ideomotor drawing

[Aster]

Doing things automatically often results in things being done in a much better way than doing things as a result of thinking and implementing conclusions. Sorry guys, verbally I am a disaster, yet ideomotorically I am just Aster! The above statement counts also for automatic/ideomotor drawing. If I prethought what to draw and then conclude something before commencing, the drawing would turn out to be somehing completely different than when drawn automatically where no thinking, no choices, no conclusions are relevant.
About the super(natural)quality of an automatic drawing I'd like to add this: suppose the idea would be to create an animation of considerable length on the topic of conception and birth. The possible father, mother, fetus, childbirth and child should all be incorporated in the visual representation of this animation. Normally a task like this would take a lot of time to think over, conclude something towards the visuals, script them and then create the animation in thousands upon thousands of drawings, built upon layers and layers of information.

I would like to show you one automatic drawing that was done in less than 45 minutes, thoughtlessly, chaotically and not knowing what I was drawing, but an example which has all the above qualities and themes incorporated inside. All pictures represented here under are extractions from one and the same automatic drawing. I entertain myself thinking that the drawing shows the OSIRIS/ISIS/HORUS concept; Father, Mother and Child integrated into one being, into one act.


The original automatic drawing, created in 1997.

From conception to birth showing 4 images of a sequence that could be animated into a moving picture.

the birth drawing.

Previous image flipped horizontally showing the child transformed into an integrated being with the mother. Watch also the person/entity on top of the totem.

Ask anyone to draw an animation of such quality in just 45 minutes. Does this drawn act not prove that ideomotor drawing has at least the potential of manifesting a super-ability / super quality that may be latently present in all of us ?

Rgds.,
Aster.

[Aster]

And so, I forgot to add the image of what I presume is the (reprillian) father, for those who are administrating my claims; this image is also extracted from that one original drawing of 1997. Here it is.



Rgds.,
Aster.

[Navigator]

Quote:

Ask anyone to draw an animation of such quality in just 45 minutes. Does this drawn act not prove that ideomotor drawing has at least the potential of manifesting a super-ability / super quality that may be latently present in all of us ?

So when you say "ideomotor" what is it that you think you are touching on here Aster?

What is this 'latent presence in all of us' do you know?

(or suspect even)

btw - that is an interesting piece of Art - they all are. Are you saying these images are that much more special because you were not consciously aware at the time you were creating them?

Do you think it is you who are creating these pics (as in- is the latent super quality/ability something you see as being of your own self)?

Thank You

[TheBoyPaj]

So you can draw. What do you want, a medal? Send this stuff to Disney* because as far as I can tell you're not even claiming it's paranormal.


*Actually, can you imagine the nightmares it would cause if he DID get a job there?

[Marian]

I draw. I could draw those in under 45 minutes.

However, it's not a talent contest. Your point is that the drawings are 'automatic' drawings (in that you are 'getting' the images paranormally) correct? That you are not in control of your hand?

Here's an easy test you can do yourself, if that is the case. Try a blindfold.

Take a large sheet of paper (from a large bolt, you want it to cover the table you're working on). Diagram in pencil the outline of the page you'll be working within (since in your drawings there is clear understanding of spacial limitations). This way the space will be mapped out (8 x 11 1/2 or whatever you normally use) but you won't be able to feel the edge of the paper.

Then using charcoal (or pencil) or whichever medium you normally find easiest to work with, attempt to do the 'automatic' drawings while blindfolded. Ideally though you should use a soft medium, so that you can't feel the work you've done previously. Charcoal would be ideal, or a soft pencil.

Then remove the blindfold and see what you've created. If the inspiration is from another source seperate from yourself, and the drawing is 'automatic' drawing, you shouldn't need to visually see the paper to create the same type/quality of images. If the images are not of the same type/quality, then I would suggest that it's not automatic, but that you are the sole creator of the work.

I'd be interested to know if you attempt to do it, and would love to see the results.

[Donn]

Aster, as someone who likes to draw I can understand the "power" of unconscious drawing. I rely on this effect in my drawings because it is far more free and loose.
However to read-into the end result some mystical truth is no different to reading the future in a fish's entrails or the way swallows fly. (Aterix and Obelix would understand!)

Quote:

The possible father, mother, fetus, childbirth and child should all be incorporated in the visual representation of this animation.

