When I tell people how much I love the show Lost their response most of the time is “I hate that show.” When I question them as to why, their follow up answer is “because I don’t understand it. The same could be said for most art forms. People could sit through two hours of amazing acting and story arc in a movie theater, but if the ending is subpar, they despise the entire film. Those art forms are about the entire journey. When it comes to fine artists I hate their work because I do not understand what they are going for. Maybe the problem I have is that I do not know that back-story of the piece. In a film, the audience can see the progression of the work. The same can be said for a music album. It is a journey from the first song to the last. I feel that art, and painting in particular does not do that for me. Personally, I only see what is in front of me. I do not know (or really care) what the artists mood was when the piece was done.
Marcel Duchamp created “ready-mades” to break away from the rule of artistic tradition. The example I am aware of is the Bicycle Wheel. It is supposed to engage the mind instead of the eye. I really tried to broaden the scope of my thought when dealing with this piece. I honestly do not get it. To me it is just a wheel on a stool. And that is what aggravates me about art such as this. I find no symbolism in the piece. I feel like he is just messing with the audience. The only comparison that comes to mind is Andy Kaufman. Everything was a gimmick to him and he found an angle to go with.
I do find beauty in painting and appreciate what goes into making them. I hate to use this as an example but I watched Bob Ross on PBS as a child. While he only did landscape paintings, the technique he used blew my mind. His finished product looked so detailed yet it only took him half an hour to complete the piece. Personally, I find that is real art compared to the idiot who threw elephant shit on his version of the Virgin Mary some years back. That piece was just for shock value. Much like Marilyn Mason did in the late 90’s.
Most artists are born with artistic talent. Can the same be said for digital artists? A digital artist might have the ability to create an idea in their head, but they still need to learn a skill set in order to translate that vision. No one is born knowing how to use Photoshop or to create code. I would say that knowing how to code is, in itself an art form. You basically have to learn an entire language to achieve your goal.
I really do not agree with the view that digital art needs to be monetized in order to be accepted as a true art form. How many amazing traditional artists have never sold a piece in their entire life? How many fine art majors do absolutely nothing with their degrees? The Internet is both the gift and the curse for digital artists. On one hand, digital artists can post their pieces online for people throughout the world to see. Yet, their work can be duplicated and taken for free. There are some ways to try to combat the theft such as pay walls and things of that nature. Most of the time, those deterrents keep the regular audience away as well.
I feel that digital art will take over in the future. People who never dreamed of becoming artists will be playing around on their computers and will create something beautiful. My nephew just got a computer for his birthday and he is eight. The first thing he did was open up Paint and just start drawing. If kids have the tools, anything is possible.
John Locke from Lost Photoshop Art
Interesting Book That I Am Going To Pick Up.
Cool Visualizer Sound Program
