why is traditional so much harder than digital?

[blog]

Its a simple question that has been troubling me in the past few days. I've got an art project for school, which is the final exam for the whole subject. Its based on both self portraits and colour. The thing I'm confused about is that I can portray form, values, colour, edges and whatnot to a considerable degree of satisphaction when I work digitally, say when I'm doing a self portrait. But the solidity of form and colour would look like utter and complete shite traditionally. So what I'm thinking is that its not my skills which are that bad (I'm not saying i'm great here or anywhere near) but its more the lack of knowledge of the medium i'm using. Is this true, and is it wrong for me to think like this. Why can I get a satisfying result digitally when working from life and having no colour picker ( although I do have handy contrast adjustments), yet traditionally that same portrait looks like a horrific mess? If I could get the same degree of quality traditionally it'd be amazing, but I just can't!

[magicgoo]

Haha, after years of trying to paint digitally, I've gone back to traditional stuff because I find I have so much more control. Weird. Maybe it's a very individual thing. Or maybe it's time to replace my Wacom.

I can say that digital media is easier to layout as far as composition because you've got layers to work with.

I guess my advice is to choose an easy medium like pencils or charcoal and work with it until you're comfortable. Don't try every type of media at once.

[Grooveholmes]

Umm.

No undoes?

[Rascar Capac]

I asked this to a couple of guys last week:
Take your best digitalpieces - would you be able to achieve the same result if you did it traditionally - tha anwers were all a confident "NO WAY"...
For me its comes down to patience...and photoshop speeds up work exponentially..and it becomes all about the concept and design.

[blog]

But I don't use undos, infact I don't realise i've made a mistake until the end of a portrait and then i scrap it and start again. The fact that not one of you can understand what I said is scaring me though! yeah, I'm feeling pretty cool at the moment.....:$ And the portraits aren't like my best pieces, they're pretty standard. I'm still confused, even if I id a greyscale in traditional it would turn out crap, but I'd be satisfied if it was digital.

[loomer]

i don't know man
I have a MUCh harder time with digital
i feel like such a noob with this and often just say "fuck ! I can do this with oil paint in like 10 minutes!"
i think it has more to do with what you use alot

[sone_one]

i think it has more to do with what you use alot

yeah quoted for truth

im having a harder time with traditional aswell... but i think its just because im used to digital painting. and it IS easier.... i think everyone profits more from a strong traditional background and knowlegde though. whenever i attempt a traditional painting... i need to think so much, that when i return to the computer, im much more secure with my color and value choices.

[Elwell]

Oh for Christ's sake, you're fifteen! Do you honestly expect to be good at everything instantly?
Things Take Time.

[Imp Head]

Different mediums require different skill sets. When I started doing oils after many, many years of doing digital there was a period of learning I had to go through.

There are some things, composition, color theory, anatomy, etc. that are universal across all mediums which once you know make picking up a new medium that much easier but by no means should you ever think it's going to be a walk in the park.

In short if you want to be good, you're going to have to do the legwork.

[Hiipi]

AND in trad med you have to mix the color you want, in digital you can just pick it, there´s a HUGE difference in that.

I tried oils for the first time like yix years ago or something - and it was crap, nothing worked. Since then I have been doing digital for a while now and NOW going back to oils has been a walk in a park compared to the earlier try. I believe I inherited some kinda color understanding or something of a sort from digi. But they are different and they have to be treated differently.


...I guess.

[blog]

Yeah, I think mixing your colours is a sort of lag when working traditionally. You don't have the ability to just make the colour quickly with yer rgb slider hehe. But atleast i know I'm not the only one now! You were scaring me before! Well I just sat down and did a quick SP, and one thing that is bugging me is colour. I can eye the values just fine but I get so occpied in mixing the right colour, at the right value that i can't keep my head on straight and everything just starts going wrong. So I think I need to get a lot more efficient at mixing colours, and I suppose a large part of my question is answered there. Another thing though that I realised was that I'm not as concious and aware of what I'm doing when working traditionally. I start thinking about going back to school, the time of day, what I'm gonna do tommorrow and shit, and I just kinda drift off. When I work digitally I'm a lot more concious of the edges I'm using, focal points, balance and unity etc. But I don't when working traditionally and that really shows in the work I produce. Are you guys/gals concious of what you're doing when you work traditionally? And by the way, whats premixing?

