Digital art discussion

I forgot...

:lol:
:P

Digital art discussion.

Tell him, not me.

Class, let us review;

Any questions?

No?

Good.

Bear
Here endeth the cultural lesson.

well all I had to go on was your signature:

(¡Viva Tiki! Ambassador of Tiki in Mexico. Zeta is specialized in the research, study and preservation of Tiki culture in Latin countries.)

So if your not Latin (Not meant derogatorily) How can you be the "Ambassador of Tiki in Mexico"

I would recommend that you have a Cocktail, chill out and know that I stand corrected
you are a hot blooded Basque, Happy now? :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

Tiki transcends nationalities.

Now, just because I can sort of use Photoshop to manipulate the images above, it doesn't mean I'm a digital artist, just a guy who can use Photoshop. I've run into those who also just manipulate images created by someone else who call themselves Digital Artists but couldn't create anything original to save their lives. I respect artists like Doug, Thor, and others who can use the digital medium to CREATE something original, they can do excellent work in other more traditional mediums as well.

Even at my local community college in the art dept. there is a heavy gravitation to digital medium, and many of the digital medium students imply that traditional mediums are dead, or at least passe. They want to be digital artists because that's what they hear of, all sorts of companies wanting digital artists. When I hear the phrase "Digital Artist," the first thing that comes to mind is the above mentioned image manipulator, like how Ernie demonstrated, and I get the impression that's what many employers seem to think a digital artist is. I don't think of Doug, Thor, and the rest who can create original works as "Digital Artists," rather they are "Artists who create works in the digital medium." They are first and foremost Artists, the medium is secondary. Whereas, in the job market, the emphasis appears to be heavy on the digital, and not so much on the artist.

Something Thor mentioned also struck a chord with me, when he wrote about the guy who used the works of other artists to build a "toolbox" he called it. Box of cheats is how it struck me. It sort of like the practice of "sampling" employed by some recording "artists" in the music industry. Used to be they would snatch a riff here or there, but now It's like entire songs are lifted, they slap a beat and their own lyrics over it, maybe add an accent of their own here or there, and they want me to consider what they've done as being original. Not. They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but they aren't doing a cover of or even a tribute to the original. So it goes with the image manipulators and that guy with the digitally simulated techniques who couldn't replicate them himself in traditional mediums. It further confirms for me that the world has some very small people who only appear as big as they do because they stand upon the shoulders of giants.

Electronic technology is here to stay, society is constantly changing, and not always for the better. It's up to artists to preserve what we can of our representative cultures.

That's my take on it, sorry if I stepped on any toes, no offense intended.

I'm glad I only "dabble" in 2-D mediums. Gimme da mud!

Bear
And NO! There is no such thing as a ceramics APP!

[ Edited by: Brudda Bear 2011-07-13 01:34 ]

Bear, While I defend the use of computers in the creation of Art
I certainly do not want it to replace traditional media by any means.

There is a mindset from many "Traditional Artist's" that is Incendiary towards Digital Art
why? maybe they see it as a threat to how they create Art, I would hope that an open minded Artist will see it as the tool that it is & not a magic box that does all the work.

But it should never replace a tube of paint and a favorite brush.
But at the end of the day it is always about the skills of the Artist, no matter what the toolset they may use.
But a Digital Image can last forever, unless Zeta sets off an E.M.P. device of course :lol:

Sometimes I have to hear an idea several times before the little dim bulb goes off in my little dim brain. Bear mentioned something that Thor and others touched on and it finally clicked for me. That there is a distinction between artists and digital technicians. That most of the careers out there are for technicians who are efficient at turning someone else's vision into an image (Tobor and others in the industry can correct me if I am wrong) We are visual beings and our culture eats images at 30 frames/second/TV channel, we can't affort to spend 100 hours on each image! BUT there are people like Tobor who can do both, efficiently turn out digital images for the Man and still create real digital art for those who appreciate it.

Yay. Back on topic.

3D printing, wow, this is amazing!!

http://youtu.be/ZboxMsSz5Aw

Like Chuck Tatum said, digital medium will not take over traditional mediums, it's just another option for an artist to create.

is fannypack art?

[ Edited by: little lost tiki 2011-07-13 08:37 ]

Yes MadDogMike makes the point well, What differentiates the two is are you a "Commercial Artist"
or are you a "Fine Artist" and those even rarer people who can do both.

