XM Doc Oc 1:4

[crimsinwing1989]

Originally Posted by wolf-brother

No it didn't. I never said it negated it. I actually agree with that part. Just saying it doesn't matter when it comes to what someone prefers.

And i never said it mattered. and as i agree with this, I suspect were in full agreement. 😃

Originally Posted by wolf-brother

It's all about what appeals to an individual.

[wolf-brother]

Exactly!

[crimsinwing1989]

[Bmutha]

Originally Posted by crimsinwing1989

But it doesn’t negate the fact of one being objectively better than the other, irregardless of which appeals to an individual... Guess that part went over your head.

lol...you say one is objectively better because you subjectively prefer one artist over the other.

You can't make any objective conclusions about those two statues because you,personally, have no clue what the original intent was.

ARH may have went to the artist and asked for him/her to sculpt them a "hussy"...they may not have wanted a muscled jungle girl.

Your opinion is not fact, just deal with it.

[GaryTonge]

Originally Posted by crimsinwing1989

To say that there is no right or wrong answer to which is better is a total disregard for artistry and the years of study, thinking and creativity that go into developing the level of skill that is on display here. I’m not saying that because one is better everyone should like the better one, but i assume that people can recognize the differences and 'see' which one is better sculpted regardless of which one they like more.

This statement is completely subjective. You're using personal bias to determine what's "better sculpted".

What you're saying is people who "see" what you see as far as techincal attributes of the sculpt go, can tell the difference and "recognize" the better sculpt. Your assumption is biased.

[Subby1938]

I’m yet to see a statue posted by our philosopher . I love pictures post something you collect . Not attacking just love seeing collections

[crimsinwing1989]

Originally Posted by Bmutha

1.lol...you say one is objectively better because you subjectively prefer one artist over the other.

2.You can't make any objective conclusions about those two statues because you,personally, have no clue what the original intent was.

3.ARH may have went to the artist and asked for him/her to sculpt them a "hussy"...they may not have wanted a muscled jungle girl.

Your opinion is not fact, just deal with it.

1.No, i say one is better because it looks better than the other…

2.False, objective conclusions can be made (by anyone) by looking at both statues. For example ones a warrior woman while the others a jungle girl, one has a sword while the other a makeshift knife, etc. Not sure where you were going with that one.

3.And the issue isn’t the intent here, it doesnt matter if Arh asked for a warrior while the others a jungle girl. The focus is the female form and which was sculpted better.

And I’m not saying my opinion is fact i’m saying BE OBJECTI--nevermind.

[crimsinwing1989]

Originally Posted by GaryTonge

This statement is completely subjective. You're using personal bias to determine what's "better sculpted".

What you're saying is people who "see" what you see as far as techincal attributes of the sculpt go, can tell the difference and "recognize" the better sculpt. Your assumption is biased.

Nah, just using my eyes.

No, what i’m saying is one appears more anatomically correct and proportionately accurate than the other. Anatomy is a fact and is objective, not assumption.

[crimsinwing1989]

Originally Posted by Subby1938

I’m yet to see a statue posted by our philosopher . I love pictures post something you collect . Not attacking just love seeing collections

I don’t have any statues, sorry to disappoint sub.

And do me a favor, stop interjecting yourself into discussions i’m having . Stop talking to me . 👎

[crimsinwing1989]

And apologies to wolf brother if the “went over your head” comment was offensive in anyway, sounded kinda rude when i read back over it.