[sone_one]

hrm strange ... im much more concious of pretty much everything when doing traditionals (well lets say... attempting traditionals hehe). the part i benefit most there is the mixing though... and to be honest... i hate it. but making you think "what do i have to do to this color to have this color as a result" is awesome for learning. i havent done much traditional stuff yet, but i pay close attention to it (reading the painting from life thread is some awesome resource btw).
often i sit there and just think about how i would paint something... which colors should i mix.... where to place a stroke and which direction and so on. whatever. often its not only about doing the art, but to really try to get a grasp AND understanding what youre doing and why. (for example you could copy stuff all your life and learn almost nothing other than mimicing stuff... its only really beneficial if you try to understand why this artist did it, at the same time.)

somtimes it bugs me aswell that there are no shortcuts... on the other hand these skills i worked hard for yet would be worth nothing if there were shortcuts ;).

[Interceptor]

I find digital to be way more difficult, to be honest. When you dip your brush into paint, you can feel the weight of it, and you know how it will apply and react, to some degree. Digital is mroe about memorization of brushes and programs. Both can produce lovely art. but I find tradition to be far easier.

[Onir]

I agree with Interceptor; honestly, though I'm not great at painting in general, when I use watercolors or acrylics or oils (the times I have used acrylics and oils at least) I really can feel how I have to use it. the viscosity of different paints as well as the brush itself really make a difference to me. for some reason it's just alot harder in painter and photoshop for me to understand how to render things effectively; I guess practice will solve that though.

[AmishCommy]

i think your traditional works are way stronger than your digitals. Digital allows you to fake the funk. it may look good to you and your friends but to anyone with art knowledge and a solid understanding of the basics they will fall apart.

[otis]

Thats funny. I enjoy the unpredictable mistakes you get in traditional that you can't get when working digitaly. From an illustrative perspective digital is easy and great. Traditional is ideal for fine art.

[Quicksilver]

Some really good points made here. I'm one of those people who doesn't really think when drawing/painting (from ref). Is that bad?? I actually find it easier to mix colours than to pick one from a chart because you get to select what hues you see or sense and dab X amount of it in your pallet. With the RGB slider I find it more trickey because you have to decide what colour dominates and pick a shade from that (like picking pink when the bar is on the red part of the slide) - what if it has aspects of other colours? (I'm guessing underpainting)


You're very dedicated for a 15-year old! And that wasn't meant in a patronising way at all, either. Makes me wish I was more driven to improve my work. [Looks at stacks of assignments. Gets depressed...]

[Rascar Capac]

I remember one term at Art Center, there was talk of drawing the model in on of the computer labs using the wacom tablet - I thought that was it, its all downhill from here...
Once you start training digitally, and put the safety net of undos, redos and a million layer options for the student- you will never be able to train the student to reach the point of putting down each stroke as if its the last stroke: The correct stroke, color, value
When you watch a good painter paint - they spend 3/4th of their time mixing their colors on the pallette - essentially they do the painting on the Pallette...theres hardly any fussing on the canvas.
You train someone digitally - they will never get to that point - I dont think so

[Chingwa]

Once you start training digitally, and put the safety net of undos, redos and a million layer options for the student- you will never be able to train the student to reach the point of putting down each stroke as if its the last stroke
I have to strongly agree witht this. Excellent point.

[tongue-fu]

Beat's me, I suck.

[Orban]

I find traditionnal skill simpler to get -
- no undo to bother you, if you put a stroke it will be there till the end. You got to learn :p
- I like to mix my paint ON the canvas. I like how the transparency of red affect the blackness of my background.
- Brush effect (or the absence of).
- working with my fingers :D
- the size. At my school, portrait drawing is done on a 1,5m*1m sheet. Pleasure :D. Some of my drawing are 2m*1,5m - when you draw at this size, you get an amazing control on things. I remember that Marko draw big too, and he's not alone.
About mixing color : with acrylic and watercolor it's just a matter of second. The same you spend finding the right color with you slider.

