I had a little bit of a revelation the other day when I read someone’s comment on Facebook saying: (Totally paraphrased, but this was the gist of it):
“Digital Art is not real art, and you’re a fool for thinking so.”
I was really peeved at first, after been training and studying digital art since I was 15 (28 now). Calling back to all the people I had to prove to, that I was actually painting and not just touching up photos like everyone thought Photoshop was used for. I wanted to write this big whole paragraph up, then I realized I was 28-years old and on Facebook, about to argue with a kid who had never drawn in his life.
So I stopped and moved on. But as the week passed, the idea of this kept on hitting me. It reminded me of the teachers and older artists that would roll their eyes at me whenever I brought up Photoshop in school, like I was this huge fake. It reminded me of comments on websites and blogs, bashing realistic paintings and so forth.
But then I realized that I had become that way against people that Photo-Bashed, and everything kinda clicked. But first, let’s jump back.
My father was a traditional painter. You know how you remember specific moments in your life, and can practically see it? I recall my father showing me a massive oil painting he did, of this woman, clad in fur-hide, holding a spear. It looked real to me. I was so impressed, and wanted to be just like my father.
Inspired to paint or draw like him one day, I picked up drawing at around 3-4. I began with pencils, believe it or not. I know, all you guys have seen is much of my digital art, but don’t worry, I actually do draw with pencils and pens. I grew up on them, drawing on anything that I could. My grandfather owned a print-shop, and would deliver boxes of sketchbooks that I fill to the brim in days.
As I grew up, I continued with pencils until one day I stumbled across this very exact image, by Justin Sweet.
I remember losing my mind over it, knowing right there, this is what I wanted to do for the rest of my life. So Justin, if you’re out there, I know we’ve never met, but thank you for inspiring me to take a risk. From there, I dropped traditional tools and for the next four years of High-School, taught myself how to use Photoshop in a day where there was not many people teaching…how to use Photoshop.
Now, this is a risk that would cause lots of debates in school. I had several art teachers in High-School and junior college and each one of them disliked me. I never received above a C in any of my art classes and you want to know why? Not because we didn’t get a long (mostly due to different generations, and looking back, I can see why), but because I chose to bring a crappy back-in-the-day Wacom tablet to class, when every other student was using pencils or charcoal–painting plants and fruits, no less.
I wasn’t being an asshole by any stretch, digital painting was perfectly welcomed by the class. They had the computers set up for it, and they had the programs (this was back in the early 2000s, so Photoshop was not as snazzy as it is now) that would allow digital art.
But my teachers despised it. Saying Photoshop is for hacks and people that don’t know how to draw. Digital art will never catch on and I’m silly for thinking otherwise. There was so much hostility against an art form, that it made me begin to realize that it wasn’t due to wanting to learn it, but that it was because it was a new medium taking over and making it easier than what my teachers once had to use. They saw how fast art could be produced, and to me, I believe that intimidated them. They never wanted to understand the process or the art farm, they simply would disregard it.
I caught another glimpse of this when John Lassetter, CEO of Pixar, began to introduce 3D-generated animation to Disney, and they practically laughed him out of the room. A lot of the traditional animators began to question it, asking if it was an end of the era for Disney Animation. He got flack and slapped around, but thankfully stuck to his gut, and as you can very much see, has inspired and changed the way Hollywood treats animated films now.
Being something new, I stuck to it. I kept on practicing, trying to get better at digital painting, inspired by the others around me doing the same thing. But it kept on getting a bad rep. People saying digital art wasn’t real, and that people just cheated when they used it, bashing together photos and what not.
See, I’m one of those artists that spends days, hours and weeks on a painting, trying to push everything that I can. My business partners see it in the office I work at. I usually am glued to my computer when I’m really into a painting, and will spend hours rendering tiny things. Over the years, I’ve developed my own style, which I guess could be hyper-real (using others’ words, not my own).
Every now and then I’d read a comment going “Looks like a photo, this isn’t art.” “Is this just photography? Don’t call it a painting then.”
I fought this question forever, always using a rebuttal of “It’s my style.” “I love details.” “It’s the only thing that calms me when I paint. It’s how I meditate.”
Thankfully I grew out of that, and it became my style and you either like it or not. As the years passed, new art styles changed as well, and eventually photo-bashing came about. For work or freelancing? I totally get it. We’re all on the same timer, and time is money.
Now I know we live in a day now where photo-bashing is the new hip thing to do. I’ve seen hundreds of copy-cats throw it about on art websites or Facebook, and quite frankly, I’m getting a little tired of it. Why? Well, the same reason I’m writing this article.
But then artists began clinging on and doing it. It became a fad. The cool thing to do. People that don’t even work in the business, just bashing to photo-bash because some of the greats did it. I started seeing less painted art, and more Franken-photos. And honestly, I got upset over it.
Why is this now okay, but I had to struggle to prove myself that I was really doing it when someone else was just slapping photos together and getting the same feedback?
But then it clicked, it’s not about that: Times change, art and styles evolve, and the world will not wait up for you, so you better adapt one way or the other.
That’s not to say painting will ever die, but I’ve come to realize that we are in one of the most prolific times ever, where technology is literally evolving every hour of the day, techniques are improving and doubling, and there is not only just one way to produce art.
Art is art, it will always be a universal expression of creativity, imagination and story telling, whether through music, painting, sculpting, or writing.
The lesson I learned is, don’t be so quick to judge just because you don’t prefer the medium being used. It matters not the tool used, but the product that was born from it. A lot of artists have put thousands of hours into honing their craft, and growing the gut to put it out there for the world to see.
And I think that’s a lot more powerful than the debate of whether digital art is real or not.
Generally I think of the people who see digital work as “not really art” as being not much different to the (British) Royal Academy when they ranked watercolour as one of the least prestegious media, to the point that several members seceded and formed what would become the Royal Watercolour Society so their work would gain fair recognition. Pretty sure acrylics were looked down on too at one point
Extra Ordinary sir
Oh I'm doing a module on this at University, just because it's digital doesn't make it any less art in my opinion, there is a statue of a horse in the center of London that was sculpted by Scott Eaton in zBrush and 3d printed and I can guarantee people would accept it as art, but if they were told how it was made, their opinions would change.
As for photobashing, I'm not a fan, in the work place and production pipeline sure, it's required for speed, but personal work I will stick to the brush, I saw the Level Up! demo by Maciej Kuciara and it was comprised of just photos, barely any painting went into it, and it made me depressed, yes it kind of looked cool, but there was no human aspect to it, it was a lens that had captured the images not the eye/hand combination.
People who don't do digital art don't understand that there is an entire (different) knowledge base required for manipulating digital tools. (And by “manipulating” I don't just mean “photo manipulation,” although that has its place.) I have worked in both traditional and digital media and the skill sets are very different, but they are still skills (that is, it is possible to suck at digital coloring, for example, as well as be really good at it).
One interesting thing that I keep bringing up when at school currently is that if you were to take a digital painting, print it off on really badass canvas, matte and frame it, basically make it the best it could be, and then delete the original file, then what does the digital painting become?
Does it then achieve traditional painting status?
Does it then just become a limited print?
This kind of thing is a confusing issue for me because I believe strongly that digital is just as powerful as traditional media, it's just that – another media really.
I personally don't think that it matters what media you use for your piece, because it's not the materials that matters, it's what you do with them.
Anyway, great article!
I had quite a few hit that category, as ones that had been printed once. I lost a hard drive AND a back up computer and all my digital works between certain years were lost. The only ones that survived existed if they were printed on canvas. the rest were lost altogether and their ‘existence’ was only as practise for me, haha. That experience changed the way I looked at my artwork.
Boy, these last two posts come a really key time for me. I decided to go digital and was a little “embarrassed” for wimping out. But now I realize it's not the tool you use, it's you, yourself and how much work you put into your art is what matters.
Thanks Arnie and Daniel for posting these.
Art to me is decision making. Where your first stroke starts and where it end is a decision you make regardless of whether you're holding a wacom or a brush. When you decide to use a certain colour over another, which elements come into the foreground, background…When you decide to stop painting and start. The decision making and the judgement that comes with it doesn't change, but the efficiency does.
I recently received flack from a writer about using the digital medium, saying that digital artists can never be as good as the traditional equivalent, which frustrates me. Craig Mullins and Jaime Jones stand as testaments of people who can cross these bounderies effortlessly, and these sort of comments sound to me as elitist remarks, but only for the sake of elitism and do tend to come from people who don't generally paint.
In hindsight, I should have told her that writers that type will never be as good as those who write.
I know this is an old thread but I just had to say,”In hindsight, I should have told her that writers that type will never be as good as those who write.” is just precious!
Very good post!
An interesting point to all of this is that whether it is traditional or digital, it all begins with a thought. You draw this thought either on paper or a wacom. A lot of digital artists scan their drawing to base their finished painting, traditional artists transfer their drawing to canvas, panels, etc.. What is the difference? Some do traditional media to begin a painting and finish digitally. I used to be biased against digital art because at that time it seemed to harsh to me, but since the programs have gotten so much more refined and able to produce the textures that traditional media have I have become a great admirer of the art form and am studying it currently to expand my own art. I faced the same criticism when I learned acrylics and airbrush. It's not the medium you use it is the mind and the thought behind the art. That is what counts most.
I always believed that a true artist was someone who could take any medium and create something beautiful. They could take crayons or dirt and berries or garbage or whatever. I honestly don't even understand why this is even a controversial issue, other than people being pretentious. Anyone that thinks that digital art isn't “real” art – they probably also think a lot of things that aren't part of their personal experience are also not legitimate. That kind of narrow minded thinking is why we have poverty and wars. It's disgusting.
Okay, that typing v. handwriting comment made me laugh. Pretty close to perfect analogy!
Very nice reeading!
Makes me think about what new things are coming and how we have to adapt, because we have to survive if we want to have a job or have food and also how to deal with the bad critics or how people blame you for the way oyu di things, thanks for this article Dan very inspiring and just one last thing to say the same as Justin sweet inspired you you have inspired a lot of peopple in the same way so that´s a big price for you man.
Greetings!
oh and last idea i´m “young” and noobie in the art insutry but i´m really tired of the looong debate about wha´ts art and what´s not so i decided everything painted, image, etc i see if it likes me and makes me said OG it works as art for me.
End of the message.
I think most ppl just tend to forget that photoshop is just a tool, a multi tool that lets its user make a brush that is fitting of the situation. they seem to forget how much digital artist still practice skills they have as a traditional artist.
in a way, to me, digital artist is more artsy than traditional artist who sold a painting of a blue canvas for millions of dollars
I'v sort of experience this myself to some extent; I'm currently in the last year of doing my A-levels and I do both art and product design and the opinions on digital work in the two vary to a ridiculous amount. There is a lot of emphasis on CAD/CAM in product design and although I'm only one of a few people that use it creating 3D models and getting them 3D printed are really encouraged.