Unless you draw in lines and rectangles, I am guessing this is a rare thing, then you will be making circular shapes that loop and cross and the inevitable result will be impressions of wombs and life.
This is also highly subjective, other people may see death and yet others may see chaotic thoughts in your drawings - there is nothing there other than lines on a page - all the rest is what happens between our ears.

I see you have mirrored your drawing to strengthen the effect. That seems more considered, more thought-about to me. Perhaps is not so "automatic" anymore. Perhaps you are manipulating the end-result?

If you covered the drawing with a blank page, could you then claim to have drawn the void?
Do you see how silly it is?

B.T.W - I really like the drawings. They are strong works.

[Anders W. Bonde]

...on the subject of interpretation, it would be interesting to see the virtually infinite number of symmetrical figures that can be created simply by rotation and translation of the mirror axis. It's then just a matter of selecting the image that best fits one's whim of the moment, like in a Rorsach test.

IMHO, we're being shown a case of confirmation bias and searching for patterns where none are. Nothing paranormal about that - this is what believers of the paranormal typically do.

The pictures are aesthetically very interesting, though.

[Navigator]

Nothing paranormal about that

Greetings Anders W. Bonde

Do you have anything in evidence which can be attributed directly to 'what is paranormal'?

How does one put value on what is and what isn't paranormal?

Aster... do you consider that what you are doing re: your Art. "paranormal"?

As for me, I don't know what paranormal is anymore as no one seems to know for sure anyhoo.

So I think more than likely the unexplained is paranormal - but isn't really - it is just those unexplained parts of nature which are thus labelled 'super'

Eventually humans will get it.

[Anders W. Bonde]

Greetings, Navigator!

By just about any definition of "paranormal" that I have seen, not least the one applicable to the JREF challenge, I would say that interpretation of Rohrsach diagrams and the location of a mirror to get a doodle to resemble something of your volition can readily and fully be explained by psychological and cultural principles - no recourse to paranormal explanations required.

I believe that history has shown us that the "unexplained" is merely that - "unexplained", and that once the explanation is found it is always in line with we know about the world at that point in time. In the interim, until an explanation is found, some attach paranormal significance to the "unexplained", apparently because these people cannot live with the lack of an explanation, so they fabricate one for their comfort. This, of course, is a sure way of never being able to explain anything, because by inventing an explanation, rather than searching for it in earnest, the search for the explanation is set aside, and for some of these people the fabrication remains in spite of the explanations actually being found.

(Edited for typo)

[Navigator]

Quote:

Originally posted by Anders W. Bonde
Greetings, Navigator!

By just about any definition of "paranormal" that I have seen, not least the one applicable to the JREF challenge, I would say that interpretation of Rohrsach diagrams and the location of a mirror to get a doodle to resemble something of your volition can readily and fully be explained by psychological and cultural principles - no recourse to paranormal explanations required.

I believe that history has shown us that the "unexplained" is merely that - "unexplained", and that once the explanation is found it is always in line with we know about the world at that point in time. In the interim, until an explanation is found, some attach paranormal significance to the "unexplained", apparently because these people cannot live with the lack of an explanation, so they fabricate one for their comfort. This, of course, is a sure way of never being able to explain anything, because by inventing an explanation, rather than searching for it in earnest, the search for the explanation is set aside, and for some of these people the fabrication remains in spite of the explanations actually being found.

(Edited for typo)

Greetings Anders W. Bonde

So what you are doing is now readjusting your onboard dictionary, and by your own xplaination - there is really no such thing as “paranormal”?
Rather there is such a thing as the ’unexplained”.

I am one of the many, many individuals who have had unexplained things happen to me. It is not pleasant, I admit - but part of the discomfort is in not knowing what it is that has happened, and another part of the discomfort is in realising that you cannot prove to another that this thing happened, so you either shut up about it (denial) for the sake of looking normal, or you seek an answer.
Because the biggest branch of Science cannot offer individuals any recognition (let alone explanation) to the possibly reality of what they experienced (no evidence in which to measure the claim) then it is natural for any individual whom wishes to find out some answers (investigate) will go to religion and/or occult in order to gain some knowledge from these institutions set up for this very task.

Set up for any number of reasons, many of which are of good intention.

JREF are into bagging those who do not have good intention. They investigate and expose the frauds.

That their are frauds, it is most likely there are genuine.

As I have said, I myself have had many unexplainable experience outside what is considered (why?) as being normal.
That is my unprovable claim (to you and anyone else outside the framework of my individual experience) .