Even with a good tablet and a good program (Painter), you don't get that. And there's no bug on a sheet of paper :D
But well. I learn fine art, not concept art/design - still the technique is the same (not the result nor the subject :))

[blog]

right, I think I get what you guys are saying now. That basically digital gets you into bad habits, that in some form or manner enable you to disguise some of the bad qualities in your artwork. In this case they are highlighted when you do traditional work. Thats why in James kei's latest interview he said he was thankful of having a strong background in fine art. Ah right, I also ask too many questions in the lounge. Hope that changes sooner hehe Thanks a lot people!

[onionface]

I'm with Magic Goo on this one.
I still prefer traditional medium, namely pen and paper. I just can't get used to the feeling of the tablet, it's too smooth. and having your hand on the table while the picture is on your screen is just unnatural.

What I like about digital is it's cheaper plus no messy paints. or piles of paper and canvas'. easy image transfer. And perhaps the coolest thing about digital is the "happy mistakes", well that's what I call them. once you've done a bit of work on a picture you can just play around with layers and settings and you find something that you normally would be to scared to try traditionally. eg:ramping contrast or using a burn brush. Mistakes sometimes lead to cooler outcomes. hence my love for pen, no erasing means you end up with things that you weren't planning on. like a baby from a one night stand.

[NoSeRider]

why is traditional so much harder than digital?

Because nobody teaches it right?

I love the undo button by the way.

[one2hit]

Because nobody teaches it right?


WTF!!!

what school do you go to again?

(for the record there are hundreds of ateliers (and reputable art schools) across the country. If you can't find somebody to teach you traditional art skills properly somewhere then you fail.)

fail get.

[Flake]

WTF!!!

what school do you go to again?

(for the record there are hundreds of ateliers (and reputable art schools) across the country. If you can't find somebody to teach you traditional art skills properly somewhere then you fail.)

fail get.

I don't know of any Ateliers in the UK, any suggestions? Genuinely curious because my "school" sucks ass..

[treeboy]

digital...traditional...theyre all just mediums and your proficiency with any of them rely heavily on your own personal preferences and experience with them.

Its like asking "why is water color so much easier than pastel?" The answer is it isnt, you, hypothetically, just have more experience with it.

[Elwell]

I've said it before, but it bears repeating:
The only thing a computer makes easier to do is bad work.

[That fat kid]

Digital allows you to fake the funk.

BAM!!

[DavePalumbo]

Arkady, you're my hero of the week with that quote. And I was basically going to say something like this, but now I don't have to (I won't even fix spelling errors, yeah!):

theyre all just mediums and your proficiency with any of them rely heavily on your own personal preferences and experience with them

[blog]

I tried out oils today again, but this time with a limited pallette, and they're amaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaazing. I actually had a lot of fun, and gave up my lunch break to work on the portrait. I got a satisfactory result that I was quite pleased with, and I had a lot of fun! Maybe it was those damn acrylics, need to buy a pallette and some linseed oil though for home usage!

[markwagner]

"but its more the lack of knowledge of the medium i'm using."

They say you paint for 30 years until you start to paint. I have been painting for almost 30 years, time flies... been doing digital art for over 20.

One thing I have noticed that I think is interesting is that when I paint, I step into a section that requires a certain amount of time which is different from using a lasso tool, making a new layer, fill, and tweek. It requires me to mix the paint, keep loading my brush, lay down each stroke, change colors, etc... I notice that when I am in that painting space, painting something that takes time, my attention shifts. I know what I am doing and need to do it for 5 - 10 minutes or longer.

While I am doing this my attention shifts, it feels like it takes a back seat, like driving on a longer drive, and I start to think of other things. I have had many really interesting insights into art, creativity, my life, and the mysterous world at large. (Carlos Castaneda talks about this as 1st and 2ud attentions).

While I am doing digital art, I do not have these insights into the human race. I think it is because I am using both sides of my brain, using technology and the awareness of an "undo", saving, using both hands, saving, etc.. and my attention never gets to take a back seat.

In the end, studying from the old masters, from history, and not from the latest great illustrator or concept artist, and painting and drawing will take me to my next level(and making sigital art), and it may take me many more year until I really start to paint. Unlike musicians, artist's work comes with age, most well know painters are older than 50.

