As I look at amazing Digital Graphic Art, (Katra, Moddy) I'm left thinking, this is as good as any fine paintings and took just as much skill. Some former painters (Katra) become Graphic Artists.
Will a piece of digital graphic art ever be worth as much as actual paintings? If you don't think so, why?
I don't think it ever will because people like to touch art as well, it makes them feel in one with the piece of art if they can see the texture as apposed to a flat surface. Also with painted art a little of the artist is intertwined, the mood, the sensitivity, and the sensuality seems to *jump* out more than a digital piece. There's a depth that you cannot achieve in digital.
NuvoForum LeaderVPS - Virtual Prince of the Server
I doubt digital art will catch up with conventional artistry any time soon as along with the valid points already made about paintings and sculptures having texture and more emotion, there's also the issue that if it's computer generated, chances are that someone with enough skill would be capable of making an exact clone, which would be impossible to tell apart from the origional.
Computer artistry has been going down a different path recently with people who are interested in graphical arts as well as technical aspects of computers and general technology seeing what they can make a computer do.
I've seen some very interesting applications of motors and laptops used to create a robotic graffiti painter that follows a design built with something like Photoshop and paints it on walls with pretty good results.
Modern art in general is moving away from creating classic pieces towards pieces which are hailed as great works for short amounts of time before being replaced with newer stuff.
Take the Tate Museum of Modern Art, for example.
There's only so long a room full of fuzzy blocks and speakers spouting gibberish can be called real art, and thankfully, it's not that long.
It's safe to say that when most people think of classic pieces such as the Mona Lisa or Sunflowers, they picture an artist sat using skills they have honed for years to create things of beuty, while people often think of modern artists as shallow people who think "they'll pay me to put a tent in a room and call it art... THIS IS THE PERFECT JOB!!!".
I'm not saying that a computer can't create something beutiful, nor am I saying that all modern artists need a reality check, but it seems that a lot of them aren't looking at creating something that makes you think "WOW, the person who did this is brilliant!", but they do weird things and try to put some kind of message to them, which really doesn't work for a lot of people...
"It's, like a shelf with, like a vase nailed to the bottom to make it look kinda inverted, but it's like a message that war is bad and freedom is, like, the key to beating opression... Like, y'know.." = GAH! IT'S *BADLY FOLLOWED IKEA INSTRUCTIONS, THAT'S WHAT IT IS!!!
*Following Ikea instructions to the letter should allow you to build a full dining table from a flat packed shelving unit which has the obligatory missing components and instructions in Kanji (which is weird as they aren't in Japan).
If you find that you have bought a flat pack from Ikea and you have constructed the product you thought you had purchased from it, please return the product to your local Idea store for a full refund.
PHP, CSS, XHTML, Delphi, Ruby on Rails & more. Current project: CMS Object. Most recent change: Theme support is up and running... So long as I use my theme resource loaders instead of that in the Rails plug-in. Release date: NEVER!!!
I doubt digital art will catch up with conventional artistry any time soon as along with the valid points already made about paintings and sculptures having texture and more emotion, there's also the issue that if it's computer generated, chances are that someone with enough skill would be capable of making an exact clone, which would be impossible to tell apart from the origional.
Which has happened before computer art, many times an old master has been copied and has been accepted so much so that the arguments over it still go on til this day. A little more difficult with digital art dues to the ways of marking it which is impossible to be seen except by the creator him/herself.
Computer artistry has been going down a different path recently with people who are interested in graphical arts as well as technical aspects of computers and general technology seeing what they can make a computer do.
I've seen some very interesting applications of motors and laptops used to create a robotic graffiti painter that follows a design built with something like Photoshop and paints it on walls with pretty good results.
I agree but to me that is what you say it is, computer artistry, a different form of art which really goes into the realm of mechanical art rather than a persons physical art.
Modern art in general is moving away from creating classic pieces towards pieces which are hailed as great works for short amounts of time before being replaced with newer stuff.
Take the Tate Museum of Modern Art, for example.
There's only so long a room full of fuzzy blocks and speakers spouting gibberish can be called real art, and thankfully, it's not that long.
Oh I do disagree there, modern art will have its own place as it always has but modern art is also shown in pieces such as Janesko, Anthony Guerra and Lorenzo Sperlonga to name but a few that have arisen purely in the modern art world, (not computer art) this is the way that art will go in the future. If one goes to galleries nowadays the fuzzy blocks are now a rarity amongst the new age artists that are creating pieces that are just as fascinating, beautiful and true to life as the old masters created.
But each to their own opinion and I would love to continue the discussion fascinating as it is but I am off on holiday tomorrow lol .
NuvoForum LeaderVPS - Virtual Prince of the Server
Which has happened before computer art, many times an old master has been copied and has been accepted so much so that the arguments over it still go on til this day. A little more difficult with digital art dues to the ways of marking it which is impossible to be seen except by the creator him/herself.
What I mean is that with a digital image, you can get a virtually identical clone simply by getting a decent photo of it and printing it off over and over, or by rebuilding it in a graphics editor.
