Digital vs. Traditional media
I should be getting a pretty nice tax return this year, and I think I'm gonna upgrade my computer, buy one of those pen-mouse thingies, and start doing digital art. I've spent a lot of time lately looking at the newest art being produced in my genre, and looking for work, and apparently about 75% of the latest high-quality sci-fi/fantasy art being produced is in the form of digital "paintings". I had no idea the medium had gotten so popular lately, since I generally make it a point to completely ignore current trends in art. But it's kind of hard to ignore it when the latest software, in capable hands, can greatly reduce the time it takes to produce a "painting". As well as reduce costs, after the initial investment in hard- and software pays for itself. Which makes it hard to stay competitive with digital artists. Not to mention the fact that a lot of art directors now specifically ask for digital art, even if they want something that looks exactly like a traditional painting, and they're not always fooled when I try to tell them that I produce my work digitally.
This all kind of sucks for me, and it's not because it'd take any time to learn how to make digital paintings. I already use Photoshop for post-production work. I've been reluctant to make the switch to digital because I don't like computers. Never have. Sure, they're often the best way to communicate and do a number of other things, which is why I'm sitting here now. But I drive too, even though I don't like it. It's just the best way to get where I'm going. I just don't like staring at a monitor and clicking on a mouse or keyboard for hours at a time. I find interacting with a wider variety of objects more stimulating. I'm sure as technology progresses, there will be a time, probably within my lifetime, that the digital world is as rich, raw, diverse, unpredictable, and fulfilling as the real world. But we're so far from that, I'd rather wait till we're closer before I hop on the bandwagon.
Guess I've got no choice, though, for reasons I've already stated. Going digital definitely makes it much easier to produce art, but God, it's so artificial. I think I feel just like a portrait painter of the mid 1800's, who spent decades perfecting his craft, when he first learns of the invention of the camera.
"Wait, lemme get this straight. Any idiot can just point this thing at someone, click a button, and they've instantly produced a portrait more accurate than any ever painted? Jesus Ass-Fucking Christ, what have I been doing with my life?"
It just shouldn't be that easy. I'm disappointed that producing art has become so easy. Not because I care that the medium is so powerful that pretty much anyone can do a realistic digital painting, and critics now have to separate the good from the bad based on vague, nebulous qualities like composition and theme, the way they do with photographs. What bothers me is that I like the challenge of doing it the traditional way. It's fun because it's difficult. It's more exciting when mistakes take hours to fix, instead of a few keystrokes. I'm afraid I'll feel exactly like someone who juggles chainsaws if he were told he had to switch to fruit.
Plus I don't like computers.
So much for having a fun job.
Hell, fuck that. On second thought, I think I'm gonna stick with painting.
This all kind of sucks for me, and it's not because it'd take any time to learn how to make digital paintings. I already use Photoshop for post-production work. I've been reluctant to make the switch to digital because I don't like computers. Never have. Sure, they're often the best way to communicate and do a number of other things, which is why I'm sitting here now. But I drive too, even though I don't like it. It's just the best way to get where I'm going. I just don't like staring at a monitor and clicking on a mouse or keyboard for hours at a time. I find interacting with a wider variety of objects more stimulating. I'm sure as technology progresses, there will be a time, probably within my lifetime, that the digital world is as rich, raw, diverse, unpredictable, and fulfilling as the real world. But we're so far from that, I'd rather wait till we're closer before I hop on the bandwagon.
Guess I've got no choice, though, for reasons I've already stated. Going digital definitely makes it much easier to produce art, but God, it's so artificial. I think I feel just like a portrait painter of the mid 1800's, who spent decades perfecting his craft, when he first learns of the invention of the camera.
"Wait, lemme get this straight. Any idiot can just point this thing at someone, click a button, and they've instantly produced a portrait more accurate than any ever painted? Jesus Ass-Fucking Christ, what have I been doing with my life?"
It just shouldn't be that easy. I'm disappointed that producing art has become so easy. Not because I care that the medium is so powerful that pretty much anyone can do a realistic digital painting, and critics now have to separate the good from the bad based on vague, nebulous qualities like composition and theme, the way they do with photographs. What bothers me is that I like the challenge of doing it the traditional way. It's fun because it's difficult. It's more exciting when mistakes take hours to fix, instead of a few keystrokes. I'm afraid I'll feel exactly like someone who juggles chainsaws if he were told he had to switch to fruit.
Plus I don't like computers.
So much for having a fun job.
Hell, fuck that. On second thought, I think I'm gonna stick with painting.