Is Digital Art Art?
That is the question everyone seems to have an answer to although everyone may not arrive at the same conclusion.
I have had arguments/conversations with other artist regarding this. Traditional artist either detest digital art or, in cases where they actually do some digital art, they view it as a time saver, lesser art form, evil necessity, etc. I’m not talking about photo manipulation, or programs like Poser, in which case I personally believe that all arguments against would be valid. I’m talking about digital works that artists create using the same methods they would if they worked on paper or canvas only using digital counterparts. Programs like Sketchbook Pro, Photoshop, Corel Painter, Procreate, Mischief, etc. I’m talking about it from the point of view that you have to know how to draw and paint first before you can create something on the level of what has been done before pixel art. I have worked both ways, traditional and digital; I prefer Traditional but have no problem with working digitally.
There are two main arguments I hear.
One can argue that all you have to do is create a quality print. Painters like Rembrandt took up etching in order to offer affordable art to a wider audience. In the same way art can be created on the screen instead of on a metal plate or an lithographic stone and then printed and sold. It is simply another process, one that still requires the skill of knowing how to paint and draw in order to create your image.