"Everything has an end.
Except sausages, which have two..."
>Yes there is, there are Professionals and there are amateurs.
I disagree and agree with this. I think there are pros and amateurs, but I don't think the hardware seaprates them.
>an Amateur clicks and uses cheats to get his work done
True; but I think it shows in the work. That's why it's important to separate the ideas of "good" and "enjoyable." People tend to confuse them, so anything they like is de-facto good.
>a Pro critically thinks what he needs to do to make his design work.
THAT'S the key! There's a plan and a vision.... but I don't think it's how you get to your end-state that makes the dif; it's where that end-state is. Dip pen, computer, markers, finger paints.... it doesn't matter if it gets you where you want to go.
>Learning how to traditionally do art is how you understand how the Masters did it.
Yeah, but it's not a religion. You don't learn colour theory or rotations or perspective or which end of the pen goes in the ink because of some moral imperative or dogmatic tradition: you learn them becuse they work.
>once you master traditional you can then work in Digital if you so choose to do it.
This feels so bad to me 'cos I don't like computers, but.... there isn't a heirarchy of tool use. I don't have to master acrylics before being "allowed" to use watercolour or oils. They're different techniques and you can do them in whatever order you want, depending on what you hope to achieve. They share a lot of universal ideas.... like the aforementioned colour theory.... but they're not one interconnected whole. Oil is different from watercolour. Computer art is just another tool, separate from the rest.
I think part of the problem folks around here have with the CGI is that you've never seen any that doesn't suck. Overwrought movie effects and crappy comic colour that makes everything look plastic are the norm. I've seen some great computer stuff. (Mostly from Japan and Europe.) I've also seen how readily it becomes a crutch too.... but I've seen that with other techniques too. (Remember the 90's, where "draw like Jim Lee = success?")
>The end results may be the same
I don't think they are, but I don't think the tools or techniques denote that.
>but in the end the Pro will always do better because he can do IT ALL THE TIME over and over
Maybe; but everyone has an off day, or dries up.
>he or she is trained to come up with new ideas that the amateur can not do
THIS I disagree with a bunch. I think a lot of pros suffer from the need to do things "right," and end up doing the same things over and over. But this goes to the heart of my point: it's the underlying idea that I think marks the worth of the work.
To me the debate about using digital mediums is different than what enyawd was originally talking about, because even if this was before computers existed he'd have to know how to create artwork to spec if he wanted to take on commercial work.
On professionalism, I think it's extremely important for professionals to understand technical skills that support their work. Look at it this way - serious professional musicians don't just play nice music - they have an understanding of the technical aspects of recording as well.
As for the debate about digitally created art instead of traditionally created art -
I can see how using digital techniques can make an artist lazy and cut corners - like correcting mistakes or making alterations could curb someone's drive to be able to master their craft without those techniques. You could say the same thing for people who use erasers though - there's not much difference - it's just another extension of eraser technology.
To me there's always going to be different camps of professional artists - there's the people who want to play with every tool in the toolbox - and there are the people who find creativity giving themselves limitations. To me they're just different paths - and I'm probably somewhere in between the two paths.
I agree that learning natural mediums and historical theory makes you a far better artist - but I think someone with those skills can work in any medium and do great work.
Last edited by Brazoo; Apr 25, '12 at 12:29 PM.
You can work in non-digital mediums and stay in the creative shallow end too - I think the difference is that a lot of people learn the basics of computer graphics and THINK they're in the deep end.
From what I've observed.
This artist is a great example - from what I know, Jonathan Bergeron didn't touch computers for years, but got a Wacom tablet and does incredible digital work now:
Here's some of his recent traditional paintings: The art of JONATHAN BERGERON - 2011 Paintings
Here's some of his digital art: The art of JONATHAN BERGERON - Digital art
Last edited by Brazoo; Apr 25, '12 at 3:52 PM.
Ask Roberto(Blue Meanie) if he wants to own a REAL comic page or just have a high quality print of a comic book page......and see what he says....
Seriously, it's not like there's a button in Photoshop that makes stuff look great. (Although we all know LENSE FLARE makes everything better...) If you have no sense of color or composition or proportion or whatever the computer doesn't help you. You are either an artist or you aren't, the medium doesn't matter. And when you can do something 100 times faster on a computer doesn't that help with the whole creative process?
I have a turn of the century travel poster on my living room wall. I stare at it all the time and marvel that it was done without Photoshop layers. The artist was undoubtedly talented and his technique with his materials was amazing, I could never touch it. And if he was working today he'd be using Photoshop and blowing people's minds.
I'm paraphrasing a friend of mine here: Anyone can learn to draw. Drawing is just a skill. It takes talent to do something good with it.
Just to pull the curtain back on this... Welcome to the age of influence rather than persuasion. This contest isn't really about the art (although crowd sourcing should in fact be the major topic all PRO designers and illustrators should be debating right now rather than tools).
I think the traditional Vs digital tools debate is moot. Even if you create traditionally, you need to be able to deliver digitally, we covered this. MegoScott is a terrific example of an artist who's job requires him to work digitally because that is where the animation industry has gone (and for the most part, monthly comics for the majors as well when it comes to colouring)... So if you don't work digitally, you don't get the work, Is that correct Scott? By definition, the difference between pro and amateur is that you get paid for your work.
The true purpose of these kind of contests is viral marketing... By entering into them and telling your friends to vote on them, you are also telling them that there is a Dark Shadows movie coming out starring Johnny Depp. The folks running this know that they will be receiving a ridiculous amount of unusable entries for their purposes, but it will be for the express purpose of directing traffic to their website or affiliate, not discovering the next big talent. As Earth 2 Chris mentioned in his Dark Knight thread, it's actually not votes that will ultimately decide... So why do they want you to ask all of your friends and family to vote? If you are inclined to enter, you are likely already a fan with a similar demographic of peers. Sad to say, but if you can't figure it out, you are likely outside the target demographic anyways. Particularly if this is the deviantArt crowd we are talking about.
Remember when they used to announce open casting calls for roles? They had them for any number of in development movies and tv shows. I seem to recall Wonder Woman had one years ago. But that s not how Hollywood generally works when casting a lead... Even if you are an unknown, to even get a real shot you need an agent to book you an audition. However, it creates a marketing opportunity that grabbed headlines and gave you a visual and a bite for Entertainment tonight.
Similarly, there is already an inter-company network of internal and external professional illustrators that they can call in to churn out t-shirt designs and happy meal packaging without going through the trouble and hassles of holding a contest. Seriously... they have Jose Garcia Lopez, do I need to say anymore?
So... They do not need to persuade you to tell your friends... They are influencing you to market for them. For free. Welcome to the world of social media.
Last edited by samurainoir; Apr 25, '12 at 4:55 PM.
For me, as long as something is nice and I like it I don't care if it's been painted or digitally created.
Paintings are just a mess of color designed to fool your eyes --- so is digital art.