Are we getting too digital?

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  05 May 2005
Digital will never replace traditional. Unfortunately alot of digital artist can not see this fact. Digital can be copied an that is not good for art sakes so it will never have value as a Tradtional piece of art. Never. I am glad it will never replace it since I am good at both methods it gives me flexibility in the market. Digital art needs the anchor of Traditional methods.
 
  05 May 2005
interesting discussion

This is actually pretty fascinating for me to read about because for a long time I was a huge luddite when it came to digital media - I got my MFA in classical, anatomical based painting, had some gallery shows, sold some work for a little while until I needed to make a better living and used my illustration skills to do photoshop art. I think the heart of this discussion involves the differences between fine art and illustration, because, when it comes down to it, we're past the point where the skill level of the fine artist surpasses that of the illustrator, and have been for some time now. I think it more boils down to intent and audience. Digital painting takes on a certain stylization due to the tools, in the same way that traditional painting invariably takes on the qualities of the medium. If I paint in gouache, cumbersome as the stuff is, it gets a beautiful, matte surface with a bit of depth to it. Oil painting is probably the most powerful in terms of the range one can get with the surface and depth of it, and the lasting qualities give the painting some value because the buyer is purchasing something that's been crafted to endure a long time, created in a traditional way that people can appreciate.

So what does that mean? A Bob Ross painting done in :20 is superior to a Craig Mullins because Bob, in choosing his materials is working from a centuries old tradition? That's kinda hard to argue, especially since Craig's work does resonate with a ton of training and classic reference.

I think because paintings are objects, they have a certain value. A digital print doesn't have the same value as an object because it isn't unique, whereas a lithograph might be somewhere in the middle since it's a limited run.

Recently I purchased a tablet PC, which seems like a pretty great step for computers- I'm finding I draw on it all the time. Times where I'd just sketch with pencil, I'm able to quickly do tonal paintings. It doesn't have the same brush quality as my winsor newton series 7 brush, so anything I do on it tends to be clunky in comparison, but hey - it feels like i'm makin' art.

good discussion-
 
  05 May 2005
Erhhm... Well...

This post seems to have given rise to a broad spectrum of opinion...

Is anything lost in the art world when 'everyone' succumbs to the digital path?

Answer... Digital Art will never completely replace traditional methods although it will undoubtedly and does already dominate the majority of modern markets... I started thinking back to social theorists such as Daniel Bell about predictions on modern society... How far we will go... or indeed how far back we will fall...

The only thing that might actually inhibit an artistic pursuit is raw materials and that can even come in the shape of electricity... which would certainly scupper digital art... The fact is that people need all aspects of art... not just one...

Having a 3D hologram or even a machine formed sculpture is fine... but if I'm parting with a few thousand quid, I want something thats going to stand up to times lessons... not melt or malfunction... I'm sure these things will become so advanced they will still make worthy additions to collectors vaults, but people always want everyting.

As regards skills being lost... As long as there is 'life study', who cares whether someone uses a pencil and paper or a digital equivalent... the skill is essentially the same... Wish I could write more on this, but am off to the gym to be a Meat-head...

__________________
Wherever you may be... let your wind go free... (E. Eden)

Last edited by Trower : 05 May 2005 at 12:27 AM.
 
  05 May 2005
Hi.
This is my first post here. This is a topic I think about often. I love digital painting/drawing and I love traditional. I really like getting dirty and love to paint and draw large works that get pretty messy. There's just something relaxing and sensual about it. However, I feel like traditional media sort of holds me back creatively. It's hard to follow my feelings and creative whims when I'm fighting with physical materials.

Digital gives me more opportunity to explore the depths of my own creativity. The ability to experiment on the fly and go back to previous verisons for more iterations is really helping me sync my imagination with the rendering skills I am aquiring. When you aren't afraid to mess something up you can take more risks and grow in directions you might not have with charcoal, pastels, paint, etc...

I don't think I will ever completely give up traditional, but it's just so much more liberating to be able to experiment to my hearts content in a timely, more painless way. I think digital is making the frontiers of creative visual arts more accessible for artists of all skill levels.

