Why digital?

[Danilo]

Hi. I am interesting: Why you use digital techniques for art? Ok, I understand that 3D art can't live without computer, but just paint?? I am tired of zoom in, zoom out brushes-size-13.5-click, search for button, click, search, click ...
I don't think that digital art isn't art. I realy sow the great ones, but so many people can't do anything without computer.

:bash: This is just my opinion. So I start the tread to understeand why the digital art is so popular.(do you think it is: easyer, cheeper, cleaner, better for modern media, faster, more interesting, with more experimenting options...)
Please answer. Thanks.


Sorry for my bad English.

[gekitsu]

danilo,

i can only speak for myself but hopefully, you'll get a bit more insight in us "digital people"

there are lots of tools that i prefer over their digital equivalent like e.g. my ink brushes. i wouldn't trade them for any simulation for every unintended splatter they make and their unbelievable sensitivity to your hand.
for painting, though, i see computers as a medium just like acrylics, oils, you name it. a way to apply color in a certain way, with special tools, special features...

and it's just my favorite tool of choice. it's fast, very forgiving, the gamut of colors is unique among all other media (can you paint with light-emitting colors in oils?) and did i mention it is fast?

that is quite an issue for me as i try to finish everything in as few sittings as possible and the least time possible cause i am tired very quickly and don't notice anymore when i overdo something.
waiting for the coat of paint i just applied to dry is THE horror for me...

as for your statement about digital art not being art, it's not the tools you use, it's the way you use them.

[Coma]

Um... Yeah

I think the main reason digital art gets a bad name is because of the way people think that it's generated by clicking a mouse a few times.

Digital art is cleaner to work with, doesn't take the same amount of time to finish. It's really quite a cheap medium to work in. It's also much more forgiving.

Though I do consider people that only work in digital kind of shallow. And I don't consider people that use generated things like filters artists.

[Patton Art]

gekitsu> I don't think he said that he didn't think digi art wasn't art...

"I don't think that digital art isn't art. I realy sow the great ones, but so many people can't do anything without computer."

I think that he means that it's still art but a lot of people only do digi art and (as coma mentioned) a lot of the digital artists are 'shallow.'

Just pointing this out... I don't think it'd be cool if everyone got on his case for that just because he didn't speak perfect english.... know what I mean?


Oh yeah... my opinion on this:
I think that you should learn traditional mediums first. I've heard that learning to oil paint good will really improve your digital art. It's just two different mediums, but, there's no reason not to learn more than one.
Besides, a nice life sized renaissance painting is something awesome to stand in front of... I want to do something like that some day, so, I'm gonna do more than digi art, eh. :-D

[Danilo]

Gekitsu, I think that digital art IS art (i dont speak english very well). I just cant get familiar with computer like with non-virtual tools. The most important thing is that I have better look on to real picture. I can faster step away to see whole image. This is very important to creatie a good composition.
About lighting: If we take white from monitor is white tone on canavas that means you can't get lighting colour with digital too. Lens effect"s, glow, ring... can immitate light wery well but why you can't done it with traditional if you done same thing (My big wish is to have non-lighting monitor in wich I must spot light to see something).
Ok, no cllasic techniques forgive mistakes but this thing turn you to think more in future, because of this my favorite technique is black ink and pen & sharp brush, I won't say anything about water colours.
I think that good painter can work very fast with traditional. With other hand, good picture need more time(except scatches, expresionism...) and if you looking to much in monitor you can damage your eyes.:cool:
Medium is cheap but hardwaer and software are not. I agree that some tools and colours are very expensive, but if you use dry pigment, and add emulsion by your self you can get very cheap colours, if you using china brushes (they are not allways bad), paper instead canavas, find some non-fancy shop, it can be a lot cheper.

I want to paint in digital, so I must get this answer from you budies: for what thing is better to use computer, and for what not? How you getting zooming easyer and faster? Do you have tablet? How you can drow down look up? How you keep works from loosing (system crash, disk damage...)? Do you print sometimes your digital (it is never that quality)? Is it complicate to you to search over and over for some command in menyes, expechel when you are in inspiration (I think thad good art comes from hard emotion). What if your computer is too slow? I heard that you can separate some programs to optimize them. Is anybody of you use projector instead a monitor for paint.

Thanks.:)

[zak]

i dont see why people even bothered replying to this thread. you have just shown everyone how ignorant you are. its individuals like you that give art a bad name. digital art its a whole genre to itself. if you fail to see the advantages, then you have a really shallow point. id be careful about posting something like that. you can piss off alot of people this way. :rant:

[Loxley]

The only ignorant response here is yours, dear zak. The question was legitimate, and your response was puerile.

In regards to the topic at hand, I find myself in agreement with Patton. Learning the traditional mediums can only serve to benefit, so why not give it a shot?