Am I therefore a fraud?

When I was younger - 18 - I had over the period of a year, some startling experiences. In the end, I went to my local pastor, a big outspoken charismatic type, and told him of my experiences.
His reaction was unexpected, to say the least. he had no answers, went a little quiet and in the end I weeded his garden, which was okay with both of us.

I another time I went and spoke with a medical doctor. He got that same look on his face as the pastor had. (kinda went a little pale, and wishing the subject had never arisen kinda look) He spoke up his explanation, which I took into account.

There are others, each one a clue, but in the end I had to find my own explanations (it is our nature to be curious) and eventually the answers where forth-coming, along with the evidence.
Explaining the unexplained.
Leaving the unexplainable to itself for the meantime.



My “Claim” btw...is that we individuals are actually Souls on a mission to examine the experience of ‘being’ human on a Planet significantly interesting, in a Universe awesomely attractive.
It is our nature (as Soul) to be curious
As Individualised Souls Incarnate - We are connected in much the same way as these computers of ours are connected....we just imagine it otherwise.
At the Source we are One and the same Soul.
As Source we created this playground to explore within - perhaps even for eternity...

My main point in this, is verifying what it is we all mean by ‘paranormal’ and ‘unexplained’ is the best Scientific name for it....separates the frauds from the genuine

At least this is a good flag to start from.


Flags

In saying this, it might too clarify to you my Qeistions to Aster

Cheers!

[Navigator]

Source:
CCDeacon Hill

[Aster]

Quote:

Originally posted by Navigator



So when you say "ideomotor" what is it that you think you are touching on here Aster?

>> Automatic Thought, or AT, universal language.

What is this 'latent presence in all of us' do you know?

>> Spiritually ? Being AT.

(or suspect even)

btw - that is an interesting piece of Art - they all are. Are you saying these images are that much more special because you were not consciously aware at the time you were creating them?

>> I trained myself not to do or think anything that would interfere with the automatic process. I am fully aware and focussed. The awareness is there where you focus it.

Do you think it is you who are creating these pics (as in- is the latent super quality/ability something you see as being of your own self)?

>> It's synergy. I am a medium, I can only receive and I do nothing else but plotting out pictures. Try an arm levitation under hypnosis, it is a similar experience. The suggestion to move your arm by the hypnotherapist proves the external influence by which movement follows upon the idea of it. Internal, external, self and visitors; it varies from signature to signature. I am involved in this process somehow, and often prefer to have no conscious control.

Thank You

>> Welcome.

[Aster]

[quote]Originally posted by TheBoyPaj
[b]So you can draw. What do you want, a medal? Send this stuff to Disney* because as far as I can tell you're not even claiming it's paranormal.

>> Yes, I want a medal and I anticipate a lot more. I want a NOBEL prize. I did send it to Harry of Disney once, but he wasn't too impressed. Harry is a skeptic, like you. S4 said 'it's too much information' once:-) JK. Most of them do the silent bit... There are very interesting bystanders.

Rgds.,
Aster.

[Aster]

Quote:

Originally posted by Marian
I draw. I could draw those in under 45 minutes.

>> Lets see it.

I'd be interested to know if you attempt to do it, and would love to see the results.

>> I have done that many times and prefer to interact using all my senses, not doing anything that would interrupt the automatic process.

Rgds.,
Aster.

[Aster]

Quote:

Originally posted by Donn
Aster, as someone who likes to draw I can understand the "power" of unconscious drawing. I rely on this effect in my drawings because it is far more free and loose.
However to read-into the end result some mystical truth is no different to reading the future in a fish's entrails or the way swallows fly. (Aterix and Obelix would understand!)

>> I agree.

Unless you draw in lines and rectangles, I am guessing this is a rare thing, then you will be making circular shapes that loop and cross and the inevitable result will be impressions of wombs and life.

>> Yes, and one million other things. Eyes, and the light inside the eyes is a fundamental element created in the manner you described. I am not drawing in rectangles. The most common movement is totally chaotic and criss/cross.

This is also highly subjective, other people may see death and yet others may see chaotic thoughts in your drawings - there is nothing there other than lines on a page - all the rest is what happens between our ears.

>> That is the place where everything happens, between our ears, the nervous system, the body. There is a difference of doing it as a scribe and looking at it as a spectator. For both counts, the awareness is there where you focus it.