I look at it like this ( and someone may have said this already). People didn't think photography was an art worthy of exhibitions when it was young. People still draw and paint even though they can take photos. I don't think traditional is going to die. I think that some artists have just found a more agreeable means of communicating their vision.

Last edited by Miss-Vyv : 05 May 2005 at 08:11 PM.
 
  05 May 2005
In the time between when I went to bed and when I got up, this thread jumped two pages. Either I sleep too long or this topic has sparked some serious interest. We've moved long past my area of expertise in the matter, and I'm glad because it's giving me a lot to think about. And most importantly, it's shown me in great detail what I've already known in that my artistic persuit is too focused on a single style and medium, there is more to art than what I've been practicing. Perhaps in the beginning of an artistic career students are too focused on a single medium or a single subject, but by the time they become absolutely serious about persuing art as a career or a serious passion, they will have moved beyond those limitations and at least tried a bit of every available medium.

Thanks for the great discussion so far.
 
  05 May 2005
Originally Posted by kromano: In the time between when I went to bed and when I got up, this thread jumped two pages. Either I sleep too long or this topic has sparked some serious interest. We've moved long past my area of expertise in the matter, and I'm glad because it's giving me a lot to think about. And most importantly, it's shown me in great detail what I've already known in that my artistic persuit is too focused on a single style and medium, there is more to art than what I've been practicing. Perhaps in the beginning of an artistic career students are too focused on a single medium or a single subject, but by the time they become absolutely serious about persuing art as a career or a serious passion, they will have moved beyond those limitations and at least tried a bit of every available medium.

Thanks for the great discussion so far.


Yeh, i agree. When I was younger I was very focused on a particular style. It's only the past couple of years (where i've been working professionally) that I've begun to really appreciate everything around and trying as much as I can. It's a blast!
__________________
Bath House
 
  05 May 2005
i believe it largely to do with what you are wanting to get from your work.. are you painting to complete a task, which needs to be efficeint and finished well, or is it for pleasure. To paint for pleasure i would rather use traditional mediums such as oils..

if we'r talking big work.. not sketches..it comes down to.. true physical interaction vs. simulation

whats better, playing GT4 on a PS2 controller, or driving the car for real.. sure this may seem a somewhat overreactive comparison, but think about it... sat at your computer with tablet and pen shaped stylus used with say... ART RAGE vs Being stood at that big ol' newly primed canvas, with your selection of brushes, and pallette of oils with various knives/tools etc


like many things, its preference, so nothing right or wrong here..
__________________
"Are we scared of failure, or other peoples success?"
 
  05 May 2005
Quote: Digital will never replace traditional.

This sounds a lot like what the Swiss watch makers said of the newfangled Japanese digital watches back in the 70's... 30 years later digital watches have replaced mechanical ones in almost every way, except for the very rich and for collectors. Let's wait until 2035, I think you'll find pretty much the same situation for art.

I mean, how many people in the world have ever even seen an original artwork by a great master? I've been to the Louvre and to the Zorn museum, but how often do I get to go back there? And do I own any of these originals? Yeah right... And what happens if a fire or terrorist bomb hits the museum? No, digital is obviously the way of the future. You just have to keep in mind the constant slow change in the field. It's like a minute hand on a watch, if you stare at it you won't see it moving, but every time you check back it's moved. I'm sure that one day digital will be able to copy a work of art down to a molecular level, so not even an expert with a microscope will be able to tell the difference.
 
  05 May 2005
If you read one message this year... read this...

I'm going to try and nip this in the bud... so bare with me.

Although this thread has inadvertantly been turned into a:- 'Digital v Traditional' forum... Where... Unless you're very childish, you'll see only one view... this thread was meant to centre more; on how the artistic populations overall skill level is affected by the advent of new software and technology... in corroboration with a waning interetst in the simpler, less forgiving tools, such as paint, pencils, hammer and chisel.

How 'some' of you (not all) have managed to turn this thread into such redundant drivel beats me... but alas... on an earlier page I found myself drawn into this sticky web too. Ashamed... Thats how I feel!

I'm one of you.

I severely digress... So back to the original question.

