But is it Art?
History has shown that whenever there has been a new style or trend in art, that there sometimes is a public “backlash” against it. Take for example the plight of the impressionists. They were forced to start their own galleries as the traditional houses would not show them. The same can be said about digital art. Even on some of the forums that I’ve posted my work on, I’ve gotten questions about how the work was produced. There seems to be prejudice against images that were produced from photos, as opposed to pictures made from “scratch”. Even my own wife has accused me of “cheating” on these pieces.
Instead, let’s consider the creative process involved. A traditional artist either conceives something directly from his imagination, or uses the scene in front of him as inspiration. Then they use their skills and tools to craft the image that they pre-visualized in their minds. The process for the photographer is surprisingly similar. When I come upon an interesting subject, I also pre-visualize what the final image might look like. Then I use the tools and skills that I have to craft the final painting. The differences between the two involve the spontaneity that I might conceive the image, and the tools used.
So ultimately the only thing that should really matter is the image itself. What makes a successful art piece? Hopefully it invokes a feeling, or perhaps an idea that the artist is trying to convey. So if my images invoke a feeling or a reaction, then the creative process has worked as planned. Ansel Adams once said that “photography is a way of telling the viewer how you feel about what you see”. If I can do that, then I have indeed created “art”.
Here is an interesting essay on digital art. This should really get you thinking…