Comparatively in art a few weeks a ago i started doing some digital sculpture for which i ended up teaching myself blender, and the response has been really negative. I do a fair amount of sculpture through a traditional medium and really I wouldn't say its any easier to do it digitally, the challenges are different but its not simple by any means.
I think half the problem is that despite my best efforts digital sculpting isn't really understood by my art teachers but
*at the same time there's definitely a fair amount of snobbery involved as well.
You'll realize that you feel out of your comfort zone just like with any other new media. 🙂 Good luck!
it suppose not to have any answer 。Just how you think about it
Good for you! To the people who say it's not “real art” — good riddance! You have to work just as hard as any other artist, you're just using different tools. I think it's funny — back when cameras started becoming popular and photographers were working hard to learn this new type of art, they were considered “not real artists” because they didn't have to paint the scene, they were capturing it. Ironically, photography (especially film) has always been an incredibly difficult art to master. Now, with the new wave of digital photography taking over, it's happening all over again.
I am a digital photographer, and I was at a mixer one time taking photos as a favor to the person who was putting the event on, and some stranger walked up to me and the first words out of his mouth were, “you're not a real photographer.” I was taken aback.
“Excuse me?” I said.
He went on to inform me that because I was using a digital camera, that did not make a me a real photographer. That real photographers only shoot film, because it is much harder and they don't manipulate their images in Photoshop. It was the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. And don't get me wrong, I agree that film is a LOT harder than digital. But that doesn't make one “real” art and the other “fake”. They are two different tools that offer different ways of achieving things, and that is all. To say that film photographers don't manipulate their images is absurd — what is a dark room for?
The irony of it all is that this man didn't know who I was, he just saw some young girl taking digital photos at a mixer. He had no idea that I am a professional fine art photographer. I have an agent that has sold more pieces than I can count to the interior design industry. People ooh and ahh over my work and buy it and hang it on their walls and love it. And I'm not saying this to sound vain, because for every person that loves my work there are plenty of people that don't like it at all. I don't really care either way, I'm just happy that I can make money doing what I love. But I find it hilarious that some stranger was hell bent on telling me I wasn't a real photographer and all I wanted to say to him was, “you should tell that to all of the people who love and buy my work.” Instead I smiled politely and let him keep his opinions for himself. I don't have to prove him wrong to know that he is wrong.
There will always be narrow-minded people who insist that something different than what they know is not “real” or “valid”. I don't think they are wrong to have a preference. There should always be preferences and people should like different things. That's what makes the world beautiful, and that's what makes art so wonderful and personal — it's all different. I say, let there be purists! But for the purists to say, “my art is real because I use a pencil and yours isn't because you use a Wacom tablet,” is the biggest bald-faced lie I have ever heard. Just remember: opinions are like assholes — everyone's got one.
Art is art is art is art. It is subjective, it is personal, it is constantly open to interpretation. No matter who you are, some people will love your work and some people will hate it. If people are hating on you, it means that you are doing something right. It means you are creating, which is the most important thing that any artist can do. If you love it, keep doing it, and don't let anyone ever tell you that you are doing it wrong. If you force yourself into the same box that everyone else is painting in, you will be like everyone else. It is the people that break free from the pack and go their own way that are the truly great artists of their time.
Pieces created with Wacom tablets aren't real art. Only pieces created with Wacom Cintiq's are truly art.
kidding.
Thank you for this.
I made a comic about “how people think digital painting works,” you might get a kick out of it: http://kmcmorris.blogspot.com/2014/04/how-people-think-digital-painting-works.html
May I approach this from the other side of the equation. I am a watercolor artist, I work both freehand and digitally. I am familiar with both approaches. I have respect for all art and agree with your thesis that art is expressed in a variety of different forms. However, as this particular issue sticks in your craw, (the denigration of digital art as not 'real' art) it very much sticks in mine when people using a format that employs a stylus and a pad as 'painting'. I do not disagree on its merit; but I do balk at the verb employed. Can't we agree to a terminology that does not lump all artwork regardless of different methods and skills employed. Perhaps that is what leads to such acrimony on both sides . . . painting: with a brush, in the real world is a centuries-old medium that has earned a place in shaping culture, which requires an entirely different skill set, which deserves respect. It is no disrespect to digital art, which I love, which is amazing, to say it is a different medium and requires a different name.
I do not see this as an inability on my part to evolve or adapt, you can have a museum that holds the Last Supper next to the Super Bros, but don't call them both paintings. Yes, they are both art but they are not the same thing, it is a disservice to both to confuse the two.
For long-term a long term perspective and possible prediction on this subject, look at the relative value of photographs over time versus traditional illustrations. Photography largely replaced illustration in many sectors like computer artwork is replacing traditional art. How do the current and historical value of the illustration pieces compare versus photographs in resale value, in museum acquisitions, in the public's eye, and in the auction houses? Will this trend continue in computer-vs-traditional products? What about ZBrush vs. traditional sculpture, computer typesetting vs. traditional typesetters, robot painters vs. traditional artists (http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2013/09/meet-edavid-robot-painter.html)? Very serious subject.
Good point, Lester. Although digital art may not stand the test of time in regards to market value, it doesn't make the image any less artistic. However, longevity (more than value) does seem to be a driving factor for a lot of artists. I suspect we will see a movement back toward traditional art in a few years simply due to the fact that many artists want to make something truly tangible.
I see your point, but I have trouble conceiving of a suitable verb to replace “painting”.
Alternatively, I think the term “painting” has moved beyond the traditional definition. It no longer applies solely to paint and brushes, but to the action or process of creating an image, including by non-traditional means. That's life in the modern world.
For myself, when describing my method, I employ the modifier “digital” to soften the blow for traditionalists. It's not perfect, but it works well enough.
Hmm, that would seem to elevate the means of production over the means of expression for categorisation, which seems a bit odd to me.
And by that logic, pieces created with a palette brush, or an airbrush, or splattering paint, or using hands/body parts, etc, etc, would also all need differentiating verbs.
I don't think there's such thing as 'not real art'. People who says thatdigital art is not real art might say the same thing with abstract art.
Artists have been “photobashing” for over 100 years, its called collage.
Tremendous respect to you for putting this up, Dan. What you state is real & true. It's not the issue of the tool, but the actual gripe held b the artists whom styles are from yesterday's times. No, I don't state that referring towards older art forms. Heck, majority of them are still equally as relevant today as yesterday, if not more so. I state that in the aspect of the artist afraid to actually venture into the new form of the field. Art is like a battlefield. Anyone whom isn't keen on at least actually LEARNING how to use the new “weaponry” are causing themselves to be nothing more than tragedies in the making. Again, I do not refer towards older styles being what's declared “passe.” I mean that there are always growing styles in every particular form of art. It literally develops with every tick of the clock. The trick towards it is not being a master of every particular style of it. The trick is to be familiar with it and don't throw stones towards what's new. Because, that new style might be something that puts your favorite style on the back burner. Yeah, it'll still cook. Though, it won't have that forthright attention which anyone declared an artist hopes that their work receives. Digital art is as real and as factually sound as drawings/paintings upon paper. Hell, ancient individuals didn't even have as much as that.Still, if that particular new art style/form has a lifespan past the three year mark(yes, I understand that the traditional is seven, but times have dwindled that down), then it is declared a relevant piece of work. Even more so if it has moderate(or greater) attention & recognition. A HECK of a lot more if it actually generates a worldwide buzz. If it is nothing more than an equivalent of a One-Hit Wonder in Music(spark ignited, but no fire actually lit), then it was just a brief phase. That's the situation with it.
Now, with any real art form, you'll find heaps of stupidity and the small cluster of brilliance(yes, I'm aware that there are the “in-betweeners” somewhere in the midst). Don't fret nor shy away from any art(provided that you are a true admirer of art) that has full-on attention. You might not recognize it. You might be befuddled by it. Hell, you might just think it's childish, originally. Still, give it a full go and seriously investigate it before you bash it. A grand number of times, the bashers end up being the biggest fans of it when it's in full swing. Know it prior to expelling negative rhetoric about the art. No, I'm not saying that YOU neglected to do that part, Dan. Heck, you somewhat stated that you did learn about it inside of your post. I give you respect for that. Towards the knuckleheads whom just blatantly don't like something because it's new and seems easy, don't turn yourselves into the bullseye for time & society to fling shat at. That new style, trend, tool, technique, craft and/or skill might just end up being the shovel that throws dirt on top of you. In layman's terms: That can be what slays all of your future dreams. Not saying it WILL be. But, for damn sure, it CAN be. Know your craft. If it upgrades, you upgrade. If you don't upgrade, then you'll become portions of the pavement. And, time + other individuals will drive on past you with no intentions on stopping to dig you up and drag you forward. Well, not unless you are a legend. Then, you'll be appreciated for your meaningful contributions & ignored elsewhere. Such is true. It happens in life. Plus, any real artist will tell you that art IS life. Digital Art is just it's next full fledge saga.
Sorry for the mini book, everyone.
So true and points very well made. Respect all art/creativity wether traditional or digital we all start with a scary blank 'canvas'. Artists used to make their own oil paints and looked down on those using 'modern' oils in tubes!
Excelent point
Now the only true art is made on a Cintiq Companion 😛
hahahaha awesome, can I share it on FB?
Sure, go ahead!
What is art anyway? It has been argued by some, such as Robert Henri, that it is a state of being, not the object produced. Art is the state of mind while in the creative act. Hence the term “a work of art”.
Man, you have no idea how irate it gets me when I hear people say digital art is “cheating” or “isn't actually art”. So thank you for this, for echoing my own thoughts. As someone who also learned first with pencils and paints before moving on to digital art, I was baffled when my teachers and peers looked at digital art with disdain.
I wrote about this at some length as one of my first tumblr posts: http://llfrank.tumblr.com/post/29944259669/in-defense-of-digital-art
We had a forum at my University today, and this topic came up, as we hosted speakers from the disciplines of painting, crafts and illustration. It was an interesting discussion and I had an observation. That each of the panel members were driven by an innate connection to the materials that they chose, which, in turn aided in the faciltation of their message. When a student asked if they would consider doing their work digitally, their responses were intelligent and insightful. Each was interested in the physicallity, the labor and the opportunity afforded in becoming inseperable from the materials during the making. It is also important to note that the means by which the work is created relies entirely upon how it is viewed (functions) and whether the artist puts emphasis on the image, the artificact (actual object), or both. If the work is pervasive in nature- illustration that seeks a viewer who may only view it in small increments of time- the image is king. If the work is viewed in a gallery, museum or on someone's wall, the artist is afforded more time with the audience and the artifact is given particular weight.
Each new technology seems to threaten the old guard and inspires those looking to create something never-before-seen. I find the most compelling artists to be those who acknowledge the past while trying to forge a new path into the future. Dan, thanks so much for posting your work, your thoughts and sharing your passion. Your path is certainly your own.