I see you have mirrored your drawing to strengthen the effect. That seems more considered, more thought-about to me. Perhaps is not so "automatic" anymore. Perhaps you are manipulating the end-result?

>> The mirroring techniques are not an automatic nor an ideomotor effect. Mirroring the art is an essential way of understanding the entire message. It inspires a connection to the squared and cubed perpectives on dimensional consciousness. It gives a clear perspective on the layers upon layers of information and relates the infinite of possibilities in order to create a recognizable image, totally anew. Mirroring allows me to reconstruct feather (origen) and totem identity (cultural) and analyse the information according to coordinates on a spiritual and cosmic scale, I call 'cosmic clock'.

If you covered the drawing with a blank page, could you then claim to have drawn the void?
Do you see how silly it is?

>> The drawing always starts connecting to the void. The void is always there, in every drawing. The void is the southern coordinate on cosmic clock. It is the N in the name of God, AMON. (www.cybercomm.nl/~cyberspc)

B.T.W - I really like the drawings. They are strong works.

>> Thank you.

Rgds.,
Aster.

[Aster]

Quote:

Originally posted by Anders W. Bonde
...on the subject of interpretation, it would be interesting to see the virtually infinite number of symmetrical figures that can be created simply by rotation and translation of the mirror axis. It's then just a matter of selecting the image that best fits one's whim of the moment, like in a Rorsach test.

>> The whim of the moment, please explain what that is.

IMHO, we're being shown a case of confirmation bias and searching for patterns where none are. Nothing paranormal about that - this is what believers of the paranormal typically do.

>> There are patterns, in plain view.

The pictures are aesthetically very interesting, though.

>> Thank you,

Rgds.,
Aster.

[Aster]

Quote:

Originally posted by Navigator
Nothing paranormal about that

Aster... do you consider that what you are doing re: your Art. "paranormal"?

>> yes.

As for me, I don't know what paranormal is anymore as no one seems to know for sure anyhoo.

>> An event or perception is said to be paranormal if it involves forces or agencies that are beyond scientific explanation. Many paranormal events are said to be experienced only by those with psychic powers, such as extrasensory perception or psychokinesis. Your dictionary.

Rgds.,
Aster.


Eventually humans will get it.

[Aster]

At least this is a good flag to start from.

>> Good words!

Rgds.,
Aster.

[Marian]

Quote:

Originally posted by Aster


>> I have done that many times and prefer to interact using all my senses, not doing anything that would interrupt the automatic process.

Rgds.,
Aster.

Do you have examples of work done when blindfolded?

Also regarding your 'lets see it', would be no problem, just have two questions: What medium do you use (easy enough to use pencil on paper here) and your drawings look as though they are done roughly in pencil, then later colored in. Is that so? I'd like to reproduce in a similar medium (though you'll have to suffer with a digital camera image, since my scanner isn't hooked up atm and I'm lazy. )

Or are they rough sketched AND colored in all in the same time frame (the 45 minutes automatic process you're refering to).

Also (another question seperate) when you refer to 'automatic'...are YOU doing the work, or is another source doing the work? I'm just a little confused because you say that you prefer to interact using all of your senses.

If someone else is doing it "through" you, you wouldn't need your senses, right? So a blindfold shouldn't make a difference with the quality and exactness of the work?

Or do you mean something else by automatic process? And if so, can you clarify what that means? Thanks in advance.

[Anders W. Bonde]

Greetings, Navigator

Quote:

So what you are doing is now readjusting your onboard dictionary, and by your own xplaination - there is really no such thing as “paranormal”?
Rather there is such a thing as the ’unexplained”.

Well, since we're communicating in the JREF forum, I thought it appropriate to lean towards the definition used in conjunction with the JREF Challenge. In the event there is something paranormal going on, this would be vindicated by winning the challenge, although I doubt this subject would qualify as there appears to be nothing paranormal (either unexplained nor inexplicable or unexplainable) about it.

I stand by my stance, that so far in the history of mankind, to the best of my knowledge, nothing paranormal has ever been proven to exist. Yes, it may have been regarded as paranormal for a while - until a "natural" explanation was found.

Quote:

I am one of the many, many individuals who have had unexplained things happen to me.

Such as? Please be specific - perhaps we can thus help you find an explanation.

Quote:

snip...then it is natural for any individual whom wishes to find out some answers (investigate) will go to religion and/or occult in order to gain some knowledge from these institutions set up for this very task.

