args

Digital art is a lesser form of art then traditional art

Federico Fellini once said, "All art is autobiographical. The pearl is the oyster's autobiography." and the simple fact is; this is utterly true. Art is expression regardless of the field or medium, whether the artist holds an acrylic soaked paint brush; or the stylus of a tablet- the end product is a sincere expression of themselves. Now in the realm of framing this debate; both sides have a burden of proof. I must prove that both mediums (digital and traditional) are equal; my opponent must either prove that traditional art is superior to digital art, or that digital art is of lesser value. As I've already proven, all art has inherent worth being that it is art; and medium has nothing to do with it being any better or any worse. Thus I will be using this constructive speech time to point out some practical points between the two; and discussing the true difficulty behind Digital art. Also for clarification; my sources are posted in the comments section. Traditional art is expensive- Now in our society today he have digital Also for clarification; my sources are posted in the comments section. Traditional art is expensive- Now in our society today he have digital art all over the place; it has utterly saturated our society (and with good reason). Digital art is convenient and cost effective. Speaking from experience; good traditional art supplies are expensive. A popular brand of markers known as Copic markers (I love these tings) [1] can go for anywhere between $5-8 a marker. a set of only twelve markers costs roughly $80 a set of 72 markers can cost near $470 and a complete set can cost well over $1,000. also given the obvious fact that when doing traditional art you are bound to eventually run out of supplies. [2]Acrylic paint (a much more common medium) is also impractical; it can cost anywhere from $2-20 per 1 ounce bottle. Not to mention that paint eventually runs out as well; which can lead to a piece drying before finished and ultimately being ruined. I could go on forever making this same comparison; but he point is made; Good traditional art supplies are expensive, and eventually run out. Traditional art is limiting- When working in digital art; the artist's best friend quickly becomes Ctrl+z, traditional art does not have this luxury. When using colored pencils(my favorite traditional medium), if too much is applied (a technique also known as burnishing) the color cannot be taken off, or colored over. when using watercolor, if the water is spilled; or too much water is used--the entire picture can be completely destroyed. In chalk pastels (also a personal favorite) In conclusion of traditional medium, it is expensive; and only completely available to certain portion of society who can afford to continuously buy the necessary products. While the product can be beautiful and amazing; we can see in the area of a pragmatic approach, Traditional art is far from being better. Digital art is cheap- For digital art you only need a few things, things that most people already readily have access to. A computer, the internet, (and the only thing you have to buy) a graphic tablet. [3] A Wacom intuos medium tablet costs a one-time price of only $349. (And that's only assuming you buy the medium size, you can opt for a smaller size and save $130.) Or if you can't afford that; Wacom also offers a cheaper model, the [4] Bamboo Pen (the kind I use) for only $69. As for the program; every PC ( I'm not sure about mac ) comes with a standard program [5] MS Paint, you can also download the free program [6]Gimp said to rival photoshop in usage, or use the free online tool [7] sumo paint and even [8] Deviantart's Da muro. I could mention the multiple other free online outlets, and such; but I feel I've made this point abundantly clear. Digital art can emulate traditional technique- As an adamant supporter of this style; I feel it important to point out [9] digital painting. A technique in which you paint a picture, with a digital program. The finished product looks just as good (in many cases better) than traditional painting techniques. [10] Watercolor, [11] colored pencils, [12] and pastel can also be emulated via digital medium Digital art is difficult to master- I'll be frank; drawing on a tablet is much harder than drawing free-hand. thankfully I'm blessed enough to own a scanner and be able to scan in my line drawing do then do work on them digitally. Far too often people discredit digital artists; giving all the glory of the art to a computer, or a program and not realizing just how difficult it really is. Go ahead I urge you right now to open MS paint and free hand (as in with the pencil tool not the circle tool) draw as perfect a circle as you can. then do the exact same with a pencil and paper. Digital artists have a lot less control over their canvases as opposed to traditional artists, and even with the convenience of a graphic tablet you still have the limitations of working with a bit-map (or vector field if the art is vector). Yet even with such limitations, digital artists are still able to create works of stunning beauty. Now at this moment I will close my constructive as to not completely overwhelm my opponent before they have an opportunity to present their own case. But thus far; I feel as though I've proven the point-- all art is art, regardless of medium.