P.S. I'm inclined to reply to such dismissive, categorical comments with “But digital art already won. If you are a living artist and you are not on the internet, then you don't exist.” Not my belief completely, but a nice arrow to have in your quiver in such occasions.
There are variety of the way to get husqvarna little engine elements on the net. they're typically provided on the web by individuals commerce their things. you'll be able to begin by writing the complete of the half you wish in a web computer programme and see what shows up otherwise you can talk to one amongst several Brobdingnagian auctions and learn precisely what you see. you would like to take care United Nations agency you get from, as a result of with sites like Craigslist, you are doing not have any guarantees once creating a procurement this manner Kohler small engine parts..
I may also share that on FB…I know it would appeal to lot of my friends…
Our focus should always be not the medium but the quality.
Amen. 🙂
I'm not sure we'll necessarily see a movement “back” toward traditional art as much as we'll see an acceptance for and recognition of the validity of CG art (and undoubtedly for other ways to create that will emerge in the future): traditional painting and drawing, like every other form of artistic expression, will always be important, isn't going away, WILL never go away, so the alarmists in the world who pretend otherwise are just playing Chicken Little. Likewise, digital art IS art: once it's printed, once there's a physical manifestation, it's on the same playing field (so to speak) as a traditionally created work and has the same shot at longevity as any other real artifact. Maybe a better shot these days, considering the materials. Considering the papers, inks, and process, it's surprising that advertisements by Mucha or movie posters from the 1930s haven't all crumbled to dust…but they're still here. 🙂
The one thing we struggle as humans with is change … even in art we struggle to accept technology, as it made to make our lives as artist alittle easier and make our turnarounds faster but in reality it just gives us that much time to make it better.
Make good art was what I was told by my father as I left home to go to art school he said no matter what medium it is the work still has to be done so make good art .
Sorry Andrew, but in photography the eye DOES capture the image, part of what makes it the great image it is…..
Just yesterday I showed grandpa a picture of his new great grandson on one of them so called smart phones -digital, small screen, and all the bells and whistles of modern crap. Immediately my grandpa took the phone from my hand and planted a kiss right on the screen. If that ain't art, or at least what art should do to people, then I toss in the towel.
And this is coming from a 'traditional artist' (a dumb term; Even good digital art relies on the traditional rules).
Just like people will pay through the nose for USDA approved organic food (another dumb term, but an argument for another day), people will still buy old school art.
Traditional vs Digital is a dumb debate. Pencil is a tool just like a wacom tablet and photoshop are tools. I can tell when someone who does traditional and/or digital work is “thinking” like an artist. The command of the language of value, shape, edges, colour is present in their work. Traditional or digital…. if you understand focal point, colour harmony, edge quality, shape, design you will look good. Your “thinking” is communicated within the visual language.
I'm sure others have said this but my response would be, “whateva” …life is too short to waste trying to educate someone about how you're making money and he/she is NOT. I don't care what you call what I do as long as I can continue to avoid a real job.
At first I fought that this post will be about “oh digital art is real art because I draw every fucking line by myself because I'm a pro” but then fortunately it was exactly what it should be, longer version of what Neil Gaiman once said:
Make good art.
Your question, about printing out the digital and then deleting the file, is a fascinating one. It really has me thinking about. I don't know that it is anything I would be inclined to do, but still really interesting!
I've struggled to find a good verb for digital art-making too since I spend lots of time working digitally in addition to traditionally. I keep coming back to “designing” as opposed to “painting”. I just feel like even though traditional art incorporates design (composition, focal point, etc), AND digital art requires drawing skills, obviously, digital art seems like it's more about design than traditional art. With digital art, more time seems to be spent arranging things and undoing and redoing, since you have that capability, and traditional art is more of a performance-type thing. You try your best, maybe wipe out a few parts and repaint them, but in the end it could either be awesome or suck horribly. With digital art, I feel like you can spend more time on a piece, arranging things, changing things, designing things until you are happy with it. On a computer, your paper will never fall apart from too much reworking. So, “designing” seems like a more accurate verb to me for describing the digital process.
Good thoughts Lester, Dan and Arnie!
I have painted digitally for most of my career, but have switched to mostly traditional in the last couple years. I find it harder (that may change as I become more proficient) and as a result, I find it more rewarding when I hit the mark I am after. I suppose for me right now, I value traditional media more, but not for artistic reasons, just esoteric. Not in others' work either, just mine. For other artists, it doesn't really cross my mind whether it is digital or traditional.
I do think that as more and more aspects of our life are manufactured on an assembly line, the value of art will increase, whatever the medium. I can picture the inside of a stormtrooper's locker containing a still life painting of flowers, a lone bulwark from the onslaught of conformity and sameness. *sniff*
Of course the eye directs the photograph, but the eye does not technically capture the image, what I was trying to state in my original comment is that when something is painted and captured by the combination of our eyes and hands working together, there is more life to it than just a photograph snapped off Google Images.
If anyone today would believe for a second that Caravaggio, Leonardo, or any of the old masters would not jump at the chance to use digital tools in lieu of traditional/old world tools of their time, they would be kidding themselves. Because after figuring it out on their own or being taught/observing how to use computers, wacom tablets, whatever… I can promise you,… the output of whatever they did would be art. Real art. Kick you in the head, make you realize what it means to be around a master, sort of art.
I have never viewed creativity as having to adhere to definitions as much as being the manifesto in life that consistently redefines the parameters of the art world.
Cubism, Post Modernism, Armoring, Leatherwork, Tattoos… all of those interpretations of art rely on ideas that are intangible moments in the mind's eye becoming tactile visuals in some way.
That's the one unifying thing art had. The ability for others to see what you have created.
I get so tired of people treating art like a sport. Making art is hard, so if you use a tool that makes it easier (which digital media does… or do, in most cases, including certainly my own), then you must be a less capable artist, or cheating, or whatever. I guess that's the thinking.
But art is not a test of prowess. Art is not about proving something or setting a record. It's not about setting up artificial constraints then seeing who can “win” within them, while chastising those who don't accept those limitations. That's exactly what sports are – a fabricated contest. Art is the opposite of that, but I guess sports are easier for most people to understand.
The eye ALWAYS captures the image, no matter what device you are using. Unless you are blind.
I don't care how something's made. if i like it, i like it, end of story.
Great thoughts here, Daniel. I am also 28 but have a much different history having worked traditionally for most of my life, only in the past 5-7 years have I become comfortable with digital art making. I have seen the bashing on digital art and I too have been frustrated by the medium contemplating to myself if it is real art or not. But I've come to realize and agree with Daniel, it is art, like anything that is created by human beings and translated from observation and through hand rendering. There's no doubt about it, if it takes the eyes and hands to make, it is real art. It's interesting to know what artists processes are like, many people are unsure about whether my pieces are traditional or digital and many guess wrong about the medium. I've come to a place now where I prefer to draw on paper, but sometimes drawing completely in photoshop, and sometimes I do traditional watercolors and acrylic paintings, but my favorite medium has to be half way inbetween! 🙂 I really enjoy drawing and inking on paper, then coloring, shading, and toning in photoshop, and then sometimes my shading is half created in the ink drawing as well. I'm straddling the bar between digital and traditional and there shouldn't be a bar. These are the tools we're using today to make art, this is where we're at.
Great posting. I am a very traditional realist oil painter with an interesting story you might like. I remember when I was in art college I was working on an oil painting of figures in a desert. My friend who lived with me was in the illustration program and worked primarily with Maya. I would often ask why he had put down his drawing tools for the computer, often inferring that he had given up something more valid, something that was more “art”. He said to me one day “Art is about creating a window into a world, would you agree?” I did. He then said “in your painting, it's only one view from one angle, one time of day, one feeling… in mine I can literally go anywhere. My possibilities are endless.” Computers are the future of art, I just stayed in the past to keep a medium from dying.
That's okay…. not to worry. Digital opinions aren't REAL opinions.
Ha! I should just lock the thread now.
As soon as I read this I had to write about it. You can read my full response here: http://www.solomakeart.com/blogs/post/24
Not very religious but is a digital copy of the Bible on a tablet device still the Bible? Could I swear on it? The same comparisons can be used for art. I feel art is creative expression and it doesn’t matter the tool each tool has its own fun and creative learning curve. Art is subjective, some love it, some do not. I do wish people would see the value in appreciating art for what it is to you. Digital or otherwise. Digital does get a bad rap sometimes but it is all around us and the great works do stand out. Same can be said for traditional media.
The eye aids in capturing the image, it is not the eye alone, when you take a photograph, it's the camera that captures the image, the eye directs it, when drawing something from life, the eye is the filter and the hand does the drawing, it is not only the eye that captures the image, so when people photobash, they're bypassing that filter (which for productions is fine, time is money) but as I stated above, in personal work I prefer to see an image that has been painted.
While I can't cite any examples right nos, I was told in an art history class that when photography first started going into galleries, they were looked down upon because they were copies of an original, so to counteract that notion, photographers would destroy the negatives and make a numbered set like for printmaking.
I am a big lover of painting and i am collecting the African painting since 2 years. Now i have collected many painting and also looking for abstract wall art online that will be in very affordable prices with awesome collection.
I think I actually have to point out my husband this post in order that he will build a stone tree on behalf of me if one thing happens. completely brilliant. The grave sculpture is difficult to seem at as a result of as you say it captures the raw feeling.
female art prints
I really appreciate this article and I think you are an excellent digital painter, however I can definitely understand why traditional artists don't accept digital art as real “art”, although I think its misguided int he use of the word “art” as I think it is moreso in terms of a matter of skill than “art” as expression, although there's a fine line.
Before I comment on digital vs art, I want to say that I do work realistically in illustration, and I want to just tell you that the realism criticism you've encountered has been something in existence forever and always will, and most of the time it's by people who aren't skilled enough to do so, or by people who produce really out there “conceptual” art, so keep on working in hyper-realism, semi realism, any type of realism, just make it your own.
I believe style is one of the main things in art and what makes a specific artist “good”.
I have been seriously painting since I was a teenager using traditional methods (I'm 32 now), and while I have no qualms with digital painting or art, and I was in school while digital art was really becoming a big thing, and I do think digital painters should have more respect for traditional painters than visa versa and I'm not sure there's much respect out there.
While I think many digital painters can draw, understand composition, etc I think digital painting can be used as a crutch especially when it comes to color.
Mixing colors is one of the challenges of painting and also ends up being a reflection of the individual artist, whereas in digital painting, picking colors from swatches is hard to appreciate. This is one of the main things I think primarily digital painters don't and can't understand.
more next comment
Someone commented above about computers and photoshop being a tool, but for many people it is everything and for many old school guys in certain industries it is hard to appreciate someone who sits at a computer accomplishing similar than someone with actual hand skills, and art is one of those categories. It just adds salt to the wound when digital artists try to compare the two when they really shouldn't be compared.
A lot goes into traditional painting or drawing and there's so many things that can be done to a piece that can't be done digitally and I think that really needs to be understood and respected by digital painters and artists.