That's the sure-fire way NOT to find the answers, as the occult and the religious have fabricated the answers prior to their even being asked!

Quote:

snip...Set up for any number of reasons, many of which are of good intention.

Good intentions are no guarantee for veracity - often the contrary.

Quote:

JREF are into bagging those who do not have good intention. They investigate and expose the frauds.

Can you verify that? The JREF Challenge does not address intent. It makes no difference to the Challenge whether someone is deliberately cheating (fraud) or simply deluded (self deception).

Quote:

That is my unprovable claim (to you and anyone else outside the framework of my individual experience).

If you cannot say what your claim is, it cannot be addressed, nor can it be challenged.

Quote:

Am I therefore a fraud?

That we cannot know until you have made a claim and it has been challenged. Personally, I assume self deception explainable by psychological and cultural factors are more likely. But again, since you're not being specific, we can't know.

Quote:

When I was younger - 18 - I had over the period of a year, some startling experiences. In the end, I went to my local pastor, a big outspoken charismatic type, and told him of my experiences.

Again - what were these experiences? And I'll contend that a pastor is the last person to seek out for answers...

Quote:

There are others, each one a clue, but in the end I had to find my own explanations (it is our nature to be curious) and eventually the answers where forth-coming, along with the evidence.
Explaining the unexplained.

Ahhh...you're tantalizing my curiosity. Let's hear about it all!

Oh - here it comes finally:

Quote:

My “Claim” btw...is that we individuals are actually Souls on a mission to examine the experience of ‘being’ human on a Planet significantly interesting, in a Universe awesomely attractive.
It is our nature (as Soul) to be curious
As Individualised Souls Incarnate - We are connected in much the same way as these computers of ours are connected....we just imagine it otherwise.
At the Source we are One and the same Soul.
As Source we created this playground to explore within - perhaps even for eternity...

Fine. Can you provide any evidence to support your claim? If not, why should anyone believe it is anything other than your imagination at work? I firmly believe your claim can be explained fully by psychological, cultural and social factors.

Quote:

My main point in this, is verifying what it is we all mean by ‘paranormal’ and ‘unexplained’ is the best Scientific name for it....separates the frauds from the genuine

I don't understand. Please rephrase.

[Navigator]

Greetings, Anders W. Bonde

Well, since we're communicating in the JREF forum, I thought it appropriate to lean towards the definition used in conjunction with the JREF Challenge. In the event there is something paranormal going on, this would be vindicated by winning the challenge, although I doubt this subject would qualify as there appears to be nothing paranormal (either unexplained nor inexplicable or unexplainable) about it.

This is something of the point I am making. It might be appropriate to lean towards the JREF definition of paranormal, in which case the money is safe.
However, from what I can gather regarding JREF, the evidence I am presenting in my thread “The Science Of The Soul” - while testable to any whom might decide to try out my system including any sceptic or and founding member of the JREF or any other person regardless of belief system, it will not provide evidence of ‘paranormal’ as stipulated by those whom require such evidence.
It does provide evidence that an intelligent motivator is involved in what we call reality, and that this intelligence can be communicated with.
It provides evidence which supports the science of Synchronicity,
It provides evidence that this universe is not at all the mechanical impersonal accident of nature which scepticism requires.

I stand by my stance, that so far in the history of mankind, to the best of my knowledge, nothing paranormal has ever been proven to exist. Yes, it may have been regarded as paranormal for a while - until a "natural" explanation was found.

Did I say this or did you?



Navigator: I am one of the many, many individuals who have had unexplained things happen to me.



Such as? Please be specific - perhaps we can thus help you find an explanation.

Who are ‘we’ and what is it about my statement that has you presuming I am asking for your explanation regarding my experiences?
I am not.
I have my explanations regarding these questions explained to me by the very intelligent invisible reality I call ‘The Soul’ (who I really am) - through the method I have explained in detail in “The Science Of The Soul” thread.
(This can be found under the post headed "Synchronicity Serendipity and Coincidence." - page link is at the bottom of this post)
In addition - the answers are most accurate, take into consideration the knowledge and detail of these personal experiences, and furthermore appear to signify that The Soul is behind the experiences I have had, for reasons which are still unfolding.
I have used this method of communication long enough now for implicit trust in the accuracy (truthfulness) of the answers provided.
So my point in saying that I have had many unexplained experiences was in stressing the fact that while the more sceptical branch of science continues to ignore the fact that people have and will continue to have unexplained experiences, that these individuals will steer clear of this science and possibly seek answers from religion and/or occultists, which as we know, are not fully adequate and tend to Shepard the individuals into supporting the beliefs of religion and occult, and these beliefs are what are labelled “paranormal” - and assigned all sorts of explanations which cant be tested by science.
(Therefore, the JREF prize money is safe).