Let your ART be your greatest teacher.

~M

[DavePalumbo]

They say you paint for 30 years until you start to paint

who says that? I think they're exadgerating a bit, but maybe that's just my perception

[Ilaekae]

...I've been staring at this topic since it went up trying to come up with a decent reply, but all I can think of so far is...

"Duh?"

[darth massacre]

Traditional is only difficult for me because I gotta mix colors. Other than that I'd ditch the computer as much as I can.



Edit: Its a little harder to do a lensflare traditionally. :teeth: :lens:

[blog]

Theres not actually any more need for any replies in this thread anymore, I've totally changed my opinion. Its better traditionally, just a little time consuming. But hella worth it! Digital can never live up to that shit!

[Zaknafain]

Digital is fast and the perfect medium for lazy people.

Saying digital is easier than traditional is just wrong.
I had a lot more fun with traditional art because I don't have to worry about the speed of my machine, stupid painter/wacom bugs what tool to choose or how to implement texture. Every kid can paint with acrylic colors but digital art is a lot more complicated. We are used to it and because of this it seems easier. I tried to show some of my friends how I paint with my computer. The result sounded like this: "wtf??? you are trying to tell me that you can really paint with this piece of shit?". It took me a year to learn how to use the computer for painting. Including time for getting used to my tablet, searching for the right program and tool, setting up the monitor and learning how to mix colors with CMY.
It isn't easier just because its faster or because you don't need to clean your brushes. Even the undo feature can be a problem. It can save time but on the other hand it kills all the happy accidents because you undo them without thinking.
Digital painting is (once you got your tools ready) more direct. Traditional painting is much more intuitive.

[Infinitum]

I prefer traditional or a blend of the two. I really struggle when I work just straight into the computer.

[Bammer]

Digital is traditional improved by technology. If it wasn't an improvement, it wouldn't exist (except as a failed experiment.) Traditional artists knock digital because when they switch there's an initial learning curve that temporarily lowers their art quality, which they can't stand because they have an iron clad expectation of their own ability. So they blame the medium and say it's cheap, quick, disconnected, shallow and fraught with issues.
Of course, aurthors said the same thing about writing on a computer. Horse drawn carrage guys probably made all the same arguements against cars.
People are always afraid of new things. New things devalue the knowledge they have about the old things.

[capncackalacka]

why is peeing easier than shitting?

[evildisco]

capncackalacka: You are heading for a wall pretty soon.

[capncackalacka]

capncackalacka: You are heading for a wall pretty soon.

who do you think you are, MARKO? what have i done thats so bad? read every post i have made. i have not only responded adequately, but have expressed my opinions in an honest, rational way. im sorry if i have offended you somehow, but im entitled to my opinion, and i thought that sharing our opinions and knoweledge was what ca was supposed to be about. i see people responding to threads in similar fashions all the time. if i posted artwork(which im nowhere the level to do yet) would that give me the ability to talk shit and not get cautioned?

[evildisco]

why is peeing easier than shitting?
If you have nothing intelligent to add, don't speak.

The fact that you did not contribute artwise(no matter the quality of it) on the boards yet and went straight to the lounge, does not make you look good.

And by the way I am nowhere near Marko as to being vitriolic.

[That fat kid]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, you lost me.

Capncackalaca, go ahead and post artwork, even if you don't think you're at the level to do so, we're all about helping you get to that level you want to be at. If the members see that you're committed to improvement and want to help the community, comments like that are tolerated WAY better. Right now, we just see you as a new guy with an awful attitude. So please, counter evil with art, don't propogate a terrible self image.

~A

[capncackalacka]

If you have nothing intelligent to add, don't speak.

The fact that you did not contribute artwise(no matter the quality of it) on the boards yet and went straight to the lounge, does not make you look good.

