I’ve read that when people in the Renaissance started rediscovering ancient sculpture they were quite gobsmacked by how much more lifelike it was than the stiff statues they had been making themselves.

Perhaps every age imagines it is the best and brightest and in reality we’ve not moved much in 3000 years.

I’m not a sculptor, but I’ve seen friends of mine who do very detailed creations from memory, or from sketches. Heck, even when I sit down with a block of grey plasticine clay to unwind, let my mind wander, I will reliably approximate shapes, contours and whatnot from things inside my head. 

People nowadays rely on things such as photographs, but because they rely on this tech, there’s no real motivation to exercise and develop the mental structures, virtual and otherwise, that are necessary without possessing the advantage of photography. 

People no longer need to memorize long narratives like the Iliad, the Talmud or long inventory lists like was necessary before writing and data storage devices such as scrolls and books either (unless it gives them pleasure.)  

Then there are the extremely gifted, a relevant example being   Stephen Wiltshire MBE, a British architectural artist of indescribable talent. Even as a young child he could be taken on a helicopter ride, see a view from a high place, even for an instant, then do an exact drawing of what he saw. He does this with buildings, even very large ones. 

However, his talent is not one of mere cold, robotic reproduction. His architectural renderings give the subjects a life-force and a personality. He also, if it suits the situation, do an improvisation, an interpretation, analogous to a what musician does when improvising or playing with an already written piece. 

So, it’s neat to think about a Hellenist walking around 2000 years ago with a camera, but yeah, I had your same reaction. I think sometimes we techies can waaay over-think things, which in the extreme can lead to, ah….things…such as Erich von Daniken’s Chariots of the Gods.

BTW — small sample of links relevant to Stephen W. :

http://www.stephenwiltshire.co.uk/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Wiltshire

http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/stephen-wiltshire?before=1348167853

Viewed Pictures, Mind Blown

So the short answer is plastic. Extruded from a nozzle that builds up the object in layers as it “prints.”

Ironically though, it is. Because necessity is more often the mother of crime.

You know, the other thing that always gets me is the old saw about how there’s no point anymore in an artist trying to create lifelike images, since cameras can do it better. Every time I hear it I die a little bit inside.

I love technology but saying that people can’t do without it, or that it does things so much better that it’s not worth trying, implies that it comes from nowhere. It amounts to taking it for granted, and I hate that.

I say Do ANYTHING you can to fuck this technology.

I would like to see a fair review and comparison of all 3D printers on the market, tables comparing stats, features, cost, resolution, material cost, speed etc. makerbot models, reprap / pro, form 1, utilimaker, cube, and so on. as there is so much marketing talk and misinformation floating about about the capabilities of these machines. Would be nice to see some compared benchmark test prints of stuff with overhangs and enclosed free moving parts to help make an informed decision.

But really, I can think of so many wonderful uses for doing things like this. Imagine if the entire Iranian museum was uploaded into digital archives! Or or or or! Everything! We are so close to being post scarcity we can touch it.