Or as you too have written:

That's the sure-fire way NOT to find the answers, as the occult and the religious have fabricated the answers prior to their even being asked!

Good intentions are no guarantee for veracity - often the contrary.

Good intentions are nonetheless better than bad intentions. I have not seen anything to suggest that JREF have anything but good intentions, but as you say this is no guarantee for veracity. (honesty truthfulness )


The JREF Challenge does not address intent. It makes no difference to the Challenge whether someone is deliberately cheating (fraud) or simply deluded (self deception).

In all fairness, there seems to me to be conflicting points of view as to what exactly JREF are about.
In my pinion, there is a difference between fraud (bad directed intent) and delusion (good misdirected intent)


If you cannot say what your claim is, it cannot be addressed, nor can it be challenged.

I have said what my claim is. I have given evidence to back up my claim. I have provided a way in which anyone seriously interested in finding out for themselves can test my claims using a simple system which I developed.
While it was challenged earlier on, unfortunately those who did so, jumped to conclusions. It took a little bit of preliminary posting to set up the preamble background before commencing to post the evidence.



Navigator: Am I therefore a fraud?

That we cannot know until you have made a claim and it has been challenged. Personally, I assume self deception explainable by psychological and cultural factors are more likely. But again, since you're not being specific, we can't know.

Yes - assumption is not always the best policy. I was referring to experiences that cannot be proven to anyone outside of myself. They can be shared, but I would not bother at the moment to do so directly to this forum. My point was and still is that these experiences individual have, are having, and will continue to have, won’t stop just because a certain branch of science or a certain mindset of scepticism choose to deride ridicule or offer explanation which is just as shallow as anything religion or occultist might offer.
What is “The Self” that it would deceive? My answer is that The Self and The Soul are the same thing, and therefore it is most unlikely that The Soul would deceive the body intelligence (that thing we erroneously think of as ‘the self’)



Navigator: My “Claim” btw...is that we individuals are actually Souls on a mission to examine the experience of ‘being’ human on a Planet significantly interesting, in a Universe awesomely attractive.
It is our nature (as Soul) to be curious
As Individualised Souls Incarnate - We are connected in much the same way as these computers of ours are connected....we just imagine it otherwise.
At the Source we are One and the same Soul.
As Source we created this playground to explore within - perhaps even for eternity...



Fine. Can you provide any evidence to support your claim? If not, why should anyone believe it is anything other than your imagination at work? I firmly believe your claim can be explained fully by psychological, cultural and social factors.

What do you base your presumptions that my claim can be fully explained by psychological, cultural and social factors?
As I have stated, I have shown and will continue to post evidence as well as remind those such as yourself of the way in which you can set up your own test to determine the soundness and of the fact that there is Invisible Intelligence (The Soul) which can communicate with the individual we each think we are.


Navigator: My main point in this, is verifying what it is we all mean by ‘paranormal’ and ‘unexplained’ is the best Scientific name for it....separates the frauds from the genuine

I don't understand. Please rephrase.

Paranormal is for those who assign things to the invisible reality which are not at all accurate and can be exposed as fraudulent (on account of the inaccuracy)
Unexplained is just that.

So paranormal is where those who offer explanations as to what is the nature of the invisible reality do so without providing supporting evidence.
IE - Still unexplained - at least to the satisfaction of unbiased scientific examination.

Cheers.

PS I will be elaborating more on my discoveries in the Science Of The Soul thread.


The Science Of The Soul

Synchronicity Serendipity and Coincidence.

[Aster]

Quote:

Also regarding your 'lets see it', would be no problem, just have two questions: What medium do you use (easy enough to use pencil on paper here) and your drawings look as though they are done roughly in pencil, then later colored in. Is that so? I'd like to reproduce in a similar medium (though you'll have to suffer with a digital camera image, since my scanner isn't hooked up atm and I'm lazy. )

Ah... you can do what I do, but you first need to know how I do it ? That's not fair. You wrote you could do it, that it would be NO PROBLEM, now just do it please.

Rgds.,
Aster.