It's much harder to reproduce something which has texture such as an oil painting as there would be differences in the way the strokes appear on the canvas or any other medium you're painting on compared to the origional.
Granted, not everyone is going to know the real thing stroke for stroke, but all it takes is for one person to study the origional well enough, or to test it and the illusion is lost a lot of the time.
I'm sorry, but I laughed when a fire raged through a warehouse used to store "art" from some galeries as I simply cannot class some of the stuff we've been given by artists these days as true art.
Art has to be something inspirational and \ or thought provoking, not something that makes you think "yeah, so it's a room full of white boxes... Your point is?".
I know there's still very tallented artists out there, and some of those do use modern methods of creating their pieces (I know a lot of people who use Photoshop and other tools to edit and complete their images), but I would rather go and do something where I'll come away with idea's and a different perception on things rather than some of the garbage that's still floating around in those lottery funded hell voids.
The three names you posted aren't really what most people percieve as modern art, but rather as graphical artistry such as that used in graphic novels like DC's Batman novels (Manbat, Shaman and such) or on cover art, though the three you posted seem to be often linked to more erotica style imagery.
I have nothing against drawings of such caliber as they do show high levels of skill which many wouldn't get to, and I know of a few Anime and cartoon artists myself through the internet, but these aren;t the kinds of things you usually see the lottery or government forking out for and I wish they would as they are much better works than some I've seen recently.
It depends on if you class mechanics as the artist building the machine and letting it go, or the artist building the machine and giving it something to reproduce when it comes to computer artistry.
You can tell a machine where point X and point Y are, and what to do when it gets there, but you can't tell a machine to draw a pretty bunny unless you tell it how.
The artist has to create the image to feed into the machine, it's just the machine making the digital image a little more reall by giving it texture and applying the laws of physics by using real world tools such as paint to create a real world implementation of what it's told to draw.
The computer doesn't have to be the creative one, it doesn't have to care what's going on around it and it's the guy working it that's creating the art, but is using a machine rather than a brush.
PHP, CSS, XHTML, Delphi, Ruby on Rails & more. Current project: CMS Object. Most recent change: Theme support is up and running... So long as I use my theme resource loaders instead of that in the Rails plug-in. Release date: NEVER!!!
You know, I think they will be worth as much as actual paintings someday. Take a look at some of the movie stills that sell for exorbitant prices already. What are they except digital art?
I don't think the day has come yet, but I believe it will. Works like those of Katra and Moddy are the ones I'd keep my eye on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuvo
The three names you posted aren't really what most people percieve as modern art, but rather as graphical artistry such as that used in graphic novels like DC's Batman novels (Manbat, Shaman and such) or on cover art,
Boy, I sure wouldn't mention that to those artists. All of the ones Katra mentioned are quite successful, don't do comic books (even if they're called graphic novels) and most definitely are perceived as artists. It would be difficult to perceive them as modern art unless one is truly considering the human body as modern art. I'd have to take a good look at all three of them before I could agree to that.
LOL...sorry poking fun at you there. But truly, all three of those people are indeed artists. I think you'd hear a huge outroar if you tried to claim that they weren't.
The three names you posted aren't really what most people percieve as modern art, but rather as graphical artistry such as that used in graphic novels like DC's Batman novels (Manbat, Shaman and such) or on cover art, though the three you posted seem to be often linked to more erotica style imagery.
Stan Lee and other graphic artists have had works that have sold for millions since the early 70's!
Its all a question of taste and yes everyones tastes are different, so yeh I see some kind of lift in the price of digital art, especially as the kind of pieces you speak of Nuvo makes people more and more sick of the "real" world of art.
DeluxeNames
AdminAdministrator
Comments
thankyou for your kind words Bryant
WWWC Photoshop & Bryce Tutor
Founder of TWInc
Profession: KMA
I am not a purple people eater
Yeh I have to say that I'm in agreement with Katra, even though Jennifer Janesko has been known to sell "prints" for thousands.
-
ModGirl Design
My ArtWanted Portfolio
Renderosity Gallery
Computer artistry has been going down a different path recently with people who are interested in graphical arts as well as technical aspects of computers and general technology seeing what they can make a computer do.
I've seen some very interesting applications of motors and laptops used to create a robotic graffiti painter that follows a design built with something like Photoshop and paints it on walls with pretty good results.
Modern art in general is moving away from creating classic pieces towards pieces which are hailed as great works for short amounts of time before being replaced with newer stuff.
Take the Tate Museum of Modern Art, for example.
There's only so long a room full of fuzzy blocks and speakers spouting gibberish can be called real art, and thankfully, it's not that long.
It's safe to say that when most people think of classic pieces such as the Mona Lisa or Sunflowers, they picture an artist sat using skills they have honed for years to create things of beuty, while people often think of modern artists as shallow people who think "they'll pay me to put a tent in a room and call it art... THIS IS THE PERFECT JOB!!!".
I'm not saying that a computer can't create something beutiful, nor am I saying that all modern artists need a reality check, but it seems that a lot of them aren't looking at creating something that makes you think "WOW, the person who did this is brilliant!", but they do weird things and try to put some kind of message to them, which really doesn't work for a lot of people...