[gekitsu]

first off, sorry for misunderstanding that point you made about digital art being/not being art.
got it now :)

getting familiar with digital tools has a learning curve, depending on the program you are using, this learning curve may be quite steep.
also, there of course are unique things that digital technique only has - zooming and panning around the image is one example. clicking checkboxes and menus is another.
that may be hard to get used to, as you never learned these things in any traditional medium before.

pixels being a forgiving medium isn't a bad thing, i think. isn't that also an issue that makes oil painting so famous? whenever you don't like what you painted, just scrape it off the canvas because it'll stay wet for 2 days at least.
as i mentioned before, i love to work in ink and brush, too. and just having the possibility of undoing a lot of steps doesn't force me to use it.

about the gamut of colors: the point is: white on canvas equals white on monitor only when you are going for print, that in fact is a limitation of the medium's capabilities.
it's like making a black/white photo of a full-color oil painting.

white on a monitor is a shade that actively emits color while white on canvas just reflects the most light among all shades on your painting.
now that hdr (high dynamic range) is a fancy topic, even display devices that support stronger liht emission may be produced in the future, even enlarging the color palette a digital painter has.
think impressionist - you are painting with light, here :)

as for tools:
a half way decent computer, maybe with a strong side on ram (ram isn't the most expensive thing to upgrade) and a tablet (you can get a wacom graphire for 100 bucks) is enough to start with. if you like the medium, you will head for more specialized things anyway (as if you wouldn't buy better oil paints when you feel you can improve your work by using them).
there are good tools like opencanvas that don't need very high system requirements at all and are capable of producing good stuff, too.

menues and such isn't that much of a topic while painting anymore. you just get used to it, really.
when i try my hand at acrylics (something i still suck at because i am too impatient), i feel dumb because i can't play piano with my left hand on the keyboard - rendering one hand completely useless - except holding the palette, of course ;)
you see, the user-friendliness issue can be turned the other way, too :)

[Danilo]

My apologyes to everyone who's been pised of by my tread. I was change my mind about this: I sad that I dont like people who can't make anything without comp. I was wrong. They just have own way to create. I am sorry:(
For other things, I was showing my point of view on to digital painting and wich things bother me.( I know many good artists who don't want to use comp, they sad "it is dead, no soul" (or they are just afraid of) but I learned perspective from 3dstudio and color law from photoshop(nobody belive me that red, yellow and blue are not basic colours)).
Getsky is right about painting with light (thanx), and I agree wit people who sad that classic tech. can improve your digital.

I'm gonna take some english classes.

[boehmke]

I think this is a wonderful thread. And a valid question. Less then a year ago I was asking myself the same question. Why digital? I love oils and watercolors. Why digital? I played with digital painting a few times and didnt think much of it. I used it as a means to an end at my job. If any illustration needed a quick change that would take me to long with traditional materials I would use the computer. I used digital as a last resort at deadline.

Recently I moved to Portland, Oregon. No job. No place to live. My best friend is here and I stayed with him. But I had no room for my easel, paints, drawing boards, bruches, etc. A week later I was going nuts. I wanted to paint so bad. Then the idea just jumped into my head. Buy a Wacom tablet! You can paint on the computer. It was the best thing I could have done. Now I can paint without messing up my buddies house, without ruinging paints and shirts with paints, no turpintine headaches and so on.

I plan on getting a studio soon. So I can still use traditional medias. But I thank god the computer was around when I needed it. Plus I think now I have a great new tool to produce art with.

boehmke

[mojo]

I have been painting digitally for 4 years now. - I have used all the other mediums for forever before that (I am 40) and it is the only medium besides sculpture where I really feel like an artist.

I tended to be a bit of a perfectionist with my work, and probably (no, definitely) worked things too much- but digitally, the perspective from an artists point of view is great, I can cover a whole canvas in a stroke, my lines are looser...and because I use a mouse, I have LESS control, which is a good thing for me. It allows the magic of the moment, and unexpected to occur, and it always does.

The other thing, is I have little space, little budget to devote to this and so always having colours at my disposal and a canvas for when the mood strikes is wonderful, and I don't have to clean up :thumbsup:
I can also save, try something completely different without really screwing up the image or save versions. I can crop where I want and save what is working. Overall my skills get better because I am more productive, I can create more in less time.

I think digital art IS absolutely real art, and while currently on the margins of acceptability in the fine arts, it will be every bit as respected as photography is now or engraving - (i have an old book of engravings by a master engraver dated 1789 that attempts to justify the art of engraving - apparantly many people didn't think of it as 'real art')

I think you have to think of it as a real medium on it's own. and I think a real artist can be someone who only works in that medium. I don't ask of painters to sculpt, but I can assure you it would improve your painting.

I am,
unapologetically in love with the digital medium.

:fish: