Post #618250 by TikiKIrby on Wed, Dec 21, 2011 11:14 PM

This topic is getting a bit too serious, but kinda hilarious so I gotta chime... This is a TIKI forum and there's name calling on what is more art?? Too funny... You do realize that a good majority of work that is considered Tiki is the epitome of commercial art, and therefore looked down on by the "art" world. I'll take a McGinnis painting or even a Mucha print over a good majority of the work coming from a fine art school but that's just me.. As everyone has said, it's subjective.. that's it now back to the topic.....

Like Grog, I started working in animation when it was hand drawn, hand painted, and hand shot on this stuff we used to call film so I think we share a lot of the same feelings about the digital world. (It's a common subject with us traditional animators.. ) What I miss most about "analog" art is it's limitations. You learn to work within the limitations and work on mastering a medium, perfecting a look. But you always have the human element involved that gives it a certain feel.. In the digital world you really don't have many limitations, in fact I find myself constantly fighting the "perfect" digital world by adding imperfections. All of the animation I do now is digital, and It is the polar opposite of traditional when it comes to working. In the 2d world we spent a good deal of the time trying to make a "perfect" drawing for each frame, but in 3d we spend a great deal of time trying to add imperfections.. Another downside of the digital world is what we like to affectionately call pixel- f***ing. When illustrating on the computer it's much harder to have a sense of scale, you can design a 20 ft mural or a 20 inch painting with relatively the same screen space and you can literally manipulate each pixel if you choose. It's pretty easy to forget about the piece as a whole. In animation, because it is sooo much easier to change almost anything in the digital world than in the traditional world, directors (or other chefs) tend to analyze every element on every frame and may loose sight of the scene as a whole..

However, the computer is a great tool to learn new techniques, take risks, push boundaries etc. with. It's really only limited by the user... Here are a couple illustrations I did of the same subject. They are both about 5 1/2" tall, the first is a sketch in gouache , the second is photoshop. It's not a direct comparison because the second piece was intended to be more finished, but you can see how much sharper the digital is.. A big reason for this is the same 5" piece is now blown up on a 20" monitor... I do get the "soul" argument but I believe the soul comes from the artist and even if he uses a digital brush the soul is still there. Because we use pressure sensitive "pens" that record our brush strokes, It's not too hard to envision a "printer" capable of replicating every stroke on to a canvas, will that make it more art? :D