Hi

During the presentation of Mr. Wedha (the founder) about WPAP in "Wedhangan" -our exhibition in DESKOMFEST 04-Jogya, 23 Jan 2011, one of participants asked him " why should the face be the object's criteria for WPAP purpose?". This question also arised when I would know more about WPAP for the first time.

This question was answered by mr. Wedha same as explained to me as follows (I quoted the main point ):
Counts mathematical way:
A picture can mean 1,000 words. But, A face can say 1000 meaning.
Meaning = 1,000 words ; ---> 1000 Meaning = 1000 x 1000 words
So, could face significant 1000.000 said, even more. More right?
Well from this calculation, hopefully become clear why I only specialize in the face.

an intteligent and great Answer

Rachmi Widhiesti wrote:


hohoho really mathematics, but I think it is right...relation to this matter, how about the face of horse or any other animals whether the formula it valid?

DweeImoetBanget wrote:


Dear Dwee,
First of all sorry to change the language written as the rule of this forum should be in English .
I try to answer your question ya :

- The description for object of WPAP that as a basic chriteria and now on process for copy right purpose is as follows (I had written all basic chriteria in other English topic here)

Just take the face of a known figure. Because the word POP IS MEANING popular (Pop) / well known. Only the face, because want more specific AS WPAP. Other objects/things we do not take because there are many other kind of art that taken.

But as Told by Mr. Wedha in the progress of WPAP, it could be opened and accept anomalies might happened with taking notes that the artist know well his reason's why he should do it...in other topics i would a short whritten about wpap anomalies

the term of "pop" here may be ambiguous. On one side means "popular", on the other hand means "jreng" or something like sound of short explosive. But its OK, both are explosive and popular

combining popularity and explosion,hmmm..... IMHO, that's make WPAP even greater than any art

gunawan syarifuddin wrote:


I think your description is more and better expalining..thank you brother gun

ihsan ekaputra wrote:


I think so, more specific is making different art from other, as quote of explanation from Mr. Wedha as below:

"From the beginning I really wanted to make something special style, which has not been done by others, who could truly represent me later"

Only the face? is there any other object? How about hand or other part of the body?