Digital art Vs Hand drawn art

07-19-2007, 05:08 PM

I am a graphic designer and have started reading some photoshop magazines, inside i discover that there are exhibitions of digital art done with photoshop in the city i was stunned!!!! and i saw some samples, they were great!!!! (i mean really interesting...)

I think that in the future, digital art will replace hand drawn art ... sry million dollard picasso and van goth but our century is moving on !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Alexa · 07-20-2007, 01:44 AM

I don't know if we should be happy or sad about it. After all, not every day we can admire a Michelangelo painting or sculpture for example. When you say the name of Michelangelo (or any other artist), you say everthing. But when a machine takes the lead, who knows the person behind the screen ?

07-20-2007, 11:22 AM

I think it depends on what we believe is art... for me art is something that inspires you, that makes you think and keeps your attention. it is true that painting and sculptures like michelangelo and the rest were extremely good no question about that but i also think imagination is a very important part of art and since it can be created with computers, i say why not....

manephelien · 07-20-2007, 05:15 PM

It's not a one or the other kind of thing. Computer art can also be art. Even completely computer-created imagery, such as fractals, can be art.

Talysia · 07-20-2007, 07:14 PM

I don't think that digital art will replace traditional art - there will always be a place for both, in much the same way that computers, synthesizers and such haven't replaced traditional musical instruments in making and recording music. I'd like to see the two coexisting, myself.

10-20-2007, 11:13 PM

I beleive Talysia is correct. Having worked as a commerial artist for the past twenty years I can attest to the lowering of standards that began when the digital paradigm began to assert itself in the field.

From my experience, all too often the technology has been used as a crutch for laziness and a lack of craftsmanship. Furthermore, having taught art at the college level, I can tell you, that as a direct result, the majority of the student populace has no interest in, nor inclination to learn the fundamentals of art (composition, colour theory, anatomy, perspective, etc.).

Their collective attitudes can be best summed up by these comments: The first by a twenty two year old fellow employee at 3DO: "Dude, get real. Why bother learning all that sh*t when the computer will do it for you?" And this one by a nineteen year old employee at Williams Electronics when I was working on Goro from Mortal Kombat: "You're a f*cking dinosaur, man. And you're so f*cking stupid you don't know that you're already extinct. Guys like me are the future, not losers like you."

Nice.

And the arts/entertainment industry reinforces this perspective too. Take a gander at the job ads. Their requisites all emphasize the knowledge of certain programmes, not artistic ability. This propagates the understanding amongst young people that the computer is the great egalitarian equalizer. No longer will talent be the determining aspect of who gets the job or not, but rather who can efficiently operate a box full of circuit boards.

And as we all can bear witness, mediocrity has become more prevalent as a direct result.

jazza1 · 02-26-2010, 02:57 PM

Art is indeed evolving, and I cannot deny that I love digital art - but I have much more respect for an old-fashioned painting!

Cookie Parker · 06-24-2010, 05:13 PM

I don['t think any art replaces another...the newer ones just find a group of followers who enjoy it.