ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Description
I've been wanting to draw black and white art for a long time 
If you'd like to see the picture in full scale, by clicking download then I must warn that it's quite big - moire is a nasty side of using halftones andx I didn't want moire on original size of the picture :\
This is my humble and ridiculously simple submission on "Bring Your Vision To Light" contest. It is not the most original, nor most brilliant idea of how to interpret "good vs. evil" theme... but since I didn't want to go entirely stereotypical with so little time I had and because, in my personal view, we people still lack an ability to objectively judge what's what, I've decided to take a bit different path.
Perhaps it's not exactly in tune with contest's idea, but it still vaguely outlines a very old and seemingly never-ending conflict, which also has its share in shaping what people view as good or evil - a conflict between old and new.
Illustrated by a 'conflict' dividing some artistic spheres about what's better or more 'artistic' - traditional art or a digital one?
Personally, I think such debates are futile, at best. No, really. Artists have always embraced new mediums, if they thought that it expresses them the best.
After all - art isn't as much about techniques, as it is about ideas.
It is especially apparent in modern art (well... and Rembrandt or Picasso didn't have computers to experiment with
).
Of course, we could endlessly discuss about how digital art is more powerful, with its wonderful keyboard shortcuts or many wicked tools that let us greatly enhance our art. Or how traditional art lets the artist 'feel' mediums they are working with and create one-of-a-kind masterpieces.
But this is actually a technical stuff referring to craftsmanship, rather than art.
A person able to use all possible techniques of painting or sculpting is a craftsman in the first place. A craftsman is not an artist in full meaning of the word without the ideas driving their manual skills. Just because some can copy Michaelangelo doesn't make them Michaelangelos. Although, without a dubt, they should be greatly respected for their talents.
But this picture isn't drawn with discussion about which is better in mind. In fact, the 'battle', here isn't a battle to the death or to achieve victory by one side - it is a creative battle that brings new and exciting things on the verge of both worlds.
The battle of ideas lying in mediums themselves, that emerge or could emerge if not ignoring the potential of both.
Anyway - the division between Digital and Traditional is quite artificial, since the contrast is, well… extreme. Also – Traditional side is in black, but not to imply that it’s sort of evil.
This is something I’ve drawn from myths, where primordial deities were often associated with powers that had to be defeated by younger generation of gods or heroes. This is the old and new that I've been talking about in the beginning – a natural state, where old perishes and young stays in the spotlight, to grow old and perish one day, just like human generations.
Digital art is and will be growing more and more popular, because of it's flexibility and applicability, but it won't stay in this shape forever.
Both digital and traditional techniques are evolving constantly and for me this is something optimistic. Perhaps, someday, we will have special new paints or resins for traditional art (btw. the paints of today don't remind anything of the paints of old masters). Or new materials for sculptures or architecture. And perhaps a digital art will be completely different after a decade or so, when there will be interactive holographers or very special screens, that will react on even the most subtle touch or movement. Or it will imitate the texture of real canvas or paper. Or printers that print pictures or sculpt in full 3D (we do have such printers today, actually).
I think this is fantastic and perhaps, one day, both mediums would blend together beyond what we think is possible - also, I don't think any technique of traditional art is endangered by new inventions. It won't perish.
It might be less common even than today though, as traditional mediums are usually not only a bit more demanding in use, but also can be a lot more expensive - and I don't just mean the cost of materials. It's quite difficult to paint with oils or print serigraphy or lithography on our desks or carpets, which is one of main reasons why user-friendly computer graphics or digital photos made such incredible career. It's simply natural.
But damned shall be those, who think that the computer would create something for them. This is not the way it works. In fact, such thinking is evil.
********************************************************************************
Painter X & Photoshop CS3 + Wacom Intuos 3
Poser reference
If you'd like to see the picture in full scale, by clicking download then I must warn that it's quite big - moire is a nasty side of using halftones andx I didn't want moire on original size of the picture :\This is my humble and ridiculously simple submission on "Bring Your Vision To Light" contest. It is not the most original, nor most brilliant idea of how to interpret "good vs. evil" theme... but since I didn't want to go entirely stereotypical with so little time I had and because, in my personal view, we people still lack an ability to objectively judge what's what, I've decided to take a bit different path.
Perhaps it's not exactly in tune with contest's idea, but it still vaguely outlines a very old and seemingly never-ending conflict, which also has its share in shaping what people view as good or evil - a conflict between old and new.
Illustrated by a 'conflict' dividing some artistic spheres about what's better or more 'artistic' - traditional art or a digital one?
Personally, I think such debates are futile, at best. No, really. Artists have always embraced new mediums, if they thought that it expresses them the best.
After all - art isn't as much about techniques, as it is about ideas.
It is especially apparent in modern art (well... and Rembrandt or Picasso didn't have computers to experiment with
). Of course, we could endlessly discuss about how digital art is more powerful, with its wonderful keyboard shortcuts or many wicked tools that let us greatly enhance our art. Or how traditional art lets the artist 'feel' mediums they are working with and create one-of-a-kind masterpieces.
But this is actually a technical stuff referring to craftsmanship, rather than art.
A person able to use all possible techniques of painting or sculpting is a craftsman in the first place. A craftsman is not an artist in full meaning of the word without the ideas driving their manual skills. Just because some can copy Michaelangelo doesn't make them Michaelangelos. Although, without a dubt, they should be greatly respected for their talents.
But this picture isn't drawn with discussion about which is better in mind. In fact, the 'battle', here isn't a battle to the death or to achieve victory by one side - it is a creative battle that brings new and exciting things on the verge of both worlds.
The battle of ideas lying in mediums themselves, that emerge or could emerge if not ignoring the potential of both.
Anyway - the division between Digital and Traditional is quite artificial, since the contrast is, well… extreme. Also – Traditional side is in black, but not to imply that it’s sort of evil.
This is something I’ve drawn from myths, where primordial deities were often associated with powers that had to be defeated by younger generation of gods or heroes. This is the old and new that I've been talking about in the beginning – a natural state, where old perishes and young stays in the spotlight, to grow old and perish one day, just like human generations.
Digital art is and will be growing more and more popular, because of it's flexibility and applicability, but it won't stay in this shape forever.
Both digital and traditional techniques are evolving constantly and for me this is something optimistic. Perhaps, someday, we will have special new paints or resins for traditional art (btw. the paints of today don't remind anything of the paints of old masters). Or new materials for sculptures or architecture. And perhaps a digital art will be completely different after a decade or so, when there will be interactive holographers or very special screens, that will react on even the most subtle touch or movement. Or it will imitate the texture of real canvas or paper. Or printers that print pictures or sculpt in full 3D (we do have such printers today, actually).
I think this is fantastic and perhaps, one day, both mediums would blend together beyond what we think is possible - also, I don't think any technique of traditional art is endangered by new inventions. It won't perish.
It might be less common even than today though, as traditional mediums are usually not only a bit more demanding in use, but also can be a lot more expensive - and I don't just mean the cost of materials. It's quite difficult to paint with oils or print serigraphy or lithography on our desks or carpets, which is one of main reasons why user-friendly computer graphics or digital photos made such incredible career. It's simply natural.
But damned shall be those, who think that the computer would create something for them. This is not the way it works. In fact, such thinking is evil.
********************************************************************************
Painter X & Photoshop CS3 + Wacom Intuos 3
Poser reference
Image size
1513x1100px 488.09 KB
© 2009 - 2024 emteaART
Comments89
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Amazing job! Adore how it all blends bravo