A Commercial Artist must do the work on a computer because the output is expected to be in a digital format
they must do it quick and be able to move onto the next job in the blink of an eye, The "Commercial Artist's"
job rarely has much to do with actual Art.

Grog's bread and butter is even more elusive, "Animation" is a real niche area and most of it has been farmed out overseas, maybe Grog can touch on just how many Animation jobs are available in the USA now?

A Fine Artist can do what ever they want, But if they are making a living from it is a sore point for many.

On 2011-07-13 08:36, little lost tiki wrote:

is fannypack art?

Hey, don't knock the Fanny Pack, Batman and Spiderman both wear one!!

And Ken, don't think for a minute I've forgotten about the speech you gave in 2010
at the Seattle Fanny Pack convention! The camera doesn't lie, no Digital magic involved here!!

I couldn't have said it better myself Swampfire! Those examples you posted are amazing!

Yea! what Stacey said, so there.

I'm with Swampfire and Tobor64 on this....

Having been a big Fan of Doug's for a long time now, to me, there is no way a hack with a good working knowledge of Photoshop (ie : ME for example) could ever create a Doug Horne art piece on the computer. If the artist is talented,his or her talent will come through whatever medium...ie a Doug Horne Painting. It's drawn by hand,but facilitated though digital means.

Just like when I saw Tobor64's pieces for the Halloween art show....I was shocked when he told me it was done on the computer....again...not just ANYONE can do that.

It's the same in the music world,tho' I think there is alot more ability to fix bad talent in digital music creating. Even so, it is THE current medium for making music...and it's certainly allowed me to have an actual career making music without having to deal with anyone in the way of my creative process...ie: pain in the ass singer, bad recording engineer etc....

So I say, if you're freehanding it with a tablet, you an artist...period. Painting over and manipulating existing images, well, maybe we call that a "Digital artist" ?

Interesting discussion tho'...

Interesting reading, and I LOVE hearing artists philosophies on art! I prefer non-digital art as a general rule. But that goes along with me liking old cars with drum brakes and chrome bumpers, single speed bikes with back pedal brakes, and so on... Seeing Doug's art was one of the first times I really turned onto digital art.

My biggest gripe about digital art is the undo button. However as has been pointed out, doesnt matter how good the computer is the human behind the mouse still needs to know what they're doing. All the crap digital art out there is proof of this!

On a slightly related topic - Appplying a posterising filter or putting a heap of contrast on your crap photo does not make it a good photo!

Funny all this discussion came up here at his time. Having experience in both fine art and the pressures of the Entertainment Industry and Illustration...as I said earlier and some are also saying..."context" and such really important. Here is an example I am currently using digital tools on..though did it the old fashion way for 40 some years.. I have a large commission from one of my collectors. This one is in Canada. He and bought a lot of my prints over the years and especially liked the piece I did called "Hawaiian Hold-em" since he and his 6 buddies play "Texas Hold-Em" in his "man cave" every thursday evening.

They smoke cigars and drink Scotch and snack on Ritz crackers and pretzles...etc. This customer is in a wheel chair and asked if I could somehow get that in here too...tall order!So, that gecko in front has a lil' "wheel chair" made of two Ritz crackers, a toothpick axle and a cork seat! He loved this idea!

Anyway, he has commission a large piece to be featured over the bar in his "man cave" which is full of deep dark wood, leather couches..and full bar...pretty slick. 24" by 36", oil. He said "Do something kinna like your Gecko's playing Hawaiian hold'em...but can I make them around Scotch and scotch bottles....and have a lit cigar in it...and play on "man cave" but all with a slight Hawaii twist with the gecko's and a lava rock pocket(lil' cave) they are playing in front off...etc. This is typical of a commission...I have words and have to put all these things into a composition that works...it has to lead the eye around...have flow..have light sources that feel believable...no reference other than my own brain.

Anyway...below are two digital sketches. The first is actually the second sketch I showed him...(first not included)....cleaned up a little..still just rough lines and notes all over the thing. I drew this TOTALLY on a Wacom tablet looking at my monitor. It's a digital sketch.

