painting software

is it a painting? i took an old drawing and finished it with "artrage" painting software...

Because you didn't PAINT it.

Is it "ART"? I think it is, but only you can give
a definitive 'Yes or No' to that question.

"ART" is a matter of INTENT; it is not limited by
the boundaries of 'materials' or 'technique'.

I mentioned earlier that I SCAN pencil sketches
to play with on the computer...
as an example, I sketched this in pencil:



And I turned it into THIS with my copy of PhotoShop5:



Is it "ART" ? No, it isn't.
It's a pretty cool example of MATERIALS & TECHNIQUE, sure;
the 'material' was computer software, and the 'technique' was
my use of it.

But it isn't "ART" because it doesn't mean a damn thing.
It was just an experiment, a test I did in case I ever wanted
to use that technique to actually SAY something.

If that image you posted actually MEANS something to you,
then it's ART.
It's ART because you SAY it's art.

Sincerely,
R. Mutt, esq.

i think your little doo hickey is art...becouse it started as nothing but a thought in your head and you made it real using tools at hand...and it serves no real puropose except to make people react to it...

the reason i asked if it really was a painting...is becouse painting can be done in a myriad of different mediums...egg tempura, water color, oils, etc...now with the advent of computers and the dawn of digitization, will the next new painting medium be pixels...

it has/is happening with photography...no more film and no more "developing" all in pixels...

maybe not with our generation...but will my son one day paint a masterpiece with just a computer and the right software?

'Art" is INTENT; form is irrelevent.

My little doohickey was not created to "make people react to it",
it was simply an experiment performed as a personal learning experience.

It is not "art" anymore than the pants I am wearing right now,
which I wiped a few brushes on while I painted the Third Horseman.

If I ever make it public, if I show it to someone in some
context wherein it conveys a message, THEN it would be "art".

But it has no MEANING; it bears no MESSAGE from me to the world...
so it's not ART. It is just an IMAGE.

It is not art because I _SAY_ it's not art.

KnowhutImean?

it is the age old argument...is it art because you say it is...or because people perceive it to be art...so it could not be art...but if someone sees it and perceives it to be art...then it transforms and becomes art...what if you do something and no one perceives it as art? is it still art because you say so...it's an interesting conflict...earlier someone posted a thread asking what is art...no one replied really...but it is a very old question...and a very interesting one to toss about...

I guess there's a certain truth to that.
If I believe that BEAUTY is in the eye
of the beholder,(and I do) then I have
to admit the same is true for ART.

so now let'd discuss...

is it art? or is it cafts?:evilgrin:

Art vs. Craft? You're own yer own with that one! :hide:

I'll leave definitions of art aside and focus on your question about whether it is painting or not.
I do a lot of digital painting, and I've wrestled with whether or not it's legitimate "painting" or not.

Here's my own thoughts and arbitrary definition. I've decided that using digital paint tools IS painting IF one does as much of it by hand and with as little cheating as possible. Then it is similar to the variations among non-digital tools. It's just using a different medium and material, like the difference between a watercolor and an oil painting.

First, it does look like your picture is a painting, because you created the picture and did the physical work of finishing it up.

What it boils down to, IMO, is whether the process relies on the work of others or if it is the result of your own eye, ideas, skills and physical creative process.

By painting "by hand" I mean that you manually conceive of and create the shapes and do the finish work manually using a mouse or digital pen as you would a physical brush or pen. Or starting with a pencil sketch, scanning it in and manually painting over that digitally.

By "cheating" I mean using automated processes, such as settings that automatically create pre-defined textures or shapes for you, or which create lighting and color shapes.

For example, cheating is when you paint a hillside by making a raw shape, and then easily fill it in with a foliage brush that automatically lays down the look of leaves. But if you use a straight brush (or variant of traditional brush) to create the colors and shadings and variations of form yourself, that's genuine painting.

It's not necessarily either/or, of course. I think it's still painting if you tweak the colors or other minor refinements. The degree is what defines it.

In other words, it's like the difference between writing on a typewriter and a word processing software. The word processor can make the process of writing much easier, and it gives a lot more flexibility and ability to correct mistakes. But it is still writing, as long as you are using your own thoughts and words. Same with digital paint software.

I've seen work done digitally that is every bit as much of a painting as any oil painting I've ever seen. You can see many examples at sites like conceptart.org. Then I've also seen people use photos and put them through a hand full of filters in photoshop or painter and call them a digital painting. Too me if someone puts the time and effort into a piece it doesn't matter if it's on a hard drive or on a canvas it's a painting IMHO. I'd just put the word digital in front of painting for anything I do in the computer. Some times I start with a pencil drawing, scan it and paint and other times I work traditionally and make a physical painting.

Sadly there seems to be a backlash still against digital work and I'm fairly certain it is because of the fact that there are people who spend time figuring out what filters and manipulations to put a photo through and call it a digital painting simply for the praise or profit they might get instead of putting the time into learning how to draw and paint and express themselves in a way that's visually appealing. Anyway, I'll stop now before I go on and on.

I've worked as a graphic designer for over 10 years and used to consider digital illustration to be beneath the work you could produce with and actual pencil or brush. And I agree that most of that discrimination was due to the fact that I simply didn't know how to push the software to give me the results I wanted. I think the mouse itself is also part of the problem. Here's a piece I did a few months back using Photoshop 7:



And I can't stress enough that if you want to really see what you can accomplish with digital art software, and you're serious about it, purchase a Wacom drawing tablet. Compared with a mouse, it's night and day.

If I had to use a mouse I'd never use the computer except maybe to block in color. Before I found Wacoms I tried using a mouse and doing art and there's no quicker way to get carpal tunnel than that.

I'll admit though that I'm still not that comfortable switching through the Photoshop palettes with the pen tool. I still have to keep that mouse handy.

Luckily though, I'm left handed. So I'll usually use the mouse with my right hand to navigate through the tool boxes and draw with my left.

You've got some nice pieces yourself! :) Another good site you need to check out for digital art is cgtalk.com

I go to cgtalk fairly often as well. Any time I need some inspiration or some eye candy I go and browse those two sites.

I keep trying to learn the shortcuts for tools. I've got most of them memorized though there's still a few that I forget.

What software did you use?

I can't answer your question.

But I did just download the artrage2 free software and like it alot. Thank you for mentioning it.