Welcome to the Tiki Central 2.0 Beta. Read the announcement
Celebrating classic and modern Polynesian Pop

Tiki Central / Other Crafts / Digital art discussion

Post #600056 by Badd Tiki on Sun, Jul 31, 2011 1:03 AM

You are viewing a single post. Click here to view the post in context.
BT

Well, I had to skip the last couple post 'cause I've had a few...
Just went to and old school punk rock reunion gig that some friends from way back had.. Just saw a gig poster a few weeks ago ...

And one of the guys asked me 'You still doing art'...

And it's funny, because I've been doing a lot of digital art that a lot of people have enjoyed over the past 10 years. But when it comes down to it I really have nothing to 'show' for it.
Sure I could load up an old game, run someone around it, show them the art I have done. And most likely they wouldn't appreciate it. Because it's 'not art', or at least not 'traditional' art. And it certainly isn't timeless art.

But a lot of people have enjoyed it, and actually my artwork is still used in new projects today, in an antiquated engine that few people use. But after all this time people are still seeing it, and most likely not even knowing who created it. And I'm alright with that.

But it got me thinking. Does that make it have less soul than something Devinchi did?
I did it for peoples enjoyment, and was successful in that respect.

And back to my friend asking if I still did artwork. In all the years I have practiced many mediums I have probably only made $100 off of my artwork. I could just never sell it. If someone liked it I gave it to them. And that's what I've always done with my digital art.

I think once money gets involved it loses soul to me. And it's a weird justopizction (I know I should spell check that) but whatever, I'm drunk. LOL.
But whenever I do art for free it flows, whenever someone offers me money (or I think about doing it for money) I hit a brick wall and can never finish.

So back to the question of soul and art. Does art have soul because of the medium? Or does it have soul because of the (oh what's the word...) expected outcome?
Certainly the great artists (I'm not comparing myself) of the pasts had no intentions of becoming wealthy from art. Most died paupers, and only the people that hoarded their work became rich.

It's quite the conundrum. As an artist I'd love to be able to survive doing what I love, but the moment I start doing it TO survive it loses all meaning and I start to loathe it.
So maybe for me digital art is the perfect medium, people enjoy it, then it's gone. I won't become rich off of it, but nobody else will either.

Not really sure where I was going with this little rant...