Second sketch below is also totally digital. I sketched and "painted" using photoshop and a digital pen...no reference or tricks...it was just like using paint..I could "paint" over my line sketch...think out the lighting lodgic in my head...and stay loose. If the customer likes this..I can use it like any painter would as my "value sketch"....then blow up the line drawing on canvas..and looking at this value sketch, incorporate color and al lthe bells an whistles in actual oils. Advantage of digital for early design for me is that if this customer says...Ohhh I like it but can you change the scotch bottle to Tiki or candle...or can you make the geckos all bigger in this composition.

Well, instead of taking out tracing paper like the old scool taught and patching and such...I can access the layer or area on either of these sketches, draw a loop around the gecko's, hit "enlarge scale" and then go back and "paint" areas around to fit the new change. Time on computer would be maybe 2-5 minutes. Time in old way? an hour maybe. Since this guy is paying a healthy sum for an "original" in oil on canvas in the end of all this, I saved time on this "design phase", the customer feels far more "a part" of the process, cus I am open to many changes to please them since it is so fast to do so. I still need to know composition, perspective, and how to draw though...or the computer would be a useless tool in this case.
So.I am sharing the "in progress" with you all. I just sent these to the guy who commissioned me too and will see his response. This is an interesting sharing experience from all...and maybe as we throw al this in the air...we can all get a feel for what digital art is...when it is "likable" and when it is a "crutch".

Either way..we all learn something. The bottom sketch, as "production art" digitally is fun and very efficient for me. Only draw back...is if we look at this in context of "fine art", if this guy askes to buy the layout "sketch"..which has happened many tines in past work where I did stuff on paper... I gained speed but lose $ for that extra art original to sell. It's give an take eh?

![](https://tikicentral.com/uploads/1900/4e1f3fa9.jpg)

![](https://tikicentral.com/uploads/1900/4e1f3ff1.jpg)

A great example of what computers do in the process, Thor.
yet it is all about the skill set.

Excellent example Master Thor. GROG love seeing artists work-in-progress shots. (P.S. Your painting for the new Tiki Magazine cover looks great.)

GROG did the same thing with GROG' Mermaid and Moai statue. However, the original drawing was done in blue col-erase pencil on animation paper. GROG scanner not work with new computer, so GROG take digital photo to get it into computer. GROG then did several different quick color thumbnails in Photoshop to work out color, lighting, and mood. Eventually GROG want to do the final as traditional art, but the computer definitefly sped up the thumbnail developement stage.( It would go even faster if GROG would hook GROG' Cintiq up instead of painting on the computer with a mouse!) You can also see how GROG changed the mermaid head to face the Moai by adding it on in Photoshop, and also in the first color thumbnail you can se how GROG shrink the mermaid in the piece. Both changes took minutes in Photoshop, but like Thor said, would have taken much longer to redraw tradionally.

GROG miss Tiki-Kate

[ Edited by: grog 2011-07-14 18:36 ]

VERY COOL GROGSTER!!!

Now that's what I'm talking about, very nice.

Excellent words and pics in this thread Thor! And as I said before, great drawing Grog!

On 2011-07-13 10:44, Chuck Tatum is Tiki wrote:
Grog's bread and butter is even more elusive, "Animation" is a real niche area and most of it has been farmed out overseas, maybe Grog can touch on just how many Animation jobs are available in the USA now?

There aren't any major tradional "2-D" hand-drawn film or TV productions going on in the U.S.A. that GROG know of. The TV shows are farmed out overseas, but they are storyboarded here in the U.S.A. on computer. And the animated movies are all CGI (computer generated images). Some minor Productions like Bill Plymptons films and art film shorts may still use more traditional methods, but the computer is involved in some aspect in most every production now in the U.S.

Found this on the internet:

Digital ink and paint
The current process, termed "digital ink and paint," is the same as traditional ink and paint until after the animation drawings are completed; instead of being transferred to cels, the animators' drawings are scanned into a computer, where they are coloured and processed using one or more of a variety of software packages. The resulting drawings are composited in the computer over their respective backgrounds, which have also been scanned into the computer (if not digitally painted), and the computer outputs the final film by either exporting a digital video file, using a video cassette recorder, or printing to film using a high-resolution output device. Use of computers allows for easier exchange of artwork between departments, studios, and even countries and continents (in most low-budget animated productions, the bulk of the animation is actually done by animators working in other countries, including South Korea, Japan, Singapore, Mexico, and India).