And by the way I am nowhere near Marko as to being vitriolic.

silly questions deserve silly answers. im not saying the question was stupid, it was silly. the answer is not going to be found on the internet in a webforum, so why ask?

i like the lounge. theres a lot going on in here. i like the conversations that happen in here. and i just want to be a part of it.

i like Marko. i like his honest presence on the boards. im sure he'd be on my side if he were to read this....and if he wasnt, maybe id just have to defeat him in a thunderdome or something :P

[DavePalumbo]

Traditional artists knock digital because when they switch there's an initial learning curve that temporarily lowers their art quality, which they can't stand because they have an iron clad expectation of their own ability. So they blame the medium and say it's cheap, quick, disconnected, shallow and fraught with issues

wellllllll... sometimes. Yeah, it's surely an issue. I wouldn't say it's the end-all be-all of the arguement by a damn sight though. Logically, it makes no sense because there are artists who do both. People just have different preferences. I have felt the sting of the digi-learning curve, but this wouldn't be that large a hurdle if the pay-off were an actual improvement. It's not though, it's just different. Digital has its strengths and weaknesses like any other medium.

[onionface]

i like Marko. i like his honest presence on the boards. im sure he'd be on my side if he were to read this....and if he wasnt, maybe id just have to defeat him in a thunderdome or something :P


If you love Marko so much why don't you marry him.

[s.ketch]

I think digital seems easier because its cleaner. You dont have to buy paints/charcoal/pencils/markers/etc, you dont have to clean up afterwards, theres an undo button, you can work easily in layers, no dealing with canvas or papers.

Personaly though, I think digital is as challenging to learn as traditional. You pretty much learn the same things over again because doing one thing with traditional is differnt from doing it in digital. I think its important to learn both because I view the computer as another media and apart of traditional art rather than a whole seperate beast. Art evolves with technology and technology evloves because of art.

[one2hit]

Digital is traditional improved by technology. If it wasn't an improvement, it wouldn't exist (except as a failed experiment.) Traditional artists knock digital because when they switch there's an initial learning curve that temporarily lowers their art quality, which they can't stand because they have an iron clad expectation of their own ability. So they blame the medium and say it's cheap, quick, disconnected, shallow and fraught with issues.
Of course, aurthors said the same thing about writing on a computer. Horse drawn carrage guys probably made all the same arguements against cars.
People are always afraid of new things. New things devalue the knowledge they have about the old things.

wh...huh?

...I don't think most traditional artists are out there knocking digital. I think plenty of traditional artists use and embrace digital. they work in both mediums. Unless we're talking fine art here, which is more practical to work in traditional so you can sell your original. Digital isn't "better" than traditional. Traditional isn't better than digital. They are just different mediums. Different mediums for different needs, jobs and personal preferences. One of the best traditional artists that I know (Fredflickstone here on CA) uses Digital medium for quick turn arounds on jobs and traditional for other needs. A lot of artists do that.

For the record, new "things" (concerning art) do not devaluate the knowledge of old things, because the principals of representational art do not change. The tools are what you know and how you apply it. People are not always afraid of new things. Only old people are afraid of new things. =p

[jetpack42]

Because nobody teaches it right?



LOL, from somebody who goes to Watts...

Dude, you are hilarious. You are never going to get good until you quit trying to find the magic "get real good" secret and just shut your mouth and draw alot more and pay attention when somebody better then you talks about their work. Oh, and paying attention to demos in class might be a start too. You want to paint like a master? There's no fuckin secret for 20-50 years of hard work. It's called PRACTICE!

[NoSeRider]

why is traditional so much harder than digital?

I don't know why people take things so damn personally?....I'm just answering a question. There are people out there who honestly struggle with this.

Besides, I'm more interested in the design aspect of things......color will come around....eventually.

I went to the Entertainment Academy and Mark Groener stated he hadn't touched oils in 10 years:
http://www.enterartacad.com/goerner.htm

So there's something to it.

And WTF said I was talking about any school?....I barely said 2 sentences....please restrain your paranoia.
Me doing designs:
http://user.aol.com/pnhassett/art/profile.jpg

[DavePalumbo]

Because nobody teaches it right?

some teachers are better than others, but there is really no right or wrong way to teach painting, just as there's really no right or wrong way to do painting. The only way a person can teach it wrong is by not teaching you anything at all (though I've sure had my share of them)

[artificial_green]

There is no harder thing. It's just your preference.

Traditional: harder to predict how your medium will behave, but once you master it, this will give your work something extra.

Digital: you have much more control but that can actually work against you. You have to think of the unpredictale aspects in your art yourself.