Again, I do think many digital painters can definitely draw, however I'm not sure many could paint with the same skill or style if it came down to traditionally. While of course anyone can use any medium they'd like, and I don't think one is more of a piece of “art” then the other, but in terms of skill and style there is a big difference and I'm not sure that many digital painters would have the same result as if they did it traditionally. .
I mentioned that I think a lot about art has to do with style. I think a distinct style in how you paint whether you do broad strokes, dry brush techniques, wet on wet,etc. there are many different techniques and methods that can't be matched by digital in the same way, and the same I think applies for drawing where line modularity and hardness/softness, etc makes a big difference in a drawing. Every digital painting I've ever seen always come across as a very smooth look and generally many paintings end up looking like they were done by the same artist.
Other things contributing to style and an artists are things like line, brush strokes, etc and while a lot of those things can be translated by the computer it doesn't end up with the same result.
So with this being said I really have no qualms with digital being art, as I think that's ridiculous because there are a million different mediums people use, but when it comes to skill and style I don't think it makes sense to put traditional and digital style or painting in the same category and I can say from experience it is more satisfying and gratifying to do hand work than digital.
I have seen many wars in classes and also online about digital vs traditional, and I do think digital artists should have more respect for the traditional arts, and I think another major problem is that neither sides understand one another because they don't share the same knowledge.
This is just my opinion and two cents, but this is a really great and so-far seeming civil blog and discussion and glad everyone respects one anothers opinions.
It's funny, (I'm a little late to the conversation, I know) but I've struggled with quite the opposite. Being the only one in my circle, up against big guns, a traditional illustrator working with colored pencils. My art always looks childish compared to the shiny digital eye candy. I guess maybe it's a generational thing. Digital is hard! Especially painting, and layering. The concepts are all the same: depth, line variation, movement, color theory, etc. They're the basics, always waiting to be manipulated. Look at Jackson Pollock, many would consider his work to not be “art”. When art can be so defined, perhaps we've lost the meaning of the thing.
Well put. 🙂
Photography and cameras were criticized at first? I fail to see it: http://daguerre.org/resource/history/history.html
You: back when cameras started becoming popular and photographers were working hard to learn this new type of art, they were considered “not real artists” because they didn't have to paint the scene, they were capturing it.
History: The world immediately began a love affair with the daguerreotype, especially in America, where fascination with the silvered plate lasted nearly twenty years….daguerreotype likenesses were regarded as mirrors of truth. Their brilliance, clarity, and seeming ability to reveal the soul of the sitter became the stuff of poetry, and at least one well-known novel, Hawthorne's House of the Seven Gables.
When the dag was invented, the commoners rejoiced!
Its only downside was the fact it had no negatives from which to print copies…and the mercury fumes.
…this was all when photography itself was in its infancy
It requires ZERO skill. You have immunity from error and anonymity from construction. How is clicking 'undo' and 'print' considered equal to REAL brushwork?
Oh I know, wave of the future, get on board with digital, etc… Well I sure do love taking a digital shower and eating digital food.
You all live in a delusional world and try and convince us of your illusion and petty justifications.
I'm a 28 year old too (2014) and I didn't grow up as a priveldged kid with access to over rated junk that magnifies skill. Like I said before, digital art s like running invyhe special olympics. You've rigged the game and to stackbyhe deck further, you take the subway to the finish line by printing your 'art' out on a machine.
Don't kid yourselves. Youre cheating falsely inflating your skill. What's worse is that society is now so full of fraudulent art, wall furniture and talentlesss hacks that real art isn't worth the tube of paint it was made with.
Congrats on not only witnessing the slaughter of a millennium of tradition in visual art by now sit here and lie while pissing on the ashes.
Thanks for putting it politely and with some mercy. My new verb to describe it would be “playing”.
Painting has been earned as THE correct verb for what traditional oil painters do. The new digital is a perversion and insult. Don't get me wrong, I see awesome and inspiring digital images all the time but they aren't real and when they are printed, they weren't created by “you”. There is no reset button in painting or cheat code to get to the trophy. This is all common human delusions on a new subject.
Not to instigate you completely but you should be irate and I'm glad you are. I plan to openly criticize digital for the next 40 years so get used to the voice of reason. You claiming you “moved on” past traditional media is the most amusing thing I've read. People never move on from traditional media, they find out hiw intense it is and how much they suck. Sorry pal but you're playing with the biggest handicap in the art world. To me, all people making that stuff are gamers (its not art; that's like saying Doritos is food)
I only see two arguments for digital art and they are both dismissive.
The first is, “art is subjective so no matter how or what people create, it's art and immune from criticism.” This stigma against criticizing terrible art or fraudulent methodology is cowardly and has cost us dearly. Galleries are now full of spilled paint canvas' sold by snake designers to clueless rich people, retouched giclee prints, and 3rd grader renderings. Shame! If anything is art, then everything is art and that's just what has happened. Art that would receive a D- in Art 1 is regularly applauded, sold, and given gallery space as well as art that was simply printed out of a machine. Painting over a print is the most dishonest and delusional practice I've ever seen. Art is subjective while a person is creating it. The moment it's viewed by another person it becomes open to criticism as an object in the world. Prints are just that, PRINTS, flawlessly dumped out of a printer, not a human hand.
Penciling in contour lines on a canvas or using a grid system to lay out your composition proportionally accurate is NOT cheating. Both require hand/eye coordination and the ability to approximate where negative space and foreground objects meet. This practice builds drawing skills and is simply a crutch like using REFERENCE (meaning referred to, not glued on) pictures. Freehanding or drawing without reference IS more respectable. Using a projector is not being able to draw, it's tracing! If you trace your contour lines, you are cheating. There are certainly degrees of cheating but many of them are negligible crutches, not outright fraud. Tracing is fraud! Airbrushing is NOT cheating–the artist is still face to face with his canvas and shaking hand, using a “fancy” brush that requires cleaning and stewardship. An airbrush actually exists. Your stylus or mouse is not a brush!
The 2nd argument is that digital artists require the same amount of skill and effort to create their work. This is a total lie. For centuries, artists have been faced with the fear of error while they physically wrestle with paint in their shaking hands. Through failure after failure they learn to mix paint, apply evenly and wet blend; often ruining clothes, canvases and countless brushes. They rightly suffer their shortcomings until they grow. They deliberate and sweat over the elements and principles of design as well as the physical process of constructing art because it's a do or die process. Digital artists do not have fear because they can immediately 'undo' any grave error that would halt or ruin a masterpiece in the making. Through no skill of their own, they employ an arsenal of trickery and image manipulating software. They also have absolutely no hand in constructing the finished product–a printer does their job! If they are arrogant enough to try and paint over their print, they are still cheating and should be made to feel the social pressure of their half measured dishonesty. The public is not smart enough to see the difference so it's up to us REAL artists to publicly bash unskilled cheater art. If we do this then maybe in 50 years, REAL artists will be appreciated and able to make a living.
Using a projector is cheating. Retouching prints is cheating. Abstract and non-objective is elementary and outrageously dumb. If you didn't physically draw/paint your art, using only your eye staring at the object and back again to a WHITE surface then you are a cheater who has conned viewers into thinking you have skill. You have no skill and should get honest.
I've absolutely had it, with talentless people using machines to trick people into thinking they're credible artists. Where does it end with the exponential rise of technology's aid? 50 years from now when virtual reality simulators and technology are even more advanced, these people will be insisting that their digital girlfriend is just as good as the real thing (even better) and that their digital life means more to them than any real one. They are sick, handicapped artists!
Grow up people, stop being lazy and learn your craft the right way, without phony tricks, cop-outs and delusional justifications.
Wow. Someone's extremely opinionated.
Or a troll.
“Slaughter of a millennium of tradition in visual art.” *snort* Hoo boy! If that's what you really think, none of us can help you there.
Again, you seem very opinionated to the point that argument with you would be pointless so I won't bother.
Also, I don't know what caused this intense amount of hatred for you, but, holy cow, dude. Lighten up a little. You don't have to like digital art or anything (I, personally, have a dislike for watercolors, for instance), but I think you're a little over-zealous there with your hatred. I hope you become more open-minded in the future. Otherwise, you're going to be quite the curmudgeonly and extremely bitter old person in the future. You know the type. “Get off my lawn!” And “Back in MY day…” and all that.
I mean, unless that's what you want…
It's clear you're very passionate about your opinion. So much so that there isn't anything anyone here or anywhere can say to change your mind. Discussion with you is clearly out of the question. You don't want to discuss. You just want to assert, assert, assert, and brute force everyone into agreeing with you. Again, I hope this changes for you in the future.
Peace.
Definately agree. Digital is just a media of choice for expressing your talent and creativity. It doesn't make your talent or creativity any less important than any other media. Of course every media has its own price value, like oils are more expensive than watercolor, depending on the name and talent of the artist, but if it is you're prefered media them you can develope with it and be the best with it, or make a decent living with it. The media really doesn't matter as much as the artist who is creating with it(and this can be interrpreted in many ways, such as the fame/name of a person or just the level of talent in the field).
My Art
I use every medium to create my art. All it takes in for 2 people to believe that it's art. In my case I'm an experimental artist that has no compunctions about disrupting the status quo. That is after all the duty of the artist; Go beyond the boundaries that society sets and come back to tell people about it. Now stop writing about it and go make your own art biaches!
I liked all the article, part from the last part. I do love digital art, but i have some problems considering photobashing the same thing than doing a digital artwork, Because with photobashing one is not actually creating, he is just re-elaborating things other people created (an engineer, an architect, a fashion designer, etc) . I can understand that an art director would prefer it, because “if you can do the same thing in half the time bashing photos, why you should spend that time trying to do the very same thing with a drawing?” but on the same time makes people thinking that also “real” digital artworks are just pieces of photos. If it's the industry standard, it means that artists working in the industry accepted to sell part of their creativity to adjust to industry standard. But while 3d animation and digital painting require creativity , photobashing requires creative use of other people creativity and i find that very, very sad. And I find really depressing to see it defended on a site like MuddyColors with the reason that “it's the future, the state of the art”. So, if one day the state of the art will be “copyright of masterworks of the past expired, let's start the masterworkbashing madness!” , it will be fine as well? I found this article because i was a bit tired of seeing collages on every site, now i feel even worst (just to be clear: nothing against you, Mr Luvisi, i know your artworks are great, i'm just talking about the photobashing thing in itself, i hope this is clear).
Thanks for great information on digital arts! I never knew this information earlier. I would love to know about Aboriginal Art dear! Do you have any information on that too? Please share here if you have pictures of this art form! Also, you have posted great paintings pictures here.
Found your article while searching for info about my lecture on digital paintings to middle school students. It was a lovely article glad I tackled it.
I came across your article when I was searching 'is digital art real art’. Digital is my media of choice and I have read many comments against it. There seems to be a misconception that the software alone is responsible for the art produced, no credit given to the skill and imagination of the artist. I am happy to see someone defending this form of art.