The last major feature film to use traditional ink and paint was Studio Ghibli's Princess Mononoke (1997); the last major animation production to use the traditional process is Cartoon Network's Ed, Edd n Eddy (1999–2009), although it was forced to switch to digital paint in 2004.[1] Minor productions such as Hair High (2004) by Bill Plympton have used traditional cels long after the introduction of digital techniques. Digital ink and paint has been in use at Walt Disney Feature Animation since 1989, where it was used for the final rainbow shot in The Little Mermaid. All subsequent Disney animated features were digitally inked-and-painted (starting with The Rescuers Down Under, which was also the first major feature film to entirely use digital ink and paint), using Disney's proprietary CAPS (Computer Animation Production System) technology, developed primarily by Pixar (the last Disney feature using CAPS was Home on the Range). Most other studios use one of a number of other high-end software packages such as Toon Boom Harmony, Toonz, Animo, and even consumer-level applications such as Adobe Flash, Toon Boom Studio and TVPaint.

GROG miss Tiki-Kate

[ Edited by: GROG 2011-07-14 18:57 ]

Grog you obviously have computer skills on top of all your other Art skills
do you do all digital "Computer Animation"?

Nope. Haven't learned any computer animation or programs like FLASH. Too busy doing these damned ceramics.

The cover illustration GROG did for Tiki Magazine was ALL Photoshop. GROG originally want to do it tradional medium, like acrylics or watercolor, but GROG wanted to be sure and have Ben in the Maikai shirt, and that was going to be so much detail it would have taken forever. So, GROG decide to do it all digital. Still, it take GROG a week to complete (not full 8 hour days, though). In the end GROG was able to get the image GROG had envisioned in GROG' mind, and that was the bottom line---what medium could best get the final image that GROG had imagined, and that was digital.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_0ufD6IKWIsQ/SBjV9KyD78I/AAAAAAAADtA/pHWw5aMwnIs/s1600-h/TM+Cover+10+-+Ben.jpg

Ben's body is actually 4 different photos combined and manipulated in Photoshop to get the pose GROG wanted. His head, both arms. and his body are all separate photos, and they still all had to be tweaked also.

The Bamboo Ben comic GROG does for Tiki Magazine is a combination traditional and digital. It is drawn and inked by hand, and then colored in the computer. GROG an animator, not a comic artist, so if not for the computer simplifying the process for making the comic, there probably wouldn't be a Bamboo Ben comic. The bad part is, that when GROG mess up some of the inking and drawing part, GROG not redraw it, GROG just scan into Photoshop and fix the images in there. So, GROG can't really sell any of the original Bamboo Ben comic art, because most of it doesn't match the final comic, and also GROG not do the comic the way most comics are done. Instead of drawing out the comic panel and inking it, GROG draw the elements, like the backgrounds and characters, separate and then combine them in Photoshop. GROG then crop the image and put the border on the panel. And that is not the way most comic artists do their comics.

But you could sell a limited run of prints?

Si.

Interesting posts from both Grog and Thor from the artists perspective. Thought I'd share my experience of a similar process from the customers perspective.

About a year ago I approached Dutch artist Herr Rudolph to basically reproduce this picture below of Liana (on my Taboo Tiki bike). I loved his style of art, and was pretty confident this pic would be a good basis/reference for him. We agreed on a price and went from there.

First of all he knocked up quick sketch and emailed it to me to make sure I was happy with the layout. Sure was.

Once I said I was happy with that he scanned it onto his computer and send me these digital mock ups. I told him I liked the one on the left,as the orange hibiscus ties in with the orange rims and orange grips. I also said I like the tiki light on the front guard like it is on the right. I wasnt real happy with the roller door background (I never liked that about the original image), but I liked his choice of colour. I sent him a link to TC and suggested he do something like the tapa wallpaper on here. Which is pretty fitting because Liana and I met on here!

He then sent me through this revised digital mock up, now we're getting there! Yup, green light, put paint to canvas.

And this is the final painting below. I LOVE that I have an original piece of art where you can see the brushstrokes and the texture of the painting - no print or digital art is going to have the same soul to it. But speaking as a customer, the digital art was awesome in refining the artwork and getting something that 100% nailed exactly what I'd envisioned in my head. As a customer (be it something like this, or getting some digital design done for work), I'm very fussy about how things look.