"It's, like a shelf with, like a vase nailed to the bottom to make it look kinda inverted, but it's like a message that war is bad and freedom is, like, the key to beating opression... Like, y'know.." = GAH! IT'S *BADLY FOLLOWED IKEA INSTRUCTIONS, THAT'S WHAT IT IS!!!
*Following Ikea instructions to the letter should allow you to build a full dining table from a flat packed shelving unit which has the obligatory missing components and instructions in Kanji (which is weird as they aren't in Japan).
If you find that you have bought a flat pack from Ikea and you have constructed the product you thought you had purchased from it, please return the product to your local Idea store for a full refund.
Current project: CMS Object.
Most recent change: Theme support is up and running... So long as I use my theme resource loaders instead of that in the Rails plug-in.
Release date: NEVER!!!
Which has happened before computer art, many times an old master has been copied and has been accepted so much so that the arguments over it still go on til this day. A little more difficult with digital art dues to the ways of marking it which is impossible to be seen except by the creator him/herself.
I agree but to me that is what you say it is, computer artistry, a different form of art which really goes into the realm of mechanical art rather than a persons physical art.
Oh I do disagree there, modern art will have its own place as it always has but modern art is also shown in pieces such as Janesko, Anthony Guerra and Lorenzo Sperlonga to name but a few that have arisen purely in the modern art world, (not computer art) this is the way that art will go in the future. If one goes to galleries nowadays the fuzzy blocks are now a rarity amongst the new age artists that are creating pieces that are just as fascinating, beautiful and true to life as the old masters created.
But each to their own opinion
WWWC Photoshop & Bryce Tutor
Founder of TWInc
Profession: KMA
I am not a purple people eater
It's much harder to reproduce something which has texture such as an oil painting as there would be differences in the way the strokes appear on the canvas or any other medium you're painting on compared to the origional.
Granted, not everyone is going to know the real thing stroke for stroke, but all it takes is for one person to study the origional well enough, or to test it and the illusion is lost a lot of the time.
I'm sorry, but I laughed when a fire raged through a warehouse used to store "art" from some galeries as I simply cannot class some of the stuff we've been given by artists these days as true art.
Art has to be something inspirational and \ or thought provoking, not something that makes you think "yeah, so it's a room full of white boxes... Your point is?".
I know there's still very tallented artists out there, and some of those do use modern methods of creating their pieces (I know a lot of people who use Photoshop and other tools to edit and complete their images), but I would rather go and do something where I'll come away with idea's and a different perception on things rather than some of the garbage that's still floating around in those lottery funded hell voids.
The three names you posted aren't really what most people percieve as modern art, but rather as graphical artistry such as that used in graphic novels like DC's Batman novels (Manbat, Shaman and such) or on cover art, though the three you posted seem to be often linked to more erotica style imagery.
I have nothing against drawings of such caliber as they do show high levels of skill which many wouldn't get to, and I know of a few Anime and cartoon artists myself through the internet, but these aren;t the kinds of things you usually see the lottery or government forking out for and I wish they would as they are much better works than some I've seen recently.
It depends on if you class mechanics as the artist building the machine and letting it go, or the artist building the machine and giving it something to reproduce when it comes to computer artistry.
You can tell a machine where point X and point Y are, and what to do when it gets there, but you can't tell a machine to draw a pretty bunny unless you tell it how.
The artist has to create the image to feed into the machine, it's just the machine making the digital image a little more reall by giving it texture and applying the laws of physics by using real world tools such as paint to create a real world implementation of what it's told to draw.
The computer doesn't have to be the creative one, it doesn't have to care what's going on around it and it's the guy working it that's creating the art, but is using a machine rather than a brush.
Current project: CMS Object.
Most recent change: Theme support is up and running... So long as I use my theme resource loaders instead of that in the Rails plug-in.
Release date: NEVER!!!
I don't think the day has come yet, but I believe it will. Works like those of Katra and Moddy are the ones I'd keep my eye on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuvo
The three names you posted aren't really what most people percieve as modern art, but rather as graphical artistry such as that used in graphic novels like DC's Batman novels (Manbat, Shaman and such) or on cover art,
Boy, I sure wouldn't mention that to those artists. All of the ones Katra mentioned are quite successful, don't do comic books (even if they're called graphic novels) and most definitely are perceived as artists. It would be difficult to perceive them as modern art unless one is truly considering the human body as modern art. I'd have to take a good look at all three of them before I could agree to that.
LOL...sorry poking fun at you there. But truly, all three of those people are indeed artists. I think you'd hear a huge outroar if you tried to claim that they weren't.
Just my two cents.
-
ModGirl Design
My ArtWanted Portfolio
Renderosity Gallery
Stan Lee and other graphic artists have had works that have sold for millions since the early 70's!
Its all a question of taste and yes everyones tastes are different, so yeh I see some kind of lift in the price of digital art, especially as the kind of pieces you speak of Nuvo makes people more and more sick of the "real" world of art.