Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 46

Thread: Yeah, but is it real?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    London, UK

    Yeah, but is it real?

    This comment here inspired this post, which I thought was better placed in the General Discussion department:

    Quote Originally Posted by ScottF View Post
    Interesting to see how you use ArtRage as a launch pad for your "real" paintings.
    I hate it when you say "real" paintings in quotation marks. A real painting is real. An Artrage image could be called "a painting" (in quotation marks), and the process could be called "to paint" (also in quotes). To me, a real painting is a real painting, and I don't need to point out its reality. An Artrage one is not. I call them images or sketches.

    The two processes are vastly different. While you need the concept in your head in both cases, realization is much easier in ArtRage. You can layer, erase, blend, trace, and you don't need to know much about colour mixing, pigment behaviour, brush shapes or types, or the different media (especially with oils).

    I don't mean to offend anyone here, but frankly, a mediocre painting on canvas is, in many ways, more difficult and, to me, more satisfying to make than a brilliant ArtRage image.

    The artistic accomplishment is the same in both methods, because you need the same quality of inspiration on both. For me, that is step one. I can then use ArtRage to create a series of sketches, quickly and easily trying out variations of that original idea, but the final step always is the creation of a painting (a real one, that is).

    I exhibit my paintings occasionally. I would only exhibit an ArtRage image as a sketch, as a document that illustrates the evolution of the completed work.

    Am I just a grumpy old man?
    It's not about how many breaths you take; it's about the moments that take your breath away.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    This is the recurrent discussion about traditional "materialist" way of painting and drawing versus digital art.

    It happens when the software simulates real media like paint, chalk, etc.

    It's where the confusion can be. For me a work in ArtRage is real, like a work on paper or canvas. This is just a different medium.

    Can we call a painting in ArtRage a "painting"? I think so, because the process will go closer and closer of a real painting process. Personally i call it a digital painting or digital sketch because as you said, "the artistic accomplishment is the same".

    Pro digital art, especially illustration and sketching, are the very similar aim than those on "real" media as ink on paper. It's destinated to be printed in series, in books or only viewable on computers. It doesn't matter it's digital or not in those case. (which is more ecological? )

    I agree that (especially with abstract art, because abstract is a part of decoration and architecture), when you start doing contemplative work it's more about very unique exemplar , if you need to sell it as a work of art, you need it to paint it on canvas.

    That's the reason why, personally, i won't do much abstract with artrage or maybe sketch for absrtract project that will be "really" accomplished.

    But now, there is some printing service that can print any file picture on a clothed canvas. So... there are an infinity of possibilities.
    Last edited by orbital_chiller; 11-02-2008 at 12:07 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Does your handle "Priceless" indicate that you're no sell-out? Haha.

    Arguments can be made for any point of view at all. Art has always been a matter of opinion, and why not over this technical issue as well, no?

    That you are a software designer by day (as a job) probably makes the distinction more a matter of painting something unspoiled that you can get away from the digital (work). Just now a matter of if you are speaking of Painting or of Art. These are two different arguments.

    Maybe you're still seeing all this virtual painting as painting with a binary palette of 0 and 1. That's a little like looking at real world painting at the molecular level. What makes art ART? They have been arguing that ever since the notion of ART appeared.

    And then there's the associated argument of the worth of a painting, which is pretty virtual if you ask me since that is something that gets manipulated as much as pork bellies on nursing sows.

    Many people only see worth based on what a painting costs. And are we going to let something so non-painterly dictate the value of a painting? Depends on what we as individuals esteem. Money? Quality? Snob appeal? Talk to the militant watercolorists and using a dot of opaque watercolor (gouache) in a painting would be a cause for less-than-subtle mockery.

    If one cares to reduce it to that level, real world anything is different from its virtual counterpart. . .technically speaking. But the value and/or art of the painting remains in the eye of the beholder. But I guess it could be argued that real painting must also be in the hands of the holder.

    You have a fondness for real world painting. I hear ya. It's a venerable slice of the art experience, the operative word being experience.

