|WikiProject Industrial design||(Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)|
This page was recently reverted to a redirect to conceptual art. Despite similar names, and conceptual art at times being refered to as concept art (same name, different meaning), they are not the same thing. Any suggestions as to how to clarify this with a disambiguation page would be welcome.
Looks like some good new info has been added, but "so-and-so is the best" or "so-and-so is the most important" isn't right for an encyclopedia article. --- Mike 04:23, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
Good changes being made... --- Mike 04:31, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
- Agreed, feel free to make changes too :) Wassermelone 19:47, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
I would suggest a better format for the artists links. Link to their page through their real name (if able to track it down) and then include their moniker/alias after that. If you want to add information about the artist... make a wiki entry about em rather than putting it here. (I guess if theres enough information that it warrants it... Wassermelone 19:47, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
- Article needs some sources to back up we're not just pulling a commercial art discipline out of the rabbit's hole here. Necz0r (talk) 01:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Suggested changes too
I would suggest the following change "Concept art is a form of illustration where the main goal is to convey a visual representation of a design, idea, and/or mood for use in movies, video games, or comics in order to promote financing for the project and/or give a visual guideline in the production. This is a relatively new designation popularized by artists working in the automobile and video games industries." to define the way concept art is used befor and in the actual production. Due to my lack of knowledge in english im not sure if this point comes across so maybe someone has a better wording.
also the articles about artists like Ralph McQuarrie and Syd Mead call them conceptual designer ,maybe the term concept artist should be added too and the articles could be linked in the artist list by someone with a little more experience in wikipedia editing and english.
Maybe the artists with their homepagelinks should be listed under "External link" unless it is an wikipedia link but im not so sure about the wikipedia standard .
- Before the prodder removed all the external links, this was definitely way too many external links on this article. The rough standard is that we should only link to a few sites, preferrably none of them commercial, where the topic of the article is discussed or defined. For a major article with substantive sections, it may be appropriate to have suitable external links to such sub-sections. External links to individual artists are definitely inappropriate for this article. If they are notable artists (see WP:BIO, with their own article, one such link is appropriate on their article. GRBerry 01:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
This page does no justice to the term because it is an art term since the 1960s and not an industry one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artclay (talk • contribs) 10:01, 16 July 2008 (UTC) you should include downloads —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 07:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
- On the contrary, "concept art" is, and always has been, very much in service to industry. Throughout history artists have, like anyone with a particular talent, sought to profit from their talent. It's a natural impulse to use what you've got to your own advantage. Artists sought patronage of Popes and Bishops, and now they seek patronage of Game Designers and Auto Makers. You may be uncomfortable with that, but it remains true still the same. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 02:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
I removed the multiple redundant links to Conceptart.org. There were 3 separate links to this domain, to different areas of the site, all of which are easily accessible from their home page. Conceptart.org is important and relevant to this topic, but no need to list several links to the same site. Also removed inappropriate link to a commercial studio's site "LeadingLightDesign.com" which was advertising itself as "The UKs premier Concept Art and production design studio". Wiki is not a ad billboard nor was the site listed providing a unique resources or relevant information on Concept Art in general (See Wikipedia:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided) Phoric (talk) 17:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
I just made some changes to try and take away some of the krufty, self contradicting portions. There was even a small portion about the background of conceptual art! Unfortunately, I've been trying to find some good articles/resources. It doesn't seem to really exist. This designation more or less seems to have organically materialized rather than having someone specific it can point to and say 'This person created concept art!' Any help would be... helpful. Wassermelone —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 20:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Recently I posted a relevant and informative link to: http://fusionfilter.com/?page_id=6313 It would seem that the moderators of this topic do not see it worthy of being listed with the other Concept Art external links and have suggested that I make my appeal here instead. I understand Wiki's desire to keep spam off their site, and do not wish to contribute as such. This link is to a personal audio series that I have designed to benefit students and beginners interested in learning more about the industry of concept art from a professional. True, I do qualify myself in the first minute of each episode (which maybe Wiki has a problem with as seeing it as "self promotion"). I speak of myself only to gain credibility that the facts and advice I am freely giving are trustworthy and accurate and come from years of working in the concept art industry as a professional. (Perhaps the entire episode segment of 10 minutes is not being listened to). It would be foolish for me to believe that "promoting myself" to students or beginners would result in their hiring me to create art for them, as this just doesn't make sense. If I am in the wrong, please explain to me why listing this link to an educational series is any different than a link to conceptart.org, which is also a commercial site which advertise their paid tutorials. Thanks for your time and if you feel my site should be featured on the main page PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesdonvito (talk • contribs) 18:41, 22 January 2010 (UTC)