Fake Rocks and Fake Art

Home / Education / ARChives / Discussions

Fake Rocks and Fake Art


Published on before 2005

Maybe there was a tone of implication, if so it was borne of my experiences - unskilled persons from Jr High to old farts are grabbing a mouse (or pen) and declaring themselves artists. There 10 million painters in America and they are not all pros. But there exist hundreds of skilled and trained professionals producing impressive work - work that is selling daily, work that is winning prizes, work that is hung in museums and homes.

For all the hoopla over digital art - I've yet to see the good stuff, the stuff you want to buy, the stuff fit for museums, etc.

If that quality or caliber of work does not exist, then do we blame the machines, the programs, or the persons using them? I don't know, but some part of the required formula is missing from that equation or else we'd see great digital art everywhere; not just rumours of great digital art. The impressive stuff done for movies is done very slowly by hundreds of hands. If this is the case, how easy is this new wonderful to actually use? One day, maybe and maybe soon, but I suspect, digital art will always be viewed with that same asterisk attached that photography has always had attached to it - that fact that (the Machine) is an essential and vast part of the art being made. When machines dominate art - much soul must be lost, and it is the soulfulness that people desire in art. Ever see anyone frame a cad-cam blueprint? - it has no soulfulness, it stirs no souls - it lacks humanity.