Tiki Central / Other Crafts / Digital art discussion
Post #597089 by THOR's on Mon, Jul 11, 2011 7:10 PM
T
THOR's
Posted
posted
on
Mon, Jul 11, 2011 7:10 PM
Man, oh Man....this subject for artist is pretty close to talkin' Religion and Politics! DANGEROUS! But have been hunched over both a computer and an drawing board for weeks and this is a perfect brain stretcher subject! lol! I could write a 10 page speech on this subject, debating and supporting all these points. But I think what really hasn't been stated that is REALLY important is simply "CONTEXT". Artists know this. A certin "blue" changes it's appearance to the eye depending on what surrounds it...other color's saturation(brilliance), how it is lit, the values, hues...opacity...blah blah. Change any of these factors surrounding this "blue", the judgement of how we feel or "see" that color changes. Same with this subject. My opinion on digital art is in this mind set above. It is a wonderful new tool..and it is also something "abused". It is both catalyst and crutch. In skilled hands..it expands new possibilities to a well trained artist in traditional art. It can also make a very unskilled artist able to make a very acceptable image..or a mediocre artist fabulous to many viewers who don't care how an image was made..they just react to the end product..etc. Doug and other artist we know of in this "Tiki" Ohana are SKILLED ARTISTS. I see them work in many mediums..digital included. They understand strong fundamentals of creating an image and telling a story. So in that context, digital "paint" and design are just another tool. However, I feel Ernie (Grog's) frustration in a different context. Here's an example. Not including drawing since I was two on the kitchen table, I have been working daily for four decades to make what I see in my brain come through my hand. If I made a mistake drawing or painting, or couldn't make a smooth gradation with wet paint...the work looked like crap. If I wanted a painted tree to feel like an impressionists painting or an airbrush look so perfect in gradation it looked like silk...it took years of "nerve training" and ass busting skill development with flesh and mind matter. Same to learn to draw a figure or understand how light theory works on things that you want to look real that come from your mind only. The only "data base" I had was in my own brain. People who could not master these skills...soon were out of a career..or never had one as artists. What is this important? Well, I have noticed some interesting things out there happen as we now mix traditional, seasoned artists with fresh outta school, highly capable digital artists. I taught Entertainment Design for Illustration majors at Art Center College for eight years. These students are SERIOUS about their careers. There were many levels or margins of talent in my classes. What I see today is that digital art has GREATLY narrowed the margins of talent as perceived by society. I have first hand witnessed former students of mine who were at BEST marginal artists that I was seriously worried for career wise who I have talked to in recent times that generate MIND BLOWING digital art now...and fully admit they would flounder like an eel in the desert if asked to draw and paint or design in traditional mediums. Over lunch recently, this person and two others showed me how they use the art of other traditional artists(scanning in parts of the art)to create a data bank of "brushes" and colors and sections of art with photos and computer generated perspective models to montage together skillfully and end up with a powerfully impressive image. I saw the one I mentioned that I had little respect for, skill wise create and painting that looked, even in style like a very famous Disney artist in the print. He had a "tool box" of things to imitate the brush strokes, the style, the colors....it blew my mind. He was able to create a piece that if asked to do traditionally, would be WAY out of his league in a lifetime of developing his hand and brain link traditionally. It's understandable why many artists resent this! Especially animators and illustrators who worked hard to posses raw, traditional skills from mind to medium. No different than if they were to create a program(maybe they have), that can allow anyone to write music to some acceptable degree with or without training. YES, the better talented or traditionally trained perhaps the better the song, but still, it would allow tons of good enough music to be created that one could saturate the music industry with, generated by a person who had put in VERY little "dues" into a career in music...nor could they sit and do a live performance on a piano. What if a computer could make anyone's voice sound like a singers...would we not eventually get insensitive to raw, rare talent? What is my point? Well...the point is that we can argue that digital art IS a tool...or a crutch depending on the hands it is in. It can put a lot of people who spent decades the old fashion way to hone a skill out of a job..replaced by mediocre art technician just out of tech school. It can also be a truly FUN and incredible way for a traditional artist to expand into another medium! I am doing that too...not to replace any traditional skills for good...but just cus it's another variation. The one tough thing about a digital image as a sell-able art product though, in my experience and seeing other artists I have shown work with is that there is no "original". I am not saying this is bad or good. However, I cannot tell you how many times I have tried to sell a collector of my art on a limited edition print that wants THE ORIGINAL! They will pay 15K for that!..but pass on $100.00 for a print. There are times I have sold originals that looked great in print, but had my cat's hair in the paint or a gnat embedded in the pigment from those painting outdoors moods I have had. Why would anyone want this? Well, People explain that they want the "THING" I(or any artist)actually touched, leaned my wrist on, sneezed on or just absorbed the creative energy in the room. I relate to this I think. I savor Polaroid pictures of my relatives that have passed on even more than other photos. Why? Because that Polaroid paper was sitting in the camera and popped out IN THE MOMENT while they were in the room...and was "there" where that image was captured. Call me crazy...but I can feel the energy inside that little picture and that is special. Anyway, there is my string of thought...thinking out loud, without judgment..just observations and pondered. I have some definite opinions about digital images, animation and such. Not all good, but many good things too. But in the end, there is no "perfection" like imperfection in my mind...human and all else of this world. Look at a tree or any thing that feels "alive". A computer will never be able to duplicate this...no matter what you tell me. There is a "life" and energy it cannot duplicate that some call a "soul". So digital does have it's place in our world I think..and a very respected and mesmerizing one...BUT..all in context! [ Edited by: THOR's 2011-07-11 19:23 ] |