    Glorious as painting can be at times, I consider it all sorta moot, and place my enthusiasm beyond what only painting at the technical level can provide -- a vehicle for personal expression. It's just another vehicle that can be driven different directions.
    Last edited by D Akey; 11-02-2008 at 01:43 AM.
    "Not a bit is wasted and the best is yet to come. . ." -- remembered from a dream

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    NC, USA
    Whether one draws a stick figure with a pencil and paper, a drawing tablet and computer, or chisel in stone, the idea being presented is still that of a stick figure, is it not? A painting is a painting to me, whether it's digital or not. The only difference between the two, in my opinion, is the intended use. Some things are better off being handled with traditional mediums, while others are best handled digitally. Either way, one has to put effort and talent into it.
    Nothing is easy to the unwilling.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    To add my humble opinion to this interesting discussion, "What is a real
    painting"? Might I include the following quote, "A rose by any other name
    would smell as sweet." Art takes on many forms, to call a painting by
    any other name does not make it less of a real painting nor lesson it's
    creative purpose, the purpose being to express ~ Long live the artist and
    the chosen medium of expression ~

    From Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, 1594:
    'Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
    Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
    What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
    Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
    Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
    What's in a name? That which we call a rose
    By any other name would smell as sweet;
    So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
    Retain that dear perfection which he owes
    Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
    And for that name which is no part of thee
    Take all myself.

    Mairzie Dotes

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    In my opinion digital art is art 100%.
    As for what artistic value has an artwork I should distinguish between inspiration/originality and technical skill.
    I know a lot of artists, some have beautiful technic but no inspiration, others on the contrary.
    The inspiration is that counts more, I think, and it can determinate also the technic. Van Gogh probably should have been never able do works like Michelangelo o Rembrandt, but he invented a new way of expression and he is a genius, anyway. So technic does not count so much, and if an artwork is digital or not has not much importance for me.
    Anyway, there can be a misunderstanding about digital artwork, as it can be made simple applying filters and effects on photos. I do not like the idea of tracing and cloning, it feels like cheating for me. On the other hand some artist may obtain great artwork simple scratch-booking, copy-pasting, etc.
    Anyway, I know also an artist that cuts out magazine photos, attach it the the (real) canvas and paint over. He is a very good painter, he could paint those figures without problem. Is that cheating?
    Agnes Preszler
    webmaster - digital artist - journalist - translator

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007

    Crazy Fine Art

    As this discussion seems to me very interesting , even if my opinion was allready expressed I will say this : In Art , which is a subjectif matter, is more about the spirit than about the technique or the material,
    we live in a multiple world and each one have his reasons, still, there are only very few who are masters of spirit, technique and material, whatever is that material.
    I descovered few day ago a painter who seems to me to be a real artist;
    why that, real, I personally say real in first because I feel that he is entirely dedicated to his Art and what he says is not a show but real experience.
    perhaps some of you know him, I speak about Robert Bosler.

    If you have some time to "waste", look to this videos(on YOU Tube):

    Essentials for Satisfaction in Art - PART A

    Essentials for Satisfaction n Art - PART B

    Thrilling mad Fine Art seascape painting

    Those who like W.Turner will appreciate it but still
    even any digital artist will do if his sensibility fit to his paintings.

    I think that he speak like a real artist, in a very accurate way about spirit in Art and the material side.
    Last edited by Dany51; 11-02-2008 at 10:19 AM.
    "All are about quiet and light." Dany
    Daily Studio Notes , Daniela Ionesco-Fine Art

    I accept critics only from friends,
    how about You ?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego, Argentina
    I guess I opened a can of worms by not paying attention to the semantics of my statement. I was referring to the difference between digital and traditional media, nothing more, nothing less. Im sorry if I offended you priceless.

    There are many brilliantly done ArtRage "images or sketches" as you call them and they have equal validity to whatever mediocre traditional painting someone might do. Probably more.

    If you choose to denigrate digital art, why even bother entering a forum that is clearly dedicated to the digital media? We dont discriminate here: several take photos of their traditional paintings and post them here. We enjoy them and comment on them accordingly.

    Maybe you could lighten up a bit! Or maybe post something so we could enjoy your work as well.
    The only problem with humor is that no one takes it seriously.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    I guess I opened a can of worms by not paying attention to the semantics of my statement.
    I am sorry, I am more sensitive to words than to images, I find the expression strong; I don't know priceless more than you but he seems polite to me and willing to discuss, he is free to like less now and more later what he don't know yet.
    He even said , as an excuse:
    Am I just a grumpy old man?

    As I am not fluently English speaking, I personnaly interprete words as they are sed and they have a more powerful meaning as if I where speaking in a very banal way.

    I try hardly to not bring in here empty soul or empty phrases or nothingness and I did appreciate the humour and kindness of the actifs members in here.
    Is all that I have to say.
    "All are about quiet and light." Dany
    Daily Studio Notes , Daniela Ionesco-Fine Art

    I accept critics only from friends,
    how about You ?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Pennsylvania, USA
    I am not a professional artist, but I beleive that my Artrage work is art. I keep my work in a directory called, "My Paintings". And that is what they are.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts