Thursday, May 1, 2008

Top 10 Star Wars Video Games

Top 10 Star Wars Video Games
A long time ago in a galaxy far far away, or rather here on
earth in 1982, the Star Wars franchise decided to branch
out into video games. The first 'The Empire Strikes Back'
for the Atari proved such a hit that it was soon followed
the following year with several others. Now of course there
are several hundred Star Wars computer and video games and
to celebrate I've listed the top ten that every fan should
try and play.

1. Knights Of The Old Republic. Set thousands of years
before the actual movies series, Knights combined classic
RPG with a great story to produce one of the best games of
the series ever played.

2. Star Wars Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight. As a first person
action game, Dark Forces II was superb, that you could use
Jedi powers made it a must have game.

3. Star Wars Rogue Squadron II: Rogue Leader. Some fun
arcade style shooting action made Rogue Squadron II a firm
favorite with space game fans.

4. TIE Fighter. Following on from the success of X-Wing,
TIE Fighter improved it's storyline and graphics to produce
an overall more enjoyable game.

5. Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast. Based on the
Quake III engine, this 2002 game was notable particularly
for the great light saber battles.

6. Lego Star Wars II. Based on events of the original movie
trilogy, the second lego game of the series proved to be
very popular.

7. X-Wing. The original PC game that later would go on to
inspire three full sequels and expansion packs, this game
allowed you to finally fly an X-Wing and help the alliance.

8. Empire at War. In 2006 your attempts to control the
universe could have been released in this popular strategy
game.

9. Dark Forces. This 1995 Doom style shooter combined sharp
graphics and a good plot to have you try and stop Darth
Vader's attempts to create a bunch of Dark Troopers (really
really bad Storm Troopers).

10. Republic Commando. Released in 2005 this first person
shooter allowed you to play on the dark side while
controlling a group of clones in the clone war.

So there you go, the top ten Star Wars Games of all time.
While everyone will have a different opinion of which games
should have made the list, these classics still seem to
remain favorites in the hearts of true fans of the series.


----------------------------------------------------
http://www.starwars-stuff.com/Store/Star-Wars-Game
All your favorite Star Wars Video Games
http://www.starwars-stuff.com
You can always use more Star Wars Stuff

Nature Photography: Art Or Technology?

Nature Photography: Art Or Technology?
Nature photography has been around since cameras were
invented, but in the past 20 years it has achieved
new-found credibility as an art form. Before that, it had
been largely relegated to the tourist industry, where
second-rate nature photography was mass marketed on
postcards and calendars. You certainly would not expect to
find nature photography featured in galleries and on the
walls of the well-heeled and tasteful.

Gradually postcards improved in quality, and serious nature
photographers with real talent began to produce their own
calendars. High quality posters of whales, wolves,
elephants and spectacular landscapes from around the world
were suddenly worthy of framing. Finally nature photography
galleries began to appear and, more importantly, turn a
profit.

When I opened my gallery in 1993, many people still felt
that you could not make a living selling photography; that
people would only buy paintings to hang on their walls.
These days, new galleries are opening everywhere; some
good, some not so good, and a few that have really hit the
big time.

All this activity in the world of nature photography has
inspired new generations of photographers to look at nature
photography as a hobby or possible profession. These new
arrivals come from a very different world than the one I
grew up in. Technology that was unimagined back then is now
commonplace, and new photographers have more power in their
hands than ever before. But what implications does all this
technology have for nature photography?

Photographers now have to make a personal decision about
how much they will allow technology to define their
photography. In earlier days, good nature photography
required a very simple approach; find a great subject, in
the best possible light, and use your skill with a camera
to capture what you saw. Today it is quite a different
story. A nature photographer can (if they choose) find a
decent subject, photograph it in whatever lighting
conditions they happen to find, then go home and completely
alter the colours, the contrast, and even the detail of the
picture. The result can be an image that owes more to the
marvels of technology than to the wonders of nature.

Each to his own. It is not for me to judge the creative
decisions of another photographer. But the question that is
in the back of your mind right now deserves to be asked; is
this nature photography?

Every photographer is entitled to pursue their craft any
way they choose. Nobody could argue that skills with a
computer are any less creative than traditional nature
photography skills. However, the person who views a
photograph deserves to know what they are looking at,
especially if that person is a customer prepared to part
with their hard-earned money.

I know many photographers get quite defensive on this
subject. Camera clubs around the world continue to wrestle
with the issue of judging natural photos alongside
manipulated photos. Some clubs have tried to divide
competition into separate categories, only to find people
sneaking their digitally altered photos into the unaltered
category for equal recognition. Understandably, 'software
photographers' want their talents to be recognised on the
same level as the 'in-camera photographers'. And so they
should, but not in a way that ignores the difference
between the two disciplines.

This is not an attempt to denigrate the skills of the
software photographers. It just seems to me that the
viewer, and in particular the paying customer, deserves to
know.

Increasingly the public is becoming suspicious of good
photography. Anything that is outstanding or unusual is now
assumed to have been altered or manipulated using computer
software. In many cases, it probably has. Unfortunately,
this suspicion gives little credit to the traditional
photographer (and there are still plenty of us out there)
who prefer to do the creative work in the field, before
they press the shutter, and reproduce what was captured on
the day.

You can't imagine, unless it has happened to you, how
frustrating it is to proudly display your best nature
photography, only to hear people say 'These days it's all
done with computers.'

For the record, my photography is as traditional as it can
be in the digital age. I am going through the long process
of scanning thousands of slides, and increasingly software
is becoming a necessity to my business. Not to alter a
photo, but to balance the colour and contrast to make sure
the printed photograph matches the original slide. It is
also an enormous benefit to finally be able to restore
images that have been scratched or otherwise damaged by age.