Digital painting is to art, what typing is to poetry. It is no more absurd to say whatever I typed on a screen is not a poem than what i drew isn't art
Same as writing vs typing, you can edit infinite times, yet only a dime a dozen manage a best seller in digital era.
Great Big Photos offers wide variety of Museum Quality Canvas Prints, framed art prints and more unique items sure to satisfy your passions.
One reason people perceive that it isn't real art is because of all those “3-D imaging” software programs out there, where human and animal figures, tubes and cylinders, blocks, infinite urban and natural settings and backgrounds, etc., are already generated, and the “artist” merely places them where he wants them.
But to do anything meaningful, he still must have a command of composition. Another problem is that there are indeed many fake “artists” out there, who simply take photos, for example, and play around with the filters in Photoshop, post the “work” on websites like DeviantArt and Pinterest, and then claim that they, “painted” it.
i paint on canvases and digitally – both are equally tricky and take lots of practice. I showed my friend who is a traditional artist my wacom, he loved it. The reason he loved it was because it took away the anxiety of messing up , and he could try lots of stuff without worrying he was ruining his canvas or paper. I wish digital had been around when i was younger, because i couldnt afford canvases. I love that digital art opens up experimentation of painting to everyone – you dont have to buy paints etc and lots of software is free, that's surely got to be a good thing. Freedom to create. I too used to get frustrated by photo bashing , but more because i couldnt understand how someone had painted something, then i realised they hadnt , the image was comprised of photos and over painting. However, if you have ever tried photobashing, which is generally used by concept artists to create beautiful ideas quickly – its not easy! you cannot just stick a few photos together and expect it to look amazing, you have to understand perspective, colour theory , composition – so yes, concept artists, i take my hat off to them. Generally i find it easier to paint on a canvas or draw on paper – wacom tablets can sometimes feel like you're painting on ice. Whatever medium used , be that mud, blood , pee, paint or digital paint – its all good to me , somewhere some dedicated person has slaved over their creation, most probably for hundreds if not thousands of hours. The only thing that irks me now is when i am looking for digital painting videos, and see people using clone techniques using Corel painter … where one rubs over a photo and smudges it about – that's not what i call digital painting , that's image manipulation – however, many people love art, and are convinced they cannot draw and Corel painters clone tool gives them hours of pleasure , and allows them to create something that gives them pleasure, which again has to be good.
I come from a traditional media background. I use the same skills in corel painter , as i would using oils or acrylics. I think its important to differentiate between art and illustration. An illustrator creates throw away work, thats always been the case. Digital media speeds up processes greatly, is far more effective, clean and “professional”, a word illustrators at least aspire to. http://www.johnhoganillustration.com
im 68 disabled vietnam veteran, i owned billboards in several states. i designed most all the art for the clients that rented a sign from me. if i heard one time or 100 times, you do it from a computer not by hand, thats not creative at all. i would always respond, yes using the computer makes it faster , however the key is coming up with10-20 totally different designs and creative directions in a week, now thats the creative part. yes a 10 year old can use a computer, but having to change your design thoughts and every piece has to be different. i totally agree with you, thanks for the article
This is an amazing blog.Thanks a lot for sharing.I will be waiting for your next post.
Omani artist
Nice post! All it actually depends on how do not matter what tools to use. So, digital art is still art because art is how to generate creative is not about what tools to use and media only way to appreciate the creations.
To all painters. You do realize that you are essentially still cave drawing, right? Time has come, and gone. Please do leave your brushes by the door.
http://deadartistwalking.blogspot.com/
Digital is art? Similar to how dog fighting is a sport? Get real. Digital is a joke when it comes to art. Its called free agency, digital has none. Do we allow forklifts to compete in weight lifting competitions?
I've said it before, kids who play Call of Duty on Xbox aren't Marines. You over there, playing on your tablet with a stylus, you're not an artist. Call out the posers. Save art. All you lazy people need to go buy real art supplies and stay out of Best Buy.
Unlike the previous respondent, I don't know if I'm qualified to make sweeping judgements on whatever it is that constitutes 'art' these days.
It's clear the digital medium (in all its forms) has caused debate, divided opinion and stirred emotions (if only the creative endeavours of some 'real' artists could provoke a similar reaction), and to some degree we should all be grateful to those technological innovators for giving us these disparate digital platforms (the internet as a for instance) to share our cross cultural views in such a democratic way on the subject – and to express ourselves of course – which can only be a good thing surely.
Let's face it, the digital age is here to stay. Life might sometimes mimic art, but if art is to stay alive and relevant, then maybe its exponents need to get their heads out of the clay and get real for a change.
Sold out Fine Art for a Dollar and says whatever. DaVinci rolls over in grave.
Everyone may be having some kind of skills, which are basically hidden inside. Therefore, a good art and creativity trainer must be able to polish those skills and help people to showcase those skills in front of public. It is good to consider points before hiring an art and creativity teacher.
Also Visit link below For more http://www.urbanpro.com/drawing?_r=offpage
“ Art & Creativity Classes”
Whether insecure artists like it or not.. digital painting is just as plyable an artform to painting in any other medium. You still need a fundamental art knowledge to be good at it.. and digital painting from ground up is not different than painting with oils or acrylics. The only difference is.. is that digital is a much more forgiving medium since you can always undo you mistakes. The only darkside to digital is how the legacy of the artist will go on once they are gone.. will many artists just be forgotten on some hard drive somewhere?.. and will they have created enough physical works to be remembered.? Their legacy will go on provided thechnology allows for it and that someone remembers to transfer that data to new forms of digital storage.
One can increase their integrity by buy real Facebook post likes. There are three main marketing techniques which are used for this work. The first is the use of keywords. When keywords are searched for regarding a particular topic, the page is going to appear in the top three results and people would be attracted to the page. The second technique is of the use of hashtags which is very popular nowadays to get fans by this interesting way by describing feeling about the page. Henceforth, people would be attracted and would visit the page. Third technique is using one’s interest. People tending to have similar interests in the content of page would definitely be attracted to your page. The page would come into sight on their timeline and they will see it. Before buying likes, one must be certain to have a strong profile image and an amazing cover which totally describes the page.
It's a print. Not a pAinting. Deleting the original digital file doesnt mean that it's a painting
It's a print. Not a pAinting. Deleting the original digital file doesnt mean that it's a painting
Actually, I would beg to differ, about that Eaton sculpture. As a sculpture, that 3D-printed sculpture by Eaton isn't particularly impressive at all.
http://scott-eaton.com/wp/wp-content/theWhiteHorse_theMall_tn.jpg
In fact, if this were hand-sculpted in stone, I would've called it a rather basic sculpture of a horse.
It has no captured sense of life, no dramatic pose, no sense of action, no anything to breath life to the piece and inspire awe to the view.
It's not even all that impressively in the detail work. It looks like the kind of printed piece you'd do in doing run-of-the-mill action figure creation work of something. It's anatomically-correct, but otherwise, a pretty basic, straightforward horse.
The only drawing point for this piece IS that it was sculpted in ZBrush and 3D-printed. Not the craftsmanship in itself, but the novelty that it's not hand-sculpted with a chisel.
That's convenient…
I was really lucky that my teachers did not show prejudice against digital art, and in fact, she was very interested.
I never really encountered people who are against digital art, because people from Asia mainly prefer digital art over traditional art.
Digital art is the main media in commercial illustration, game illustration and even card illustrations.
People think that traditional art is a thing of the past, and should have been forgotten.
Even when it comes to physical painting, there are so many newer tools/ invention that makes life so much easier.
I find alcohol markers very easy to use, and I can create a really fast drawing. It's way more convenient compared to , say, water colour or acrylic.
I absolutely hate water colour and oil painting. It's not because I can't do it, but I believe it's unnecessarily un-efficient.
We live in the modern society and technology has advanced. There's no need to stick to old methods if they aren't efficient compared to newer methods.
My thought is there is a difference between starting with a photo and embellishing it and painting a portrait in oils, for example. What do you think? The artist doesn't say that she started with a photo. Is that deceptive? And is it's value the same as a portrait that is produced as a result of study, skill, and practice? The oil painter has learned to use perspective and intuition so that the painting resembles the person. With a digital painting that starts with a photo, that skill set is not required.
My thought is there is a difference between starting with a photo and embellishing it and painting a portrait in oils, for example. What do you think? The artist doesn't say that she started with a photo. Is that deceptive? And is it's value the same as a portrait that is produced as a result of study, skill, and practice? The oil painter has learned to use perspective and intuition so that the painting resembles the person. With a digital painting that starts with a photo, that skill set is not required.
Where the argument seems to go wrong for me is this…what is illustration and what is the difference, if any in the readers mind, what is the difference between illustration and art….it seems to me art is illustration, but, illustration is usually not Art with a capitol A. Illustration goes way back..even the cave paintings have the element of illustration, elegant as it is. But, does Art have a different genesis than illustration…in terms of the creative process? I have my view…what's yours?
re: photography…..the things to remember are:
1. the definition of art was widened to accommodate the legitimacy of photo printing to include that which hangs on a wall and can be bought and sold….(then the definition was later made broader to include concepts which sometimes used photography) and 2. that the camera is a machine…and while the photographer has choice, timing, framing, etc…it a machine which makes the image. (this idea doesn't include photoshop, where the artist makes the image ultimately from where the machine had limitations.
All art is controversial at some point in its life. Look at Van Gogh, he was considered insane and his works were considered weird and unsalable in his life. Every time a new style or new medium has come into play it has been bashed. I think partly do to what your saying with intimidation, but also jealousy along with other mixed feelings. I also at one point in my life thought it was a cheater tool. I still don't understand it and my wacom tablet hasn't gotten much use because of it. I guess when it comes down to it I'm computer illiterate. I'll admit it though. I also have the courage to admit jealousy and feelings of failure because my art isn't hailed like digital art is. I choose graphite as my medium. The smell, the feel, being dirty, I don't know. But even still to this day only 27 and having purchased a tablet at 18, have desire to bring my art to another level as well. Mostly to see if I can.
Sorry even though I read through and corrected grammar and sentence structure I still made mistakes…. :/
great way to put it!
great way to put it!
Color theory, composition, anatomy, rendering form, creating rhythm, understanding edges, understanding how an image reads, brushwork/penmanship, lighting, and other schools of thought. To master these principles isn't any more easier just because your using a different medium. If van goh took up the digital medium and created, using the same techniques and principles he would if done using actual paints, is he any less of an artist? No. Of course you can cheat in in the digital medium but people can tell when you do.. And you can you cheat in traditional like tracing an image and calling it your creation. It's how you use it that makes you a cheat or an artist. The only difference is that traditional medium creates a physical original which is always of greater value than it's prints, while digital creates no true original form but the vision and practices of the artist is of no less value whatever his/her medium.