And the finished piece.

Perfect example of the digital tool used as a way to "stage" a painting and allow freedom to play with elements quickly and to the satisfaction of a buyer...then bring in the traditional tools to inject the "soul" and original. No "crutch" here for lack of talent....great example. This would fall into the "fine art" context I would say, since that was the intent of the final result of the process.

Technology arguments have always been a subject of debate in art. Norman Rockwell (by the way...ABSOLUTELY AWESOME COVER you did, Ernie, for Tiki Mag on that issue with Ben!) used to use an early version of image projector he called a "baloptocan" sp?). He used this to take a drawing or photo he took of a model and project it onto a surface so he could trace it. Many said he was "cheating"..but his argument was that he COULD DRAW without question without the thing..but it gave him a speed and advantage of trying different scales..etc. that allowed him to maximize his potential output for "Saturday Evening Post".

I think my opinion stand that again, as a tool that catalyzes the talent of an artist who could create impacting art and exhibit exceptional skill with a yellow #2 pencil and a stack of white paper or on a canvas with a brush and pigment without digital back up...is, in "classic terms"..a true visual artist. A designer lacking this ability and using the tricks and clicks and scans and filters and such of a computer as their only means of being able to make images that impress people, is a "technician" in my mind. A different level of respect.

No different than if a person were to have a program to write music that had formulated filters, harmony or chord changing tools that formulated to sound good to the ear, etc. where you could "borrow" riffs, no fail chord strums on a Martin Guitar in sound without ever having touched a guitar...blah blah. You can argue the better a person's "ear for music" is the more likely the end product will sound more authentic....but the skills were greatly technical adjustments and skill sets. Again, I say this from witnessing, working closely with all level of talents both technical and traditional. Students in my classes, co-workers and just fellow friends who are some form of creative minded spirit.

I am having fun exploring digital art. It's like an etch-a-sketch on steroids in my book!! But, Classical skilled artists have always fascinated people the most. Not unlike watching a tightrope walker as they exhibit years of hand, eye, mind and body skill to defy gravity using a pole and their feet on a wire. If we give them a mechanical leotard (let's call it an "I-Tard")that is wired to a data base that fires signals off to their muscles to maintain perfect balance...they could perhaps accomplish feats anything we have seen to date! But is their skill still as "magical" to us? Would it not be less entertaining after a while..when their is no sense of human error adjustment or the way they walk seem just not the same? I dunno... Just thinking out loud here on this thread. Always with the argument that we can have strong opinions on this subject based on the context we insert it into.

OK...had my Sat. AM coffee and heading for a hike and then to my studio. Have a great weekend all!

Sorry Thor, "I-Tard" is already taken - that's the retards who walk around all day with an iPhone to their heads :lol:

HAAAA U are right on that one
MDM! lol!

I'm a new guy here. I joined up a few days ago mainly because I became interested in this digital art discussion. I have been reading the forum for quite some time and found my feelings hurt when a number of the posters here said that computer art has no soul. I've been doing computer graphics for a very long time and I don't mind folks judging my work for quality, but it does make me sad that someone would call it soulless. No mater what tools I use, the main tool is my imagination.

This discussion has always gone on in art. There were folks who said Picasso's art or Pollack's art or many others who took art a new direction had no soul. But that is what art is, a journey of discovery. I'm old enough to remember when folks said the same about acrylic paint. It was just fake oil, they said. A good artist finds tools that works for them and should be judged by their art and not those tools.

I think most complainers have not used a computer to create. It would help if you tried. If you always wanted to carve a Tiki, check out a free program that can be found on line called Sculptris. Ten minutes with this software may open your eyes to the possibilities of creating on a computer.

Welcome Gene, and thanks for contributing to the digital art discussion.

Whoa Hewey. Thats a nice piece.

This is theoretical talking. I don't mean to offend anyone and nothing is written in stone.

Do you like "Live" music where the artist press buttons in his Macs and beat boxes?
Do you like Barry Bonds breaking the home run record on steroids?
Do you like french fries that don't decompose for weeks?

I don't

Technology is not always good.

I think we went back a bit here Zeta... Read all the comments through and you will understand better that there is no need to hammer "digital art" or technology as a negative...it's all about "context" of any tool to create and I think you will see this if you really listen to everyone and be open as an artist should.