I recognise that the trend towards using software to
enhance and alter photos is not only inevitable, but just
as legitimate as old fashioned nature photography. However,
I continue to encourage people to learn true camera skills
as well, so that the use of software to manipulate images
is a creative choice, not a remedy for lack of ability.
Thankfully, the demand for my ebooks suggests that there
are plenty of people out there who feel the same way.


----------------------------------------------------
To see some Australian Nature Photography that is captured
in the field, and reproduced from the original image on
film, see Andrew Goodall's work at
http://www.naturesimage.com.au To learn the essential
skills of better photography, you can also find Andrew's
ebooks and subscribe to the online newsletter...it's free!

Artistic Talent Myth Plagues Visual Art World

Artistic Talent Myth Plagues Visual Art World
There is a great deal of confusion in the field of art and
art instruction with regards to the subjects of talent and
creativity.

Until recently, like the majority of contemporary society,
I too believed that to be a fine artist one had to be born
with an abundance of artistic talent - you either had it or
you didn't.

This is the likely reason I was an art dealer and owner of
a gallery for years, instead of being an artist and having
my work displayed in a gallery.

Today I am quite relieved to find that, even though I was
not born with a large currency of innate visual artistic
talent, such talent can be acquired and developed.

I can imagine that quite a large number of this article's
readership disagrees - perhaps some vehemently - with that
statement.

This is why I am bringing in someone exponentially more
qualified to address the confusion on the subject of talent
which has permiated societies around the art world for
100's of years.

I didn't just find any art instructor to help sort this
out, Larry Gluck has been teaching others how to draw and
paint since 1975. His 20 Mission: Renaissance fine art
studios are currently teaching more than 3,000 students
every week. His unique method of instruction, known as The
Gluck Method, is also taught in various colleges in America.

So without further ado here is Mr. Gluck to help dispel
this "talent myth..."

"I'm not very creative, I have no talent." If you had a
nickel for every time I heard someone say that before I got
them to sign up for drawing and painting instruction you
would be very wealthy indeed.

Perhaps you too believe you lack the "artistic gene" or
"special gift" called talent. Let's get real about this
thing called talent, shall we?

Talent implies a degree of skill or ability. Ability in any
field can be acquired. Were you born with the talents
required of you in your current profession?

Of course not, you acquired the skills you needed in order
to perform. Can you learn to play any musical instrument
you want or would you need to have been born with the
talent?

Like anything else, you can learn to draw and paint
beautifully. You need only the desire to acquire the skills
and someone to provide you with workable instruction.

Moreover, people often confuse talent with creativity. Both
are important, they combine to create art, but they are not
the same.

The dictionary defines 'create' as; to cause to come into
being, as something unique that would not naturally evolve
by ordinary processes. Create is what evolves from one's
own thought or imagination, to bring about, as by intention
or design. Creativity could easily be described as what one
imagines and then produces using one's skills.

People use their skills to bring their creative concepts
into the real world for others to see. The painter observes
a spectacular view. He imagines painting it in vibrant
colors. Then, using his talent, he transforms his idea into
the actual painting.

Not everyone is born with an abundance of talent, but each
of us possesses a wealth of potential artistic creativity.
It is imprisoned within all of us. We have only to free it.

Natural artistic talent alone is not enough. Those born
with natural talent, an instinct for color, the ability to
sketch a good likeness with charcoal, are often thought of
as gifted. However in life, innate ability often turns out
to be more of a liability than an asset.

It is often found that the Natural doesn't know how he does
what he does. Natural talent, devoid of understanding, can
be unreliable. One small failure can shatter it.

The Natural may eventually invent "reasons" as to why he
can perform only some of the time. Examples are the writer
who must drink to create his best lines or the painter who
"knows" she can only work when Mars is transiting
Sagittarius.

Unfortunately artistic talent and creativity are not
properly married in the majority of fine art instruction
curriculums. Studying under the Italian portrait master
Giuseppe Trotta ' a classmate of Picasso himself,
graduating from The Pratt Institute in New York, and
founding the world's largest fine art program for drawing
and painting instruction, have provided me much insight
into art education.

I have seen both sides of the talent and creativity coin
hobby-horsed in colleges and private art instruction
programs. Rarely have I seen both sides given proper merit
simultaneously. On the talent side, you have the art
instructor who ignores any form of creativity. The music
teacher, believing all great music was originated hundreds
of years ago, who disallows any original work from students.

On the other hand, focusing on creativity alone, you find
the art teacher who applauds the unrecognizable blob of
paint smeared across the canvas. No fundamentals are
taught, thus there is no improvement in the student's
artistic ability to reproduce what he or she envision in
their mind.

In developing talent one should begin with the fundamentals
of drawing and sketching; the proper technique for holding
a charcoal pencil, how to create depth and realism, the
ability to capture light and shadow...

Once the ground work for these fundamentals is thoroughly
laid the precise principles that underlie all drawing and
painting skills can be taught.

This does not stifle originality, but instead provides the
best possible environment for it to grow.

When the fine art student has both a solid technical
foundation and strong nurturing of creativity, they are
then capable of producing what they conceive in their mind.

And that is exactly where any artist wants to be."


----------------------------------------------------
Eric Hines has worked in the field of art for over a decade
as a musician, art dealer and is currently employed by
Mission Renaissance, the world's largest drawing and
painting instruction program in the world. He is currently
taking art classes to learn to draw and paint, very soon he
will be selling his own art work and not just the works of
others. You can visit the Mission Renaissance website at
http://www.thegluckmethod.com