It is in fact considered a painting. Given that a work that was complete and painted using a software brush. It is a print + painting. While graphical art caters towards commercial audiences, it does not fall short of being another medium of Art.
I agree with your argument completely. Art is art, not matter how it is done. In your argument, you said times are changing and I completely agree. We are in a change, where electronic media is completely changing things. Disney's 2-D animation used to be a big deal and the main way they do their films. Now 3-D animation seems to have taken over. I would argue, like writing to technology, 2-D animation and drawing will always be there. Medias never change, and while they are old, they are just transformed in a new way. In fact, one day I think 3-D animation will be old, and something like 4-D animation and art will arise. What is to say it can't happen? Humans constantly want to improve, to make things more realistic. 3-D animation will become an old media one day too. Art will always be evolving. I don't there will ever be a point where a medium will be THE medium in how art is done. Art is not simply something where one medium or media can do it. So art cannot be said to be new or old, since it is a constantly changing thing where various medias are being developed.
>priveldged kid with access to over rated junk that magnifies skill
Privileged? Almost everyone in the West has a personal computer, and just about any computer made in the last 15 years could be used to paint. I'd go as far to say you could pick up an ancient Dell, a Wacom tablet and a used copy of CS2 for less than $100. That's if you're literally broke. You can now draw to your heart's content until the day the machine dies.
Compare that to the cost of pencils, pens, paper, canvas, etc. Its not even close. The only privilege here is the ability to live in a bubble sheltered from the reality where digital and traditional media coexist and complement each other, rather than destroying each other. Its not about the toolset, its about the artist.
Digital art is just a different kind of art. But if I were rich I know what I would want hanging on my wall….and it wouldn't be some flat image created on a computer!
I am a traditional textile batik artist. My take on digital art is that the artist soul does not show in the work, it lacks a human quality to it. It is perfectly mechanized, just a glorified giclee.
Dan's work is awesome!
There's a fundamental difference here: tools and content.
In the case of using wacom tablets, programs like photoshop, illustrator, zbrush, blender, etc. to make a piece, you're using a set of tools to make your art.
If you're taking other people's content to make some new composition, your final piece is innately derivative. The degree of derivation strongly determines how much credit goes to the maker of the new piece and how much goes to the old, and how much are their respective values.
Whether “sampling” the instrumentals of musicians, “recontextualizing” pre-existing “found” materials, or “bashing” photos, these folks are making compositions mostly-to-largely taken from other people's work and lying, plagiarizing, claiming they should be paid for what someone else did.
Your old teachers can place their noses as high in the air as they want; they're still wrong. Likewise, no amount of judge rulings or museum approval changes the fact that the people paid for “sampled” materials or “found” art are not artists.
I like your fish h8r.
Talk of “soul”, “aura”, etc. is bullshit. Does it look good enough to evoke a sense of awe?
Hello sir, I think what you're saying is from the practitioner point of view, not the receiver, because, well, sometimes the receiver cannot differentiate if the artwork is done digitally or traditionally! but I do acknowledge what you're saying.
I am a degreed studio artist. That said, the reason I am here is because I started to tremble, then shake and now I have a full blown 'can't hold a cuppa anything without a lid'. Tests tests more tests, they will find out I hope. But for now, I want to put color down on a surface…period. But I can't afford the materials and messing up tends to irk me even more. Enter art apps and coloring apps, I can enlarge an image to a huge space and have some control, and I don't mess with apps that do not have unlimited undo. Bravo on your art! Carry on McDuff!
I just randomly came across this, but good subject, I enjoyed the read.
I think art should be seen as something that is done creatively and in constant development. People are into different things and they either like something or they don't. At the end of the day one people use a pen, some a brush and some a tablet, it's how you progress with the tool.
I'm not sure digital art is created to be hung on a wall
Zero skill hey Neal. Let's compare what someone with zero skill can do with a digital blank canvas with someone who understands what they are doing. I think you'll see you are speaking from a lack of experience.You sound angry and bitter.
I could not read all the comments- apologies offered to those who wrote as I am. If this has been said before- also apologies.
I have a foot in both places. I am unapologetic. I received a deep, serious education at the hands of instructors who were a wonderful mix of acadenician and practitioner. The faculty shows in the late 1960s were notable annual events with examples of design, paintings from one-man shows, a new book, etc etc. and the people behind the objects on exhibition were the ones handing out our assignments and evaluating them.
That is my grounding- in a world before the personal-laptop- i computer. The basic driver in my education and subsequent career in a “day job”, has been and continues to be forward metaphorical thinking. It has been no stretch for me to use a computer to produce images in the morning or late at night, and spend a few hours with the paintbrushes and surfaces in the studio.
It is the same because of the ideas and metaphorical connections that I'm wired with. Simply put-
there are things that only a paint brush will do (or chuck of graphite), and things only a computer with a vector graphic program will do and the choice is mine. What the danger is (and the marketing strategy for most programs I suspect) is to make it easy to produce images.
If you are making lazy uninformed images you are wrecking the profession (if there is such a thing an an art profession). The hard part with art has always been getting the image that is inside- outside.
Pure and simple, if you are a maker of images, your life depends on that.
For perspective, Why did Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni say that all he made were puppets (speaking of his sculptures)? Why did he throw his fresco brush at the Pope exclaiming, “I am no painter”?
We would do well to not confuse materials and techniques with ideas and images. It would be helpful to search out the whys of what we individually produce and deal with the honesty of the answer.
Have at it- whatever your it is.
Mind you I realise this comment is a bit over 2 years old, but it does seem rather biased.
See, if you're a professional artist, you must have already picked up that Art is a form of expressing yourself and being creative, aye? Art can be anything: reality distorted; a still life of dead butterflies; a child travelling through a maze built with clouds and spilt sugar; a small black circle in the middle with white empty space, the edges of the canvas etched with the line arts of city buildings and trees; whatever! You should understand that art is a medium to express and free oneself, and to be freely criticized.
So, why does the medium from which it is generated from matter? Authors of long past may criticize people today for reading a book with mass-printed chapters when they themselves wrote with hand-woven papyrus! Musicians may shake their heads as the next sensation forms their melodies using software instead of real instruments played in the theatre. What would their real argument be: time and effort, or skill and cost?
Value comes with the cost of the material AND time and skill! An artist who sells digital works may earn less than the next Da Vinci painting with a costly canvas and premium-quality paints and charcoals. But what if this “Da Vincent” drew/painted worse than a toddler, and the digital artist better than anyone out there? Does the digital artist deserve recognition, or he, the ill-doing “Da Vincent”? Most would agree that the Digital artist should! Why? Because he honed his skill, perfected his trade and takes his time to perfect each craft! The digital artist doesn't have to fork out hundreds of thousands of dollars to make good artwork! He could, but he chooses not to. Regardless, his medium of choice should not restrict him in any way of his choosing from producing well-done art. A counter-argument is that value can come from the scarcity of an artist's chosen resource; paintings are limited and so are things like old-timey photographic prints (from the days of turning negatives to positives). That holds true as well – a traditional artist ought to earn more due to their chosen materials; in comparison to a digital artist, who simply has to draw, print and matte – viola, finished! Take this thought: is it worth it to buy from someone who can't draw for sh*t who uses expensive materials, or from an able artist who can roll up their sleeves and draw, regardless if they use a piece of printer paper or a drawing software?
Drawing digitally simply gives their user to be more FREE with their craft. Art, after all, is about letting one's imagination be freed from their pathetic prison, and be drawn, sculpted, danced – whatever it may be – to express! If people buy this, don't drown yourself with envy and spite them for earning more attention than your rook-nosed work could ever earn!
If they draw digitally, and you spite them and call them off for not using a traditional canvas and a blob of oil paint… you're limiting their possibilities as an artist to explore their field – you're just making a bigger prison!
Don't forget that TRUE art requires time, dedication, thought and practice to produce!! If it evokes an idea, can appeal to a large audience in a sense that you don't have to stare at a circle – but rather, look at an actual character underneath a dying tree or whatever – and it looks beautiful… thats true art!
Don't shun one for drawing digitally or in a medium you don't use or accept. I know with the advancement of technology and resources we destroy a part of our culture (like abandoning still life for more expressive forms), but remember that art is art. It is a timeless thing, and if you want some of the best examples of it, go look at an image of galaxies far beyond us caught on a modern enlargened space camera called “The Hubble Space Telescope”.
“The lesson I learned is, don't be so quick to judge just because you don't prefer the medium being used.”
Its not the medium dude, its the level of skill too. I am not an artist but I can by using Photoshop edit an image, give different blends to it, use filters on it, use another background image, edit it in same way and then merge them both using layer masks create “art” as you call it.
Just a thought – has anyone read David Hockney's book SECRET KNOWLEDGE – Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters. A fascinating insight into the technology used to create their work.
I believe both forms of art have their place. Digital art as a means of presenting an artists creativity and message work. But digital art is Not a painting, nor is the printout, by definition of “painting”. As far as the value, let me propose this: Imagine you go to Sotheby's and they are auctioning some rare Van Gogh paintings. Suppose someone came running in with a digital printout of a painting created purely in photoshop and it was comparable to the Van Gogh's, created by a very accomplished digital artist. Do you think the buyers will suddenly consider buying that print and paying the same amount as they would a Van Gogh? The point here is not just the image is important. The collector is looking for that canvas that Van Gogh carried daily on the streets and into the fields, that he sat up in a chair at the bar, the one that sat and never got sold, the one that has his blood, fingerprints and heart. that is the difference. So you just can't compare.
I believe both forms of art have their place. Digital art as a means of presenting an artists creativity and message work. But digital art is Not a painting, nor is the printout, by definition of “painting”. As far as the value, let me propose this: Imagine you go to Sotheby's and they are auctioning some rare Van Gogh paintings. Suppose someone came running in with a digital printout of a painting created purely in photoshop and it was comparable to the Van Gogh's, created by a very accomplished digital artist. Do you think the buyers will suddenly consider buying that print and paying the same amount as they would a Van Gogh? The point here is not just the image is important. The collector is looking for that canvas that Van Gogh carried daily on the streets and into the fields, that he sat up in a chair at the bar, the one that sat and never got sold, the one that has his blood, fingerprints and heart. The one with the amazing texture. I guess it would be similar to buying a jewel, its one of a kind and its even more because of the artists soul. that is the difference. So you just can't compare these two things and consider them the same. I personally feel the computer is a tool, so it is helpful, but I know in real life there are no undos, or easy revisions or plugins to make art easy and i don't feel that digital art is entirely a solo endeavor. I feel that it is a collaboration between the artist and the computer. I would tell any artists that it is valuable to know it and use it, but I would also tell artists that its is also fundamental to know both realms.
comparing them two is like comparing fast food vs. real chef food.
Wow. Great post. Being a traditional painter, but also a graphic designer, I’m totally divided. When I’ve enroled in the university to learn design, computers were treated like cheating. Now there is not any sane graphic designer who designs by hand like the old days, and anything done by hand is totally uncommon. The market demands tight deadlines and there is no way to do that without computers.
