found on the Depthcore website: "A Trip to the Park" by David Garvin
Wouldn't mind learning this program, whatever it is. The line quality, overall softness, and obvious ease of creating quirky, subjective "psycho-geometries" appeals. It's not that typical Pixar rendered look, even though it's rendered. The artist here is under 20, and this could be a one-off but somehow it feels newer and fresher to me than say, Torben Giehler, who seems stuck in an old labor-intensive paradigm (hard-edged painting--been there!) but is trying to hip it up, computer it up. This looks like it just happened, but could also be from the game world. (A Katamari Damacy-like screenshot will follow to accentuate the point.)
I like that image too, but I found Garvin's site and there is some major mach twee going on there.
He's 19, so I'm cutting him some slack. He'll figure it out eventually or he won't. This way, he gets to think about why some people like one image more than another (simplicity, a sense of airy openness and spontaneity) and I get a great image for my blog.
OK, That is young. (And that example is good.)
Tom - I'm surprised you'd lead with "wouldn't mind learning this program, whatever it is." Isn't that buying into some common misconceptions about art made with computers?
I'm being extraordinarily lazy in not looking up the program but no, I think googling Depthcore immediately disproves that "the program is the art," if that's what it sounded like I was saying. Or visiting this particular artist's site, as L.M. did. I suppose the rest of my sentence is "wouldn't mind learning this program, whatever it is, so I can adapt it to my own style, or 'critique it from within,' if possible."
Also by "obvious ease" I was referring to the fact that so many things made with it *are* psycho-geometric landscapes, and many of them are not good. Should have made that clearer.