Civilisation will always advance with technology... but artistic talent is artistic talent. If someone can draw with a Wacom Tablet well, chances are they can be equally good with a traditional pencil... On a 3D front, I have 'Sculptor' friends who work just as well in Maya as they do in bronze resin... Art is ruled by the artist... not by the tools in his hands.

If someone is an artistic ignoramus, then that is simply their lot... The only way of improving a 'test subject' will be nothing less than a frontal lobotomy... No issuing of 'Wacom Tablets' / copies of 'Photoshop CS X', will make an ounce of difference to their overall rating within a world where everyone has access to the same advantages.

'Better' / 'New-er' tools will be handled by both the talented and the untalented... Who do you honestly think is going to produce a better end result?

The work of the 'talentless', will undoubtably improve... Of this I am very certain.

Filters like; 'skin simulation filter', will enter the fray... and laymen will make use of these things, thus improving their work... but give it to the Art-Guru, and you're going to get finer and more finished solutions every time.

Using layers or multi-saves gives you that time machine advantage you need when you make aesthetic errors... but the artist needs to notice that he / she's made them. That takes 'eyes', and that's a miracle invention, we're not close to inventing yet...

A simple metaphor / analogy is this:-

You give an overweight, asthmatic kid a brand new pair of 'Nike (?) Nitrosoxides'... He may get that little bit faster... He might be far faster... but I can guarantee... Stick an Olympian against him, with a pair of those babies (alternatively; Grandma's slippers...), and my moneys still on the sportsman...

This was the first thing that came to mind... I don't often think about dumpy kids in sportswear... erhem!

Every technological leap helps, but it helps the whole (society), not just the individual... Without a master we are left with a simple tool, and due to this, it falls to each persons unique skill level as to how to apply their new advantage. Socialism doesn't even work in regard to wealth and politics... What lunatic thinks that raising the sophistication of everyones tools will help the untalented reach a par with the talented.

The only thing that can match God's gift is discipline and hard work... and maybe quality 'life study'...

Sorry to go on... Crikey! I don't think I've ever repeated 'talent' and 'tool' more often, since luxuriating one evening at 'Stringfellows' two years ago.

Regards.
__________________
Wherever you may be... let your wind go free... (E. Eden)

Last edited by Trower : 05 May 2005 at 02:48 AM.
 
  05 May 2005
Just view it as a new medium.
A medium to express your views.

Doesn't matter if it's Digital or not.
As long as you don't copy&paste other ppl's works, it's fine.
You'll gain skills anyway.

At least your eyes and taste will develop.

I know traditional methods has its point.
But you can't argue that it's the Digital that has many novice entering into the field.

And variety is always good.
The More the Merrier then, right?
 
  05 May 2005
Originally Posted by jmBoekestein: I saw some paintings by Van Gogh and Picasso once but I was fairly young. I noticed however that the paint was often put in in thick dabs, laeving quite a pronounced relief. Is this intentionally done for the purpose of reflecting light in all directions. Or is it a sside effect of the viscous nature of the paint. Sinca a flat surface would reflect all the colours in all directions, but a thick dab might add something?


You have to go to a gallery or a museum one of these days and look at some oil paintings. The impasto marks are part of the magic of traditional painting. How artists use it can be intensional or unintensional--it's up to the individual taste.
 
  05 May 2005
The Louvre needs to go on tour! I'd see that 'at a town near you'!
because i can't afford to goto europe.
__________________
"This is what comes through to us."
 
  05 May 2005
2035? Steven what will artist do when the looming worldwide energy crisis comes. If you can not power up a computer/laptop on a constant basis you are going to have pick up a pencil.
Traditional will always be with us it not dependent on anything but a willing artist.
Of course digital will become more advanced but In no way is going to replace Traditional.
Artists today should practice both mediums. Digital has it limits and Traditional has its limits. By practicing both you open your level of expression.
 
  05 May 2005
Quote: 2035? Steven what will artist do when the looming worldwide energy crisis comes.


They will start burning traditional works of art just to keep warm.

 
  05 May 2005
Thread automatically closed

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.
__________________
CGTalk Policy/Legalities
Note that as CGTalk Members, you agree to the terms and conditions of using this website.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.