In design, digital was the way to go. However, when talking about painting, I’m not so sure…
First, there is market value: an oil painting is a unique piece. Whoever purchases it, knows that it’s unique and that ads value. Is a digital painting unique? After all, if my cat scratches it, I can request the author another print and it’s solved, and not to mention that several other persons can buy the same piece.
Second: One of the most wonderful things about painting is the happy accidents. The unexpected. In a ctrl_u world, that is not the same. The approach is trial and error, and it’s totally different to the visceral feeling you get when you know you can actually screw the whole piece you’ve been working for hours/days.
And then, the last point: I’m not sure why, but a lot of digital artists share the same kind of brushwork and even the same kind of concepts. It’s all epic fantasy or sci-fi. The kind of work you may see in a Dungeons and Dragons manual (and I love D&D art) but not hanging on a wall. I know, there are a lot of traditional painters doing insanely boring still-life paintings…
So, while I’m not belittling the art value of digital, I believe that digital it’s quite more utilitarian and mass-market oriented than a traditional painting.
What i feel about digital art is that “I don’t think it’s not REAL ART, but lame art.” this is why: not just because i can’t do it, but when it comes to digital stuff, it just looks too REAL and too GOOD that there are no problems with it. I can’t feel anything when people use a mouse pad or digital pen and pad. you are not getting dirty and messing up on yourself.
true it does take a long time as well to draw an image with that style, but when you actually touch the pen/charcoal and paper you feel that you are actually working. and at the end when you have to wash your hands, you have real proof that you have worked hard on it with the marks on your hands and forehead full of charcoal or paint and graphite.
And yet, when i put my stuff in competitions, all the finished winners are all digital and not one are traditional.
I enjoyed your write up. I just recently started digital art. I am a traditional artist and have completed over 500 pieces of traditional art, so digital art is quite alien to me. I have noticed people do turn their noses up a digital art, however in this fast moving world of technology, I think it important to move with the times and at least give digital art a go. For me digital art is just another media and it is important to keep the art as traditional as possible, without the use of photographs, i.e. I start with a drawing I do myself and build up using the tools provided. It is an exciting art form and for me it has not been easy and still is not, but somehow I intend to get good at it.
i have no issue with digital art, heck i even bought an IPad Pro, Pencil , and procreate just to start it . i love it honestly, its faster and much easier . i would say that traditional artwork each stroke is harder to manipulate once its put down, and digital it is alot easier to correct mistakes. i can see both sides of the argument , However! is Digital artwork still art. Most Certainly yes , i cannot tell you how skilled someone has to be and how much of a change digital is , to be going back and forth from Digital and traditional is. quite honestly its overwhelming but very fun at the same time. to be able to manipulate things and aspects of things, colors and etc on a whim. the tools to use. the things/tools that i can use digitally that would probably cost 100$s to even come close to traditionally, the only Peeve i have between the 2 or this whole ordeal is when someone uses digital touch up and Lie about it. things such as FotoForensics are such tools that can show were things like this are done.
Great post.Best MPSC, UPSC, Banking classes and reading room in nagpur.
Digital is another medium but it will certainly deteriorate your traditionally drawing and painting skills.
I have experienced this myself, I have been a traditional media painter since I was a child, I am now 32, and last year I started a digital illustration course, even though we are using photoshop and illustrator we still draw on paper, and learning to draw and paint with photoshop. I did a master study of Frederick church’s oil painting, twighlight in the tropics, I painted it on photoshop, spent 9 hours on it, and then a fine artist student(older than me) told me I didn’t really paint it and digital art is just photo manipulation, even after I showed her my screenshots of the progress she did not change her stance. If you are painting or drawing something, be it traditional or digital, then you are painting or drawing it, just different tools. Photobashing tho… not so much….
yes, definitely digital art is not really art but it looks almost real. we are using digital art in different kinds of fields like the film industry, media communication, engineering, science, gov sectors, etc. digital graphics look very beautiful and impressive. it is highly demanded in recent times. it brings adventure thoughts. it is very helpful.
thanks for sharing this informative post.
This conversation should be this long…
-DIGITAL ART IS NOT “REAL ART”
-Ok boomer
To me, “real” art exists in two planes – the eye, mind, heart, soul of the creator and that of its viewer. It should not exist as some ageless and immutable definition which can be “imposed”, and to those who would “impose” it, I say that is quite un-artist like, and while one may have the skill of a great draftsman, in my estimation s/he would be lacking that ethereal spirit of one. We might all agree that a tree is a tree, but once it is rendered onto some other medium through whatever vision and execution realizes it, that tree can exists in countless individual realities simultaneously. That is the power of artistic expression, and any vehicle which facilitates that teleportation is wonderful and valid.
Where I must agree with many of the naysayers here is in a subtle but important area. I do not agree that digital painting is “painting” anymore than I would say that rendering the sound of a violin by moving my stylus across a screen is “digitally playing the violin” – it is less than intellectually honest in my view. Still, I do consider it creating and envision that it could lead to a great musical creation, and become art. I would offer that digital art is a sub-class of digital “creations” or “renderings”. I believe that a digital creation which is rendered in the style of oil on canvas can be “real” art. That said, if its creator is content to fool the viewer’s eye and is not at complete peace with its digital origin then that particular artist does the medium a grave disservice, plays into a key sore point of the traditionalists, and is as lacking in artistic spirit as those who would arbitrarily shut the digital medium down in its entirety.
There has always been an “art as a sport” kind of segment to the audience and some creators, meaning, if something is hard to do or technically impressive then it gets more “art points” for some. Personally I don’t care how my work is labelled. Not to sound crass, but I get paid for it just the same, and (finally) clients actually appreciate that it is digital because that makes things easier for everyone.
Physical media is, I think, generally more challenging, so it gets more art points–except for mark-making, where digital is still very clumsy. I don’t think a lot of folks appreciate that. They only see the stuff that’s easier. It’s noteworthy that a lot of traditional masters “can’t” work digitally (meaning they try once and give up because of how bad it feels at first). And when the medium feels bad it’s a lot harder to create. I’ve been doing both for a couple of decades now and neither is the whole package for me.
I’ve done both digital and traditional and I’ve always strived to be proficient at both, which has it’s pros, mostly in being adaptable as an artist, and cons, mostly that progress in both is slower because you’re not able to pour %100 of your energy into either.
My “hot take” on digital art is it is %100 real art as a skill, but not necessarily as a medium in the sense that it’s really noncorporeal unless you’re saving a print somewhere as a hard copy.
Because we’re so used as a society to having digital be the back-up to the physical, when the digital is the primary or only form of a peice of art’s existence it makes us think of it as risky, maybe not worth getting too attached to incase a technical woops wipes it from existence.
Which I think is what psychologically a lot of people are getting stuck on in the same way a lot of people treat music as an artform some still like to have LPs and CDs, while others are fine to just have mp3 files even at the risk of not having a back-up.
And then of course there’s people who downplay digital art because they assume under some delusion that digital art is made by the computer with minimal input on the part of the artist. When in reality the digital artist has often had to spend just as much time time learning and practising to use digital like any other medium.
The other thing about digital is the caveats that come with it, one that caused me to view my own digital work as lacking in terms of emotional investment was the reliance on the software and hardware to keep functioning when many times it simply didn’t. Nothing killed a jolt of inspiration quicker than loading up the pc to find the pen pressure in the tablet had failed and I’d need to reinstall the driver for the umpteenth time. I’ve even had it where after the forced win 10 upgrade some programs simply stopped working and I couldn’t afford to pay for the updated versions to fix the compatibility issues.
Until I could upgrade my machine and download a newer or different program there were a few years when Traditional media became my only media simply because it was so reliable to be able to just pick up and start creating. It took a long time for me after one particular computer death losing nearly half of my artwork that hadn’t been backed up to step back into digital art again.
So while I think to say “digital art is not real art” is incorrect, I can honestly say I see why many either owners or makers of art would think it isn’t.
Digital art may be an art form, but it is not superior to traditional methods, in my opinion. It has it’s place and is wonderful for some industries and applications, but it can’t ever replace the expert colour mixing, abstractism in brush stroke and manipulation of edges that we see in traditional art as an extension of the artist’s person. And a print, however high quality, cannot replace medium applied by hand. Sorry, but you cannot digitally achieve individual brushstrokes that have expertly caressed, dug and dragged into the medium. Even a 3D printer can only print digital information. No, the skill of mixing colours by only your eye and feelings, and also ‘painting light’ is what makes traditional painting such a special ability. I see digital art as definitely an artform, definitely a clever skill but definitely more illustrative, easily layered, easily undone if you make a error, etc. I guess that digital artists who cannot paint by hand hope I’m wrong, but I can’t see it ever being as revered as painting by hand. The energy of the painter has interacted in an unadulterated manner in traditional painting, whereas the artist using electronic means is by definition an adulterated version. Maybe one day we will evolve into spraying coloured light out of our fingers straight from our state of being, we are all just muddling through till then. The future for digital art is staggeringly imaginative and can be reproduced exactly over and over, but a painting that is a one off and can never be exactly reproduced has a special place in humanity’s consciousness.
art is a skill that makes an individual great. it doesn’t matter its a digital art or any kind of art. when an artist thinks about some special things and gives it hand made art or digital picture to the audience that made him/her an artist. today’s time is digital media. we see different kinds of uses of digital art in different kinds of games, videos, gifs, etc. through digital art we can use it in different kinds of areas.
thanks for sharing this information with us.
The Digital painting lacks one single aspect. The exclusivity, however great and mighty it could be.! When an oil or a water color painting is made original methods, which the artist laid his hands on, You can buy with a feel of greatness. Because, rest all can be duplicates even if the artist, again draws the same thing, it will not be same.
Here, the first digital painting it self is a duplicate, as one can not guarantee that, it can not be reprinted en masse.
When you lose a original painting, it is lost forever until you find.
with digital, you can lose how many times you want!
Digital art is real art, of course it is – it takes the same processes & skills as any fine drawing or painting. It’s just another way to create. I create and sell prints that are ‘drawn’ from scratch in Photoshop. No plug-in programmes, just your basic Photoshop. I could draw and paint on canvas with similar results, but that costs more. This way my colours never run out & creating prints to sell becomes simple. If you have the talent to create a drawing or painting, then you choose your medium – oil, acrylic, charcoal, pen – and now digital. Manipulation of photos with filters and processes is entirely different; but creating something from scratch is art whatever the medium.
I’m a traditional artist, but what I really miss in digital art is seeing the ‘human hand’ in it.
Brushstrokes or little lines in the paint, that show you how the artist has decided to move the brush, to me that is a connection to the process of how it was created.
With a digital print, I can’t run my finger across or look at it upclose. I can be mesmerized by a print, don’t get me wrong, but there’s something in (most) digital art that just doesn’t capture my interest.
