Zirngibism
February 4th, 2009, 04:55 AM
Ok, hope I don't come off as ignorant here as I think I did in the last question dealing with categorization, but here goes:
I'm thinking about entering a couple of my things into Ballistic's Exposé 7 (I realize my chances of getting in are pretty slim, but since it's free to enter I figure it's worth a shot.)
Onto the question: Most of my work lately has been a mixed media of digital and traditional art, where I scan in a graphite/pen drawing, or watercolor/acrylic painting, and then colorize and paint over it in Photoshop, fixing proportions, adding detail, and adding color. Or I'll scan in abstract watercolor blobs and chop 'em up and collage them on a bazillion layers.
My point here is that the work can't be viewed as entirely digital, as some form of these values and/or colors previously existed as a painting or drawing on paper. Is this acceptable for a book that labels itself as showing off digital art?
I realize this is probably a case-by-case basis for deciding whether something's categorized as digital or traditional or not. (Many digital painters I see scan in line drawings, and I'd be willing to bet most people who scan in their traditional paintings do color adjustments on them, which doesn't automatically make them digital.)
Perhaps I'm being too strict about definitions, and should say that anything beyond color adjustment on something scanned should be considered digital art?
Maybe I should just post what I plan to enter and ask your opinion?
Anyway, I've never actually looked through a book from the Exposé series, and it's pretty hard to tell from the tiny preview books on their website as to whether 100% of the works that got in were done entirely in the computer. Maybe someone here who owns one of the Exposé's could tell me whether there are any obvious hybrids in there?
.
I'm thinking about entering a couple of my things into Ballistic's Exposé 7 (I realize my chances of getting in are pretty slim, but since it's free to enter I figure it's worth a shot.)
Onto the question: Most of my work lately has been a mixed media of digital and traditional art, where I scan in a graphite/pen drawing, or watercolor/acrylic painting, and then colorize and paint over it in Photoshop, fixing proportions, adding detail, and adding color. Or I'll scan in abstract watercolor blobs and chop 'em up and collage them on a bazillion layers.
My point here is that the work can't be viewed as entirely digital, as some form of these values and/or colors previously existed as a painting or drawing on paper. Is this acceptable for a book that labels itself as showing off digital art?
I realize this is probably a case-by-case basis for deciding whether something's categorized as digital or traditional or not. (Many digital painters I see scan in line drawings, and I'd be willing to bet most people who scan in their traditional paintings do color adjustments on them, which doesn't automatically make them digital.)
Perhaps I'm being too strict about definitions, and should say that anything beyond color adjustment on something scanned should be considered digital art?
Maybe I should just post what I plan to enter and ask your opinion?
Anyway, I've never actually looked through a book from the Exposé series, and it's pretty hard to tell from the tiny preview books on their website as to whether 100% of the works that got in were done entirely in the computer. Maybe someone here who owns one of the Exposé's could tell me whether there are any obvious hybrids in there?
.