Does it matter if I paint with a physical paintbrush and real paint, or a digital paintbrush and a computer?
Digital Painting Versus “Real” Painting
Author Malcom Gladwell says it takes 10,000 hours of practice to become an expert at something. At 20 hours a week, that’s 10 years. I have spent many years learning and practicing skills in photography, art design, composition, color theory, digital painting, printing and other art techniques. I’m not saying I’m an expert at anything, but I’ve certainly done my time, and much more. In the realm of photography and art, I likely have more than 30,000 hours of practice. It is only in the past couple years that I have felt my work is starting to reach a level that reveals all my practice and learning, and transcends the average.
Of course, how much practice and learning that is behind the creation of art really doesn’t matter to the average person viewing the art. All that matters is that people feel some connection with the art itself. Yet lately, with the ease of taking digital pictures on phones, and applying filters to make them more pretty, many people have come to believe that digital images aren’t real art. They don’t see the difference between artistic creations with depth, and simple, pretty pictures . . . until the art is displayed as physical, framed pictures right in front of them.
It’s the Emotional Connection that Matters
Many people who see my large, framed pictures in person have big emotional reactions to them, everything from wide eyes and open mouths to long, quiet stares. Many of the pictures look like paintings made with paint on canvas. People ask, “Are they all paintings?” When I tell them they are “digital” paintings rather than paintings made with paint, they often droop their shoulders, as though this somehow diminishes the pictures, because digital pictures can be made on phones; as though their emotional reactions and feelings of connection are negated because of how the pictures were made.
Painting is Painting, Regardless of the Tools
I understand where these thoughts come from (often it’s the idea that something that appears easy has lesser value) but I don’t understand why people have such a difficult time seeing past this, and ignoring the medium, while enjoying the result instead. The reality is that it’s usually not any easier, and it’s not a trick. So, why is the impact of a picture less because of how it was made? In my case, I don’t use stock images; I don’t use pre-set filters and automatic software manipulation to do my work. I do it all by hand, just as a painter does, but with different tools. Most of my art is based on my own photography. Some pictures I create from scratch in the computer. It has taken me many years of thought, learning and practice to be able to make the pictures, and print them properly with a high-end large format printer. In essence, this is no different from what most good painters do. My process is different, but the final impact should not be.
So, does it really matter if I paint with a physical paintbrush or a digital paintbrush?
Comments are closed.