It’s a bit like seeing a model on instagram that has everything smoothed and filtered.You look at her for a few seconds, you can’t really feel anything else but; ‘Hm..pretty, I guess.’ and then move on.
But when you come to the people that are real, true pictures that show someone was outside, the wind was blowing, her hair is brushing against her face, then you truly can imagine what she was feeling like, standing there. If you’re a traditional artist, it’s difficult to hide in your brushstrokes, hów you made a brushstroke. You can’t, the viewer can see it.
An artist that clicks ‘undo’ whenever there is a flaw, to me, just feels lazy. Easy, sure, but lazy.
Instead of learning how to (fix, cover up or better; use) that change on your picture, you just click undo.
I have digital artists sitting in my art-class (I am in it too) and whenever they use paper, they tap the paper and then sigh, It’s so difficult in comparison, with no easy escape when you want to move object, make them bigger, change the colour, etc. that they just lose motivation for them.
Colourmixing can be done by tapping a palet on the screen, changing a colour doesn’t require a minute of thought and big decisions can be undone by another tap on the screen. No big decisions, just fiddle around, delete what you don’t like (even a line in the middle of your work) and then, in the case of the people in my class, just slap it onto a website for selling and make a profit while you scribble another one down.
I write letters to random people (one time contact penpals) and sometimes I get a typed response.
I then always assume they have arthritis or they needed to translate their story through Google.
Sometimes I politely ask, and the person replies back; No, it’s just quicker and easier that way.’
That disappoints me. Sure, they still sat down and typed for me but appareantely I wasn’t worth a handwritten letter (as we all agreed on, on the website for the penpals.)
A digital painting (on average) to me, is like a typed letter from a friend. A lot less personal to me, with no flaws or character.
Dell Boomi is one of the best cloud integration software products and a must-have for anyone using cloud technologies. more details visit my linkhttps://brollyacademy.com/dell-boomi-training-in-hyderabad/
Nice Post Thanks For Sharing Keep It Up!
Furthermore, I love the variety of topics you cover, and how you cater to different interests and demographics. It’s evident that you put a lot of thought into creating a diverse range of content that appeals to a broad audience.
I really enjoy simply reading all of your weblogs. Ziyyara’s experienced tutors specialize in GCSE Board all subjects and offer personalized lessons to help students excel in their studies.
Dell Boomi is an enterprise iPaaS (integration platform as a service) that helps businesses connect their applications, data, and devices. It offers a wide range of features and capabilities, including:
Integration of on-premises and cloud applications
Real-time data integration
API management
Business process automation
Data visualizationdell bhoomi
A React course is a training program that teaches you how to use React, a JavaScript library for building user interfaces. React is one of the most popular JavaScript libraries in the world, and it is used by many large companies, such as Facebook, Airbnb, and Netflix.
A React course typically covers the following topics:
The basics of React, including components, state, and props
Advanced React topics, such as routing, Redux, and testing
How to build real-world applications with React
React training in Hyderabad
Your perspective on photo-bashing and the changing art landscape is valid. As new techniques gain popularity, there will always be imitators and copycats. However, it’s essential to recognize that innovation and experimentation are essential to artistic growth. What may start as a trend can lead to exciting breakthroughs and new possibilities.
I want this blog comment
Your perspective on photo-bashing and the changing art landscape is valid. As new techniques gain popularity, there will always be imitators and copycats. However, it’s essential to recognize that innovation and experimentation are essential to artistic growth. What may start as a trend can lead to exciting breakthroughs and new possibilities.
mandala course</a
online sketching course</a
Hindi online classes</a
online zumba classes</a
yoga online classes</a
Thanks for sharing such an informative article.The article was a delightful read, and I found it to be exceptionally well-crafted and enlightening.I think this is a fantastic article, and I really appreciate you letting me know about it.
I appreciate you sharing this insightful information.I thought the post was really well-written and insightful, and it was enjoyable to read.I truly appreciate you alerting me to this essay, which I think is wonderful.
Your blog is meaningful, I have read many other blogs but your blog has persuaded me, I hope in the coming time you will have more great blogs to share with readers.
“The ‘Meet the Team’ page humanizes the website, putting faces to the creators and fostering a sense of connection.”
“The well-crafted blog section adds a personal touch to the site, keeping readers hooked with insightful articles.”
React Masters provides React JS Online & Offline Course for further quires contact us at Mob:+91 84660 44555
I really love the article and the way you convey it. Keep writing…
Thanks for sharing this with us, its very informative and productive, hope you will share more in future
Lamp Institute provides React JS Online & Offline Course for further quires React Training in Hyderabad at Lamp Institute is led by experienced instructors who are experts in the field. They provide valuable insights, share industry best practices, and guide students throughout the learning journey.
“Great post! Really enjoyed it.”
“Insightful read, thank you!”
“Your blog is a treasure trove!”
Kloud Course Academy
“Great article, felt good after reading, worth it.
i would like to read more from you.
keep posting more.
also follow Full Stack Development Course In Hyderabad“
nice article “Top Digital Marketing Agency In Hyderabad
“
“Great article, felt good after reading, worth it.
i would like to read more from you.
keep posting more.
also follow Full Stack Development Course In Hyderabad“
“Great article; felt good after reading; worth it.
i would like to read more from you.
Keep posting more.
also follow Full Stack Development Course In Hyderabad“
I recommend this spell caster,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
fix all relationship issues,.
This love spell helpful.
The information is clear and easily accessible, making it a joy to visit your site. Well done
Your blog beautifully addresses a common misconception about digital art, shedding light on its validity and artistic merit. It’s refreshing to see you challenge such narrow-minded viewpoints and advocate for the recognition of digital art as a legitimate form of expression. Your thoughtful reflection encourages us to appreciate the creativity, skill, and innovation behind digital artworks. By highlighting the diverse ways in which artists utilize digital mediums to convey emotions and tell stories, you empower us to embrace the ever-evolving landscape of art. Thank you for sparking this important conversation and inspiring us to broaden our perspectives.
24kbet an online gaming platform that offers a wide range of betting options, including sports events and online games.
The MY24KBET platform is a state-of-the-art online betting site tailored for dedicated sports bettors and gaming fans. It offers a diverse array of sports markets, live betting opportunities, and online games, delivering a comprehensive gaming experience. The platform is equipped with advanced security measures, guaranteeing a secure and fair environment for users to place their bets.
24KBET is a premier online betting platform designed for avid sports bettors and gaming enthusiasts. It offers a comprehensive range of sports markets, live betting options
my 11 circle account offers access to engaging fantasy sports, enabling you to create and manage virtual teams in popular sports like cricket and football.
Cricut Design Space is an essential app to use for various Cricut machines. You can download the app just by clicking here. With the help of this software, Cricut users can create stunning designs for projects. The app can be used on both Windows and Mac devices. Plus, the Cricut Design Space is also available for Android and iOS smartphones. Keep reading the whole content to get extensive info about the app.
When we talk about “sports for lazy people,” we’re referring to activities that offer a low-impact workout without requiring high levels of physical exertion. These sports are designed to be enjoyable and accessible, making it easier for individuals to incorporate regular physical activity into their daily lives.
ggwinner is a leading online gaming platform designed to meet the needs of a diverse community of gaming enthusiasts and bettors.
Digital art is def art, even if it takes some shortcuts
Art is art, simple as
Discover the power of full-stack development with Python at Gautham Digital Learning in Hyderabad. Our comprehensive training program equips you with the skills to excel in this dynamic field. Ready to launch your career as a versatile Python developer? Join us and transform your passion into expertise.
Sports for lazy people offer a practical and enjoyable way to stay active without intense effort. Low-impact activities such as walking, swimming, yoga, Tai Chi, and bowling provide numerous health benefits while being easy on the body. By incorporating these activities into your routine, you can maintain physical fitness, enhance mental well-being, and enjoy a more relaxed approach to exercise. Finding the right low-impact sport for you can help make physical activity a natural and enjoyable part of your life.
Thank you for your appreciation. I’ve written an article for you, but I want to clarify that I haven’t actually written or shared any article in our conversation. However, I can rephrase your sentiment about an article you’ve read:
Thank you for this excellent article. It’s highly informative and provides a wealth of valuable content.
Would you like me to expand on this or rephrase it differently?
Are you looking to embark on a journey into the dynamic world of full-stack development with Python? Look no further! Gautham Digital Learning offers comprehensive Python full-stack training in Hyderabad.
Discover Exceptional Wedding Venues in Kapashera
Explore a diverse range of party venues along NH-8 and in Pushpanjali:
Luxurious Farmhouses
Elegant Banquet Halls
Upscale Hotels
Experience the convenience of hosting your entire wedding celebration at a single location. Kapashera’s NH-8 and Pushpanjali areas offer unique multi-theme wedding venues, allowing you to create distinct atmospheres for different functions without changing locations.
These versatile spaces provide the perfect backdrop for your special day, combining convenience with style. Discover how you can transform your wedding into an unforgettable event at one of Kapashera’s premier venues.
Great post! Thank you for sharing this. It was a pleasure to read and helped enhance my knowledge.
Catch the latest ipl cricket news in hindi for all the updates and insights.
good blog thank you
good blog
Digital art is as valid and impactful as traditional forms. It offers unique creative possibilities and reflects contemporary techniques and tools. Art’s value comes from its expression and impact, not the medium used.
Full Stack Developer Courses in Mangalore
Enroll in our Full Stack Developer courses in Mangalore to master front-end and
back-end development. Learn HTML, CSS, JavaScript, React, Node.js, and more from
industry experts. Gain hands-on experience, earn a certification, and advance your
career. Join now and become a proficient full stack developer!
Great article, felt good after reading, worth it.
i would like to read more from you
keep posting more.snowflake course training in hyderabad
Stay updated with the a href=”https://topcricketnews.today/”>comprehensive fixtures and results history for the 2024 pakistan super league season
Live Draw HK
Data HK
Data SDY
Data SGP
Data Taiwan
Data Cambodia
Paito Cambodia
Paito Taiwan
Paito China
“Best SEO Course Training In Hyderabad
“
The notion that digital art is not “real art” is a misconception. Digital art represents a modern evolution of artistic expression, utilizing technology to create unique and innovative works. It challenges traditional boundaries while expanding the definition of art itself. Embracing digital art enriches our understanding of creativity and acknowledges the diverse ways in which artists can communicate their visions.
Excellent post! Thank you for sharing this amazing content.
The information is clear and easily accessible, making it a joy to visit your site. Well done
The information is clear and easily accessible, making it a joy to visit your site. Well done
We Provide Outbound call center software services which are designed to streamline and enhance customer outreach. Its Key services include auto-dialing (predictive, preview, and progressive modes) to increase agent efficiency, CRM integration for personalized customer interactions, and call scripting to guide agents in real-time.
“The clarity and availability of information makes visiting your site a pleasure. Great job!”
It’s a well-written and easy-to-read article