Best to focus on what brings YOU yourself a tool that expresses your creative spirit and shows your talent....the outcome will measure the skill of both mind and heart. If the soul is there...as I see many artists who use digital mediums say, it comes through...If not..you have pixels and data, with no heart. Same as an unskilled painter who cannot mix the hues that speak to someones empotions and inspire their response.

I feel very enlightened by this thread...and it actually inspired me to play with "Sculptris"!!! I HATE it..know why? I can't stop playing with it thanks to you Gene!!! LOL!! Really though..thanks Gene..you contributes a great part to this thread and a toy for the creative minds.

Have a great weekend....

[ Edited by: THOR's 2011-07-22 18:46 ]

*On 2011-07-22 18:18, THOR's wrote:*If the soul is there...as I see many artists who use digital mediums say, it comes through...If not..you have pixels and data, with no heart. Same as an unskilled painter who cannot mix the hues that speak to someones emotions and inspire their response.

Bravo. That really gets to the heart of the matter for me: the heart of the artist. There are incredibly talented artists that have work that, to me, seems empty. Conversely, there are digital pieces that make my heart sing. I can only appreciate what causes my soul to rise. I cannot say the other is not art, just not art for me.
~Zero

Thanks Thor (Tom) ... I'm sure glad you tried Sculptris. I bet you make some amazing stuff with it. All of your art is amazing .....

I haven't read through all of this but will go back later as I find this very interesting. I don't expect to be a digital artist, but soooo wish I had some skills. Sure I have the applications and the books but need someone to show me what to do as that is how I learn. I would so love to take a 1x1 class on use of Photoshop. I struggle at work trying to build e-Learning products because I don't have the skills in graphic, video and audio applications. I spent a fortune buying Director for myself...haven't got a clue how to use it. JEALOUS of all the folks that have the digital skills. I do like digital art. :)

I also understand the dying art of hand-drawing/art but think that will turn around some day. Same thing is happening to many other skills...such as cursive writing...might even be deleted as something taught in school, kids can't count back change without the cash-register doing it for them-they have no math skills, Borders Books closing its doors due to e-Readers. Sign of the times...but the old masters and genius's works still ring true.

Tiki artists digital and old school are all appreciated in my book.

Grog...when can I sign up for my private Photoshop lessons???? :wink:

[ Edited by: VampiressRN 2011-07-22 20:25 ]

I know it's Pornography that got most people into computers
But for me it was Photoshop.

Well...my computer stopped me before really tricking this out and refining it further...I think I need more Ram...cus the further I got, the less responsive and slower the tools worked!! lol! But I made the beginnigs of a gold shrunken head as I had my Saturday coffee just now...!! Using "Sculptris" Just fun to fart with! I will see what I need to get this laptop better equipt... However, this took about 25 minutes and it was FUN! Where I see this tool as a great resource to ANY artists is as a "visualization tool"..a fast way to see all sides of a rough form. I could rotate this in all directions and change the surfaces/material into anything I wanted. I wish I had been able to work this more to add hair and detail...but here is my stab. I have very little experience in digital art...so all this is new fun for me. Thanks again Gene!

[ Edited by: THOR's 2011-07-23 09:56 ]

GROG checked out some videos on the site, and GROG definitely want to give it a try when GROG have time. Damned Goin' Primitive mugs, can't wait until they're finished and out of GROG' hair! GROG wish GROG could just push a button on a computer and they'd be finished. Damned technology. Where is it when you need it?

Good job Mr. Thor, and thanks Gene.

I have messed with Z-Brush in the past, so I downloaded "Sculptris" to try
and Thor is right it's easy and fun.

I myself have not done much 3D graphics outside of Bryce 3D & Poser.

Thor ..... It is not always memory that hangs Sculptris up. Sometimes the graphic card can't handle the load. It helps sometimes to reduce some trangles. They can add up to millions with lots of detail. I try to save a lot and shut down the program every now and then to clear out the memory junk.

I have been really happy to see folks checking out the sculptris program. I knew some of the cool artist would come up with some cool stuff with it. I'm not one of those real artist, but I thought I'd show how I use the program. This is one of the techniques I use.

I used to sculpt clay before I got old and became allergic to clay dust. I found I could have fun with the computer instead. The Sculptris interface gives you a big ball of clay and all the tools you will need to model any kind of island art you want.