May I Rant About Digital Art Please?

I've started digitally "inking" the sketch from my last post in Illustrator & thought you might like to take a look at my progress. You can see from the scan of the original sketch (acting as template) that I've made a few adjustments...eyebrows lower, eyes smaller, nose narrower, jawline fuller...but basically it's the same gal! Eventually, she's going to be gocco printed on vintage paper & become part of a mixed media piece. I'll show you when it's done!

Anyway, the painstaking task of vectoring my sketch got me thinking about digital art & its reputation amongst traditional artists.

I hang around the Etsy forums waaay more than I should (when I'm supposed to be working!) & have been frustrated on a number of occasions by peoples' attitude towards digital art. I'm referring to the viewpoint that digital art is somehow less legitimate than traditional art. What's particularly frustrating, is when the people who hold this opinion know nothing about digital process whatsoever.

There seems to be this misconception that digital art is just a few mere magical mouse-clicks away! Also that it's somehow inferior because it's not "handmade" (the Etsy catch cry) & is "cold" & "soulless".

Well, I can tell you now, I use the same pair of hands, set of eyes & brain to make digital artwork as I do when using paint, ink or pencil. Furthermore, digital techniques are not as intuitive as putting pencil to paper - it's not so easy to just pick it up & hit the ground running - it took me a very long time to fully grasp the technical aspect of making pictures digitally & to finally be able to accurately render the ideas in my head. This is all contrary to the commonly held opinion that digital art is somehow easier to make than traditional art, that it takes less time, talent & skill.

And back to the "handmadeness" aspect again... Despite the fact that I've just argued that in its own way, digital art is just as "hands on" as traditional art, I just want to add that technique & craftsmanship are only part of the picture when it comes to making art. What about the more cerebral considerations: developing your concept, making your colour choices, composition, subject matter, & all those other decisions you make about how best to render your ideas? I think, especially on Etsy, with its fixation on "handmade", that some artists get so caught up with the craftsmanship of making art that they forget the conceptual side is equally important. Maybe if they considered this, they'd start to understand that computers are no different to any other tool.

I guess part of the reason digital art still gets a raw deal is because it's still relatively new, but why not embrace whatever tools & technologies are at hand? Once upon a time, the camera obscura was seen as the devil's work, & there are techniques & media embraced by the art world these days, that were once considered too "lowbrow" or commercial.

I'm a believer in using whatever it takes to communicate your ideas, whether it be a charred stick on a cave wall or a MacBook Pro.

Comments

[Tepimade]

Very interesting thoughts you share here.

The more I do digital work the more I appreciate how much personal, hands-on, concentrated effort goes into creating a finished piece. Myself, I think that some of the "bad rap" of digital artwork has to do with the end-product. The quality of a digital print-out of the same file could vary wildly (not to mention includes many different potential output media). The field is so new that it is difficult to pin down a standard--for example for printed matter, there is not yet standard I am aware of for paper, ink or printer that would be widely known or easily accessed info for non-expert collectors or novices, and the technology is still changing rapidly.

I think this distracts people from focusing on what was involved in making the image itself. It's unfortunate that makes things difficult for a person like yourself who has high standards for the quality of the output as well as putting significant effort into the image.

I don't know the history very well but I can imagine that the field of photography must have gone through a similar phase prior to important technological improvements (in paper, emulsion, development), a period of adjusting to the newness of the medium, and the establishment of some parameters for the final product--that presumably freed people up to focus on the photo itself and learn to appreciate what goes into that artistically, intellectually, technically. Assuming I'm right, we can also conclude that field of photography worked through these challenges as it's been largely accepted in the art world. Similarly, new types of paints, techniques have with time become established and recognized as being difficult to master--even those that might have been dismissed early on, even marketed overtly as "easier than oils" from a technical standpoint.

It may also be that appreciation will increase as more people have an opportunity to try digital art for themselves. Again, I don't know much about the field, but I imagine one could argue that wide availability of cameras might be credited for making people realize it's not so easy to create stunning photos as it might have seemed to them before they gave it a try.

There will always be some--"my kid could paint that" "I could've taken that photo"--who just don't get it. But I am hopeful that people will be have a better appreciation for the craft of digital art in the future.

[Cicada studio]

I am with you all the way on this topic.

[From Tiki with Love]

I actually like your adjustments on the digital illustration better than the original sketch! It is such an improvement and all possible because of the world of digital!

[puglyfeet]

Great essay. Bravo!

