespeare spent over 10 years writing Hamlet, is it his best work? Most people say no...

Conclusion? Time does not equal quality.

I don't know enough about classical art to give you any examples of still famous works that took very little time to produce... Oh wait, half of Picasso's stuff took him less than a week to produce.

I think what you mean to say Hatter, is that EFFORT yeilds quality. But time does not always imply effort.

[Otohiko]

The Matrix Sequals took 5 years to make, and they sucked...

Tim Burton spent 3 years working on Planet of the Apes, it sucked...

Star Wars Episodes 1 and 2 took at least 3 years each to make, and they sucked...

Shakespeare spent over 10 years writing Hamlet, is it his best work? Most people say no...

Conclusion? Time does not equal quality.

I don't know enough about classical art to give you any examples of still famous works that took very little time to produce... Oh wait, half of Picasso's stuff took him less than a week to produce.

I think what you mean to say Hatter, is that EFFORT yeilds quality. But time does not always imply effort.

x2

To effort, I'd also add intention, discipline, inspiration and clarity. Any of the above requires effort, but can be summoned by a good artist in an instant to produce good art.

I can believe that someone can make a great AMV in 30 minutes. If that someone is an artistic genius, sure. (I guess that brings me back to wondering why PG is taking so long... )

[Onideus_Mad_Hatter]

What about improvisation?

Narrow. Naaaarow.

Good art = quality

but

Quality does not = time.

You know it's interesting to see some of you bring up various genres and so forth, but so far NONE of you have actually been able to give an artists name, or even a specific work.

Take Jean-Michel Basquiat, what most would call a Grafitti Artist, although his art is quite simple in design, he often times spent weeks developing it and he considered many of his works to be unfinished (even though he sold them to people). It's easy to say that a specific genre requires little effort, but if you actually spend some time examining artists and their art in those genres in most cases you'll find they spend countless hours making it. Take Piet Mondrian, he sometimes spent weeks deciding on the precise positioning of just a SINGLE LINE. o_O

[Pie Row Maniac]

I can believe that someone can make a great AMV in 30 minutes. If that someone is an artistic genius, sure. (I guess that brings me back to wondering why PG is taking so long... )

In a way, you just answered your own question. 8)

[Pie Row Maniac]

You know it's interesting to see some of you bring up various genres and so forth, but so far NONE of you have actually been able to give an artists name, or even a specific work.

The Matrix Sequals took 5 years to make, and they sucked...

Tim Burton spent 3 years working on Planet of the Apes, it sucked...

Star Wars Episodes 1 and 2 took at least 3 years each to make, and they sucked...

Shakespeare spent over 10 years writing Hamlet, is it his best work? Most people say no...

[paizuri]

the anime he used wasn't THAT obscure...hell I knew and seen Comedy before he made that video...I just never knew the dvd's it was from o.O.

I like how you use yourself as a basis of comparison...it's quite amusing.

Okay AD, other than Panacet's, it looks like I gave your AMV it's first REAL opinion...

An AMV can be good on a variety of points, both subjective and objective stances. For instance you can say with absolute certainty whether a video makes use of advanced editing techniques like lip synching, head and background motion lip syching, flash bang effects, animated music effects, animation reconstruction, etc, etc.

However just because an AMV is a technical marvel when it comes to editing doesn't mean that everyone is going to enjoy it. That's where the theme comes in. Whether the majority of the audience can relate to it, or get lost in the emotions and the story. As I said though, that's a subjective stance. No matter what you make, there will most likely always be someone who loves it, someone who hates it, and someone who just doesn't give a fuck...all three stances will be based entirely on subjective analysis though.

TIME does equate to quality though. Michelangelo took FOUR YEARS to paint the Sistine Chapel, not 4 days. Nearly every celebrated marvel of artistic achievement in human history took countless hours to produce. From the Notre Dame Cathedral, to the great Pyramids, to the Crazy Horse Memorial (a project which may take another FIFTY YEARS to complete). Even the anime series that so many of you rip apart to make your "art", some of it took DECADES of artistic creativity and work to produce the final results. TIME DOES EQUAL QUALITY. Anyone who thinks otherwise is most likely an ignorant fool or young and inexperienced.

I fail to see how you have proven that time equals quality (well, aside from putting it in capital letters). Time doesn't necessarily equal quality. If the amount of time put into something always increased the artistic merit of the things we produce, if I spent four years painting my house on my back should it should look like the Sistine Chapel? If I spent FIVE years doing so, should it look BETTER than the Sistine Chapel?

There are two major parts to AMVs: concept and execution. And although a video with a great concept done poorly is still a bad video, a video with a bad concept and excellent execution can only go so far. All the time in the world is not going to make a video with an inferior concept but impeccable editing become better than a video that has both a great concept and great execution. I mean, what are you going to do? Add MORE lip syncing, more effects, more cuts? Or are you going to try to add more "concept"?

For example, I'll use sliced bread, since I think someone mentioned it earlier. It takes a few seconds for me to slice a piece of bread off of a loaf. If I sliced it very carefully and evenly and took 30 seconds to do it, the bread would still taste the same. If I took a whole month to do it, it'd taste kind of moldy.

[AbsoluteDestiny]

Shakespeare spent over 10 years writing Hamlet

um... wtf shakespeare biography have you been reading?

There was probably a 10 year gap between him and Kyd writing the Ur-Hamlet and then him doing the Hamlet we now know but for all intents and purposes they are different plays that individually only took as long as plays usually took to write... which isn't very long.

[Onideus_Mad_Hatter]

The Matrix Sequals took 5 years to make, and they sucked...

ROTFL...actually I consider the third Matrix movie to be the best out of all of them. Primarily for the flight/fight sequences. I just hope all those directors out there remember it when they make the live action DBZ movie and the next Superman movie.

Tim Burton spent 3 years working on Planet of the Apes, it sucked...

In what way? I thought it was very good, maybe it wasn't a direct literal adaptation of the books, but in it's own right there was nothing wrong with it at all.

Star Wars Episodes 1 and 2 took at least 3 years each to make, and they sucked...

Again, in what way? Certainly in some respects I agree with you about SW. For some reason you seem to be misinterpreting what I'm saying. I'm not saying that time ALWAYS equates to quality, you're reversing what I've said. I'm talking about QUALITY, not time in an of itself. TIME doesn't MAKE quality, what I'm saying is that quality TAKES TIME. Certainly it also takes other things, like effort, understanding, etc, etc, but in this discussion I'm talking about just the aspect of time and how it's usually an essential part of what makes "good" art.

Shakespeare spent over 10 years writing Hamlet, is it his best work? Most people say no...

And yet it is considered to be one of his best works and certainly so when compared to other writers. Again though, at this point you're roaming off topic and trying to counter my arguments by using things I never stood against. Essentially I've made the claim that cookies taste better when you use high quality ingredients and then you're saying, "No, it's all about how good your oven is." Certainly having a good oven would make a difference, but it's not the point that I'm debating, I'm talking about high quality ingredients vs poor quality ingredients. Do you understand?

Conclusion? Time does not equal quality.

I don't know enough about classical art to give you any examples of still famous works that took very little time to produce... Oh wait, half of Picasso's stuff took him less than a week to produce.

I think what you mean to say Hatter, is that EFFORT yeilds quality. But time does not always imply effort.[/quote]

[jonmartensen]

You know it's interesting to see some of you bring up various genres and so forth, but so far NONE of you have actually been able to give an artists name, or even a specific work.

lollers, that's not the fountain of knowledge you drinketh from. Oh well, balls to you, keep those wheels spinning.