|
So, you’re wondering, what’s the big good things...and big bad things?
First, two bad things. In digital you give up the unique, hard-to-counterfeit object, e.g., real oil paint on real canvas
that the artist actually touched. Consider photographs and lithographs, the world of multiple copies--digital is part of that
world. Many artists don’t number their prints; I’ve settled on editions of 10 as a compromise (there’s some
scarcity but I don’t have to charge much for the first numbers). A few artists paint on the digital print and call the
result mixed media. Then you are back to the unique object but it won’t have the permanence of oil or some other media.
Another bad thing is that computers are so powerful and perform so many neat tricks so quickly, people get two wrong
impressions: the machine is making the art; and any child can do it. Everybody knows that word processors won’t write
a word for you--they merely let you reformat your manuscript in lots of ways. A computer used for art is basically an image
processor--and lets you reformat an image in many different ways. The best analogy is with a digital keyboard. There’s
a lot of trick s in that thing, and the cost might be only $100. But if you’re not a musician, you won’t get music
out of it. Ditto with an image processor. As always, artists make art, and digital won’t change that.
Here’s some good things. Computers are fast; you can try lots of ideas quickly. It’s like having a dozen eager
assistants, mixing paints, priming canvas, painting backgrounds. Second, digital can do tricks that have no equivalent in
the analog world. And digital is very clean. Personally, I love working with sprays and dangerous chemicals; but you need
a lot of space and a good exhaust system. With digital you need a big desk.
|
Here’s the main caveat I would throw up to people thinking about digital. Are you comfortable with machines? I’ve
always loved science, technology and machinery. So it was easy for me--a lifelong fine artist and experimental artist--to
segue into digital. But if you hate machines, forget digital. If you prefer a brush in the hand and real paints on a palette,
ignore digital.
Going ahead anyway? Here’s the main advice I would give. Start with a small program or the beginner’s version
of a famous program (such as Photoshop Elements 3). Play with the software. Max it out.
To close, I’ll mention the most surprising thing about digital. To people on the outside it’s a weird new art
form. But people in the field know it’s already a huge sprawling frontier with dozens of outposts, many of which don’t
speak to each other. There’s photo manipulation, conceptual art, programming art, installations, video, computer-generated
art (where the goal is to announce the computer’s role), and several other varieties.
My theory (not widely accepted) is that the future of digital art is fine art as traditionally defined. My work is aimed
at exploring what that can look like. I see that my work is becoming more ”painterly” but I don’t want to
replicate oil painting--what’s the point? I want to create new kinds of beauty that can be made only with a computer.
Article 11>>>"What's All This Talk About Digital?" first appeared on CREATIVITY-PORTAL.COM in 2005.
--a more theoretical discussion of digital art can be found on ARTISTICNETWORK.NET, in an article titled TOWARD A DIGITAL
MANIFESTO.
--for a general introduction to digital art, visit Digital RISING, a blog for doctors, lawyers, collectors, and everyone else:
digitalrising.blogspot.com
|