[Linda Crispell]

Don't forget that Andy Warhol was criticized for not producing "handmade" art. I don't think anyone would make that claim today. You are ahead of the masses with digital technology, one day they will catch up to you and the criticism will seem ridiculous too!
Linda

[Junkyard Sam]

WELL SAID.
Don't worry, digital art is here to stay. And as an artist, you're on the right path... Consider that the most important art movements have ALWAYS been questioned and doubted by the mainstream...

Ultimately, digital isn't better or worse than traditional. It's just different.

With analog, the artist is more restricted by the mediums - and the mediums are a big part of the end result. (i.e. no undo button, etc.)

With digital - there are more possibilities for the artist to truly get what he or she visualizes in his mind onto the paper. (aside from limitations of ink color - like no silver or gold for example.)

What's annoying is how many of the biggest "anti-digital" people consider themselves liberal and open-minded but are really quite narrow and conservative in their views.

Also, it's possible for the end result of digital to be very handmade in the end... One of each of my print editions is made into an archival mounted master print on canvas. It's a unique treatment that only one of the edition gets.

In fact - the mounting process alone takes longer than a lot of popular traditional artists spend on their entire work, so yeah - I really don't appreciate the dismissive attitude of these closeminded people.

Thanks for your post. It really hit home. =)

[Sarah]

I agree with you on the effort factor. When I use Photoshop it can take me just as long as creating something using a sketchpad and a pencil. It has also taken me quite awhile to figure out how to use certain tools to get the effects I want.

I'm also an art teacher and when I teach digital art to grade 8's it is a long and laborious task. Much longer then teaching painting, printing or even ceramics. They get soooo confused with saving, opening files, cropping, moving, selecting, re-sizing...... the list is endless. Most of them can't even remember to keep their rulers on the screen so they can see how big their image is! It's a very time-consuming thing to teach and often most of them are disappointed saying it would be more fun to just draw what they wanted on paper.

I've also been teaching a Multimedia unit to Grade 10's for the first time this year and that has been really difficult. Firstly the kids thought they would create EVERYTHING on the computer, so when I explained we would start with sketching ideas some of them literally curled into balls and started rocking in the fetal position because that was "too hard Miss". They thought they were in for a 'bludge' computers subject and would make pictures of people with arms coming out of their heads all year.

Now 3 terms in, I'm starting to see that few of them have ANY artistic talent to speak of, which is severely limiting what they can create. They think that digital art is finding pictures in Google, opening them in Photoshop and changing things a bit and that's it. Masterpiece created. The reality, which I'm finding through researching digital artists (eg Magicjelly), is that a very fine balance of using traditional hand-drawn techniques and digital manipulation is what the key is to getting digital art right.

Digital artists deserve huge amounts of recognition in my opinion. Anyone can pick up a brush and spew something out. If you don't put in the time and effort making digital art, the work can just look so amateur and dodgy.

[gemma jones]

wow! you really got people fired up there! its true tho ... it is about the WHOLE end product. and tools are means to an end. and there are different, specifically appropriate mediums for different messages/narratives ... but at the end of the day if you don't have a sound conceptual base or idea to communicate - it actually doesn't even matter how skilled you are with a mouse or a paintbrush. true. with you all the way x x x x x

[Gaia]

I love your work and I really appreciate seeing the process behind it!

It's true, there's a certain amount of discussion about digital art vs. traditional. Once upon a time, I was among those who were sure they'd never touch a computer and I was conviced that nothing could give me more pleasure than brushes and watercolors... :)
Time often gives people a second chance and I'm glad I had mine. Now I spend as much time with my Wacom tablet as I used to do with watercolors and I find in digital art everyday a new interesting challenge. You are very right, computers don't fill in the gap of talent and will never help to fix mistakes like a magical wand. The challenges of color and compositions are the same as with a traditional tool.

Hope more people will eventually understand this and I think the best way to do it, is to try for themselves! :)

Keep up the lovely work!! The hair style and detail is really great!!

ciao,

Gaia

[Kelly]

Here! Here! Well said!

[Melissa]

Yes. Yes! YES!!! Amen. Thanks Karena for releasing your rant!

Can I just say that the way you use LINES is so beautiful? Your image is stunning, really.

[Shannon]

I for one have a deep respect for anyone that produces digital art because I, for the life of me, cannot figure to do it myself. I try, I get frustrated, and I resort to settling for the less than black lines.

Keep digitalizing your work, it looks fabulous.

