Maybe it's because of this fellow?

old_man.jpg

I'm also one of those who makes his living working in digital art all day. So I'm quite familiar with the whole CS package as well as quite a few 3D and compositing programs as well. But when I say "photoshopped", perhaps I need to be more clear. Cut and pasting photos into a layout is not real art, whether you use photoshop, painter, or any other program. Adjusting the levels of the photo also is not art. That's really at the heart of it. There's no art happening. And it shows. Granted the printing process doesn't help the final product, but it still comes back to cut and pasting of real images into a montage of line art. That's what I mean.

I used to hate using digital art programs for anything, but they do have their place, especially in advertising and illustration, and you can create some beautiful images if you avoid using it as a crutch.

I agree, something nice about limited colors. Look at old superman comics, etc. Those pop out and look great. Even MM looks great even though that was prob a CYMK cab art.

Its really not the process in printing but the style and taste. There is no question that having someone make art adds immensly to the cost of the machine production.

Why is that? Did JPOP demand the art on his machines? He didn't do the artwork...someone else did. His machines are some of the most beautiful.

I get the difference for sure, but the original comment I quoted skated dangerously close to claiming illustrating and painting digitally was not really illustrating and painting. If you're a digital artist, especially one that illustrates, then you can sympathize with the constantly inaccurate stereotype by the general public that we are not actually drawing or painting anything. That digital illustrations are created by moving the mouse over the "make art please" button and walking off.

I also, unfortunately, disagree with you on the sentiment that composition, alteration and visual design of multiple assets isn't art and voids it of being an artful expression. If that were the case, we are on a slippery slope to start calling any collaborative, composition based medium "not art" (I.E. photography, film, games, pinball, mixed media, magazine/literature layout, interior design, fashion design, etc. etc. etc). BUT, now we're really derailing the conversation with a "what is art" discussion. ;P

So "yes", laying out the movie art assets from LOTR in a pleasing way is art. Was the lay out done well on LOTR? That's an entirely different issue.

We'd have to split on that one then. But I'm one who thinks abstract art is garbage. If a three year old can do it by dribbling paint on a canvas, there's no skill involved. Call me a literalist. I've seen so much crap digital art, whether it's painting over a render of a 3D model (the most common crutch), or taking photos and playing with the contrast, etc.. But I think you'd agree that for pinball art, you shouldn't be trying to do that sort of thing anyway.

hand drawn all the way...'till it hurts....!!

I haven't been in this hobby as long as you all. I like my LOTR translite. I also like the playfield art. I admit some pins just seem like the effort wasn't put in. You have to take into consideration different marketing techniques, different strokes for different folks. For example. I think WPT has a great translite. I accept that I'm in the minority but I also think people are not giving it a fair shot. I am not an artist but I am a fan of art. WPT has subtle and tasteful art. Who cares if the girl isn't that sexy. If every machine catered to the comic art fans or whatever each pin would lose it's unique character. To each their own. Also the Hulk LE might just be there for you guys who don't want photoshopped characters. Every pin can't satisfy every pinhead equally. We all have our own tastes and there are plenty of pins out there for all of us. Enjoy what you like and let others enjoy what they like without trying to belittle their opinions.

no you're not.
it would look bad if LOTR look like a comic book.

sometimes it looks better when it's hand draw, sometimes it's better with real pictures.
it's all up to the designer and yes sometimes it's a bad decison.

That's funny, because I was part of the team that created Wreck-it Ralph at Disney. Small world.

We do a lot of licensed work, not just this one. We did a Green Lantern tie-in, a Battleship (the movie) tie-in, Brave, etc. Wreck-it Ralph was probably one of the most exciting (because we're all fans of the movie/theme in our office).

Since you work at Disney, can you get me a lead on the Fix It Felix Jr arcade machine, then? Talk about art, that cabinet is 'retro' done so right!!!!

ebay.com link: Fix it Felix Jr Arcade Video Game from Disney Movie Wreck it Ralph

Yeah, they had three Ralph arcade games up in our lounge area during the making of the film. The controller always seemed to be very un-sensitive to moves. Or it was my playing skill. It was my impression they made a couple for promotional use. They set up an arcade in-house as well during the time, but sadly, no pins.

Well, thanks to you both. Saw Wreck-It Ralph and absolutely loved it!

Later,
EV

On behalf of all of us who were on 70-80 hour weeks for four months at the end of it, you're welcome. You can find me in the credits.

Hand drawn all the way!!!
Being the Art School fossil that I am, it was always hand drawn. Computers like the SGI Indigo were just being introduced to us and I really hated working on/with them. Hand drawn was just so much easier then.
Now, with technology being what it is today and the tablets becoming more accurate/sensitive, the line between hand drawn "paper" and hand drawn "computer", is almost indistinguishable.

I guess the moral of the story for this thread is, give us more boldly illustrated exaggerated caricatures of people/places/things, instead of "half-assed" underdeveloped lightly touched up PF's of photo-realistic garbage...

BTW: They have a whole (free play) section for Ralph in the Starcade at Disneyland. They managed to set up the TRON-LE from Flynn's next to POTC too. (Sad shape on the TRON-LE though...)

WIR.jpg

I agree. a well illustrated image will always be more aestheticly pleasing than a photograph (or photo paint-over)

as example, I'd much rather there be an illustration of the wicked witch, by J. Scott Campbell, rather than a photo of her:

witch.jpg

I have SM, NBA & ACDC --photoshop

MM, STTNG & TZ --Art

I much prefer the art on the playfield and translite. I was really hoping for that on WOZ. Please correct me here, but I understand that a lot of WOZ is art but the licensor required certain images to be used rather than drawn. Anyone know this for sure?

I dont know for sure but I wouldent doubt it. having worked in the video game industry the past 8 years I know that clients and license agreements can force you to do some pretty cooky things despite hurting the overall quality of the game.