[Navigator]

Greetings Aster


When you think of yourself, do you think in terms of 'you are the body, the human instrument?'

Thank You

[Aster]

Quote:

When you think of yourself, do you think in terms of 'you are the body, the human instrument?'

Yes, very well put.

Rgds.,
Aster.

[Marian]

Quote:

Originally posted by Aster


Ah... you can do what I do, but you first need to know how I do it ? That's not fair. You wrote you could do it, that it would be NO PROBLEM, now just do it please.

Rgds.,
Aster.

I can, but if you want me to use computer technology to reproduce it...it would be much easier. I do have photoshop.

To be fair, I'd like to use the same medium you use, and the same conditions you use. And the same amount of time that it takes you. Your drawings appear to be done in pencil, as rough sketches. The coloration appears to be added later. I'm asking if this is the case.

Otherwise I can reproduce it in much less time using various computer programs. (With some help, I'm actually lousy with photoshop, but I have some artistic friends who are not ;D)

[Marian]

I decided to do one in my own style. I used Crayola Markers (Classic 10 colors) and the images were taken using a Sony Cyber-shot (Sony DCS-P72).

This took 20 minutes. I planned to use the remaining time doing another technique (I took the drawing to soak in tea), unfortunately I didn't leave enough drying time (or even if I had, crayola markers just may not tolerate trying that), either way, it ended up messy. I was going to try for some image transfers from the original, as well as 'aging/blending' of the original with the tea soaking.

Anyway, here's what I did in 20 minutes (no pencils, no prep. sketch, all marker) on computer/xerox paper.






And all photos can be viewed here (as well as original sizes).

http://eqscreenshot.homestead.com/sketch.html

[Aster]

Quote:

Originally posted by Marian


...>Otherwise I can reproduce it in much less time using various computer programs. (With some help, I'm actually lousy with photoshop, but I have some artistic friends who are not ;D)

My drawings are created with an extremely tough inkpen. Pencils and most other media will brake during the process considering the heavy pressure at times. I empty about 3 to 4 pens in one drawing. Sometimes I draw on top of an aquarel prepared for this purpose. In this case I added streaks of crayon as soon as the drawing had been finished.

The issue is not to reproduce my drawing. The issue is to create a drawing of your own in about 45 minutes that has the same properties, as noted in my first post.

Rgds.,
Aster.

[Marian]

Quote:

Originally posted by Aster


The issue is not to reproduce my drawing. The issue is to create a drawing of your own in about 45 minutes that has the same properties, as noted in my first post.

Rgds.,
Aster.

Those properties being the same as the first drawing you showed, which was done in 45 minutes and represents the Isis/Horus/Osiris theme.

My drawing can be shown to also reflect that same theme.

[Navigator]

And if you were not the human instrument, but the Soul within, then this would signify that YOU are doing the drawing and merely blocking out conscious awareness of the fact.

No 'paranormal'

In your conscious state, you revert back to thinking 'something else' has channelling through your body, and you become amazed at the results, and attribute these results to coming from another source other than your Self.

A 'trick' of the mind.

A sleight of the hand.

All because you believe you are only the body and not the Soul.

[DrMatt]

If I may make an aside:

I too have had unexplained experiences.

For instance, why DID Miss Raiht who taught second grade wear peach-colored lipstick? There are many possible explanations, but I don't know which one of them is correct. And chances are that I never will.

Okay. Back to your regular discussions.

[Navigator]

Quote:

Originally posted by DrMatt
If I may make an aside:

I too have had unexplained experiences.

For instance, why DID Miss Raiht who taught second grade wear peach-colored lipstick? There are many possible explanations, but I don't know which one of them is correct. And chances are that I never will.

Okay. Back to your regular discussions.

Not to derail anything here, but I don't see how this can be seen as unexplained experience DrMatt.
Many teachers must wear peace lipstick, even occasionally.
While it is unexplained to YOU why she wore this lipstick, the likeliest answer is because she felt like it at the time....people do these imprompt things now an again.

It is our nature.

Like you feeling like posting this question.

Of course, you might want to ask her but she might not remember, may have passed on to the peachy heavenly realms, or might not like to tell you that she did it just to provide really big mysteries for you to ponder over and maybe even lose sleep about?

As you say...unexplained.

If you really really want an answer, pick the likiest and work on it from their.

(I think the likeliest is that she just felt like it on that particular occasion, or it was all she had at the time, or....etc.etc.etc.

Maybe it went with her hat?