[Laurie]

Yes indeed sister, as I sit here late at night trying to finish a project for a deadline (tomorrow) that I just received direction on this afternoon. Digital art IS very labor intensive. Getting through the concept phase, actually producing the art in whichever program it suits best is not just the click of a mouse or hitting a key. I hear you loud and clear and totally agree with your "rant".
Thankyou

[Johanna]

Rant on girl! I totally understand what you mean. Especially when the ones poo pooing it don't know what they're talking abut. When I tell people I'm a jewelry designer they're like "oh you string beads". Or ..."but you didn't make the components used in the necklace".
::sheesh::
Some people have no clue! Thanks for cluing them in :)

[merrilee]

well said and beautiful work!

[Pamela]

you are awesome!
love your art love your blog love your words!!!
love, pamma
;)

[heather]

Thanks for sticking up for digital art!

[Cindy]

I've been creating digital illustrations since 1988 and all I can say is that a computer is a tool just like a pencil. You still have to have talent to make it do what you want it to do!

[daisy janie / scoutie girl]

I agree wholeheartedly. I try to create in both, and each is fraught with its own challenges. Love your blog!

[eileen]

I had this conversation with my 14 year old son yesterday. He is just getting into graphic art. He does beautiful hand done characters but gets very frustrated when he tries to work them on his computer finding it much more time consuming than hand work.

As a Graphic Artist who left the business just as computers were coming on the scene I have to say that I am one of the hold outs for hand done work. I realize that there is a lot of great art being done on computers, and I have to say that I have very limited knowledge of what can be done on computers, but what I've seen in the quality of type art (my speciality)is very clunky. I don't know if it is just the limitations of the medium or the lack of perserverance of the artist. My main worry is that this will become the standard and people will begin to forget that fine quality which can be attained by hand. A long time ago I had a similar conversation with a musician in a music store just as ditial pianos where coming on the market. He also worried that the quality of the music would be compromised. I don't know that much about music either but it seems to me that what is being done digitally in music is wonderful and new and that I need to stop comparing apple to oranges. I'm hoping as my son continues to learn more about the medium he will learn that each has it own challenges and rewards.

[emily]

this is a great post. thank you.

& your work is beautiful :: digital, or otherwise ;)

e

[Jw]

Everyone has their own prejudices with regards to art/media... well, everything, really. But art is what we're talking about.

I studied architecture in college, and when I started, hand drawing was still the first thing we learned. The idea is that there was a connection between the hand and the eye that allowed ideas to be expressed freely, and that the mouse did not allow for the same expression.

This is somewhat true when first learning anything... as a previous commenter said, teaching children digital art is harder than painting because they have to not only learn about art but about a complex interface at the same time.

One of my classmates during this first year of architecture school was the quintessential "computer dork". He'd been a computer whiz since before the Internet existed, and to him, the mouse was an extension of his hand... a more precise, comfortable extension.

He sucked at drawing by hand. By his own admission, he was terrible. When he was forced to do hand drawing in school, his work suffered. When he finally convinced the professors to let him draw in the computer, he excelled. The art of his work improved because he was allowed to work in the media he was comfortable in.

Most of my work is digital now, though I don't think I would be as good at it if I hadn't learned analog techniques first, or if I didn't regularly experiment with real-world media in my spare time. Painting in Photoshop takes all the skill and technique that painting on canvas does, really. Both can turn out "cold" and "sterile" results, too ;)

[Flora]

I am totally agreeing with you 100%. It takes a lot of works to create artworks digitally too, as well as craftsmanship. You really need to know your equipment and know how to manipulate it digitally to achieve what you want. It's really not that easy for just anyone. For me, computer has always been my medium; I am familiar with it and I can pretty much create whatever I want with it, just like traditional artist with their paints. It's just another tool. Even though I am currently wanting to learn how to paint using paints and brushes, I will never put down computer or think digital artworks are less valuable than conventional artworks.

[Claudia]

All I know is I spent ALL DAY working on the
Photo Shop segment of my art quilt, subject: corsets. Since I can't draw, I use photo shop and illustrator. So what? It takes all my wits to produce my art, and I'm not ashamed for a second that I use a computer to do much of it.

According to those idiots, Maggie Taylor is not an artist. Snort, yeah, right.
http://www.maggietaylor.com/flash.html

[Rocki]

I just have to comment about your blog - it is AWEsome! Wow!

Found you via etsy forums... when I should have been working ;)

Rocki