Artificial digital art vs. real digital art

Loom, by Tomi Dufva

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

I have been wondering for quite a long time that why is it thatI prefer programming as a way to create digital drawings and not just simply use some clever drawing programs, like painter or illustrator. And there is some great drawing programs out there, that can mimic real life mediums and go well beyond them. Like Painter with it’s watery watercolors and liquid inks. Somehow digital paintings just feels wrong, even if they are nice programs and the works produced with them fairly good. Come to think of it, I have never seen any convincing abstract piece of art that has been made with such tools. There is some very nice figurative works, Like Mikkö Ijäs’s iPad drawings. But I havent come across some nice abstract paintings or other digital artworks made with such tools. There is some, but they’re probably ment to be just some filling in website or similar. Obviously the answer is simple: they are just copying real life media. They are not original. And it can be felt. Hardly ever have I seen digitally made paintings that would move me. They cant, because theyre superficial. Abstract art is all about the media, it shows the quality of the media, like the material of oil colours or the light of watercolors and that way it also conveys some larger intents of the artists. Digital copies don’t do that, they are mere copies trying to be original. Still, coded digital art moves me. I always find and feel it interesting. Painting by code. It feels natural. And that it is: programming is the very core of digital. Well this is simple thing really. Just something I think of importance to ponder on.

Trackbacks

Comments are now closed for this article.