Mr Bloke Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Of course I meant computer art ... that was the whole point of my post! (OK ... I accidentally missed it in my initial list) Sorry, I'm a bit confused now Do you think that writing computer software is a form of 'art'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 I'll agree to disagree: it is not, within the meaning of the thread as postulated by the OP (who was comparing manual skills with human-machine interfaces). (FYI, Aardman's Chicken Run and The WereRabbit movies made very extensive use of digital post-processing techniques ). You are of course perfectly entitled to dislike/not appreciate 'digital art'. I appreciate art regardless of the medium or support (as very aptly summed up by Alcoblog), and each to their own. Coding is not an 'art' as such: it is an engineering technique, steeped in applied mathematics. Code is written to perform a utilitarian function upon data. For 'artistic software' (just like accounting software or CNC machining software or...), the coder, however, must be aware of the artist's requirements in order to implement relevant functionalities. You don't code a raytracer for a tax calculating application. This is (necessarily) an iterative process (coder makes, artists use and feedback, coder updates, artists use and feedback some more, round and round she goes). After all that, there will be elegant and inelegant ways to code (optimally/sub-optimally etc.), but still it's not really "art". but the early wallace and gromit was just done frame by frame. southpark was really really basic. I do appreciate digital art done well. I just don't appreciate it as much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 The difference between a software programme and a paint brush on canvas is that with a paint brush you have to physically apply a required pressure or movement to create a particular desired effect, and there-in lies the skill of traditional painting.In a software program, you usually have a myriad options for the paintbrush tool (besides a myriad further tools) in order to carry out different effects. There is as much skill involved in selecting and using the 'right' tool to achieve the 'right' effect (relative to the digital end product as imagined by the artist) as to use the 'right' paintbrush and apply the 'right' pressure (relative to the analog end product as imagined by the artist). It's just a different skill. Does not make one any worthier than the other, and reciprocally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birds Posted September 25, 2012 Author Share Posted September 25, 2012 Its the fact that with an oil painting there is always going to be significant differences. Every brush stroke is slightly off perfect (if that makes sense). Digital art can be pixel perfect, it takes away the:huh: (can't think of a word)??? Its the imperfections that make traditional art so beautiful to me. I'm sure anyone that feels the same way as me understands my completely inept description above...I am trying to avoid the use of the phrase "X-factor":hihi: There's bound to be an effect in a software programe that ensures no two brush strokes are precisely the same, thus realistically emulating traditional painting. Why dont they just paint in the traditional way in the first place?? Its like playing darts on a Wii. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerrangaroo Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 The difference between a software programme and a paint brush on canvas is that with a paint brush you have to physically apply a required pressure or movement to create a particular desired effect, and there-in lies the skill of traditional painting. The same applies with a tablet and pen, simply moving the pen will not give the desired effect, pressure comes into play along with speed of the stroke much as it would with a brush. No one here is saying that one is better than the other, it's whether or not they are appreciated. There's many examples of paint brush art that I have no time for, they do nothing on terms of exciting senses, the same with digital art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 There's bound to be an effect in a software programe that ensures no two brush strokes are precisely the same, thus realistically emulating traditional painting. Why dont they just paint in the traditional way in the place?? Its like playing darts on a Wii. I feel like thats just lazy painting:hihi: and theres no texture on a screen. I always want to touch oil paintings. They don't like that in museums and galleries I guess also torchered artist wondering round with ipad has less of a ring to it:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerrangaroo Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Its the fact that with an oil painting there is always going to be significant differences. Every brush stroke is slightly off perfect (if that makes sense). Digital art can be pixel perfect, it takes away the:huh: (can't think of a word)??? Its the imperfections that make traditional art so beautiful to me. I'm sure anyone that feels the same way as me understands my completely inept description above...I am trying to avoid the use of the phrase "X-factor":hihi: I don't disregard traditional methods of painting or put digital above I just have an appreciation of the end product in both examples. Digital opens up an entirely new world and way of producing pictures and makes available a way of creating effects that a brush would struggle to do. In that respect it is a superior tool but only in the right hands, doubtless it cannot add the emotion felt in some of the masters works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerrangaroo Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 I feel like thats just lazy painting:hihi: and theres no texture on a screen. I always want to touch oil paintings. They don't like that in museums and galleries I guess also torchered artist wondering round with ipad has less of a ring to it:hihi: Are you like that with sculptures as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Are you like that with sculptures as well? Only the male sculptures! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloke Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 ... I appreciate art regardless of the medium or support (as very aptly summed up by Alcoblog)... 'Art' is the generic word for expression in many different mediums, not just painting. This encompasses painting, drawing, sculpture, photography, music, dance, writing, cooking etc... and each to their own. Coding is not an 'art' as such: it is an engineering technique, steeped in applied mathematics. Code is written to perform a utilitarian function upon data... Hmmm I still don't understand how you can agree that cooking is an art form but writing computer software isn't! (It's becoming a bit of an art form following your editted posts) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.