Digital Art vs Fine Art

[...]

Yeah, but with the paintbrush or the lump of clay, anyone can do anything.

The computer is merely a new avenue; all other approaches will remain self-referential and insular, unweathered by new approaches or new forms. People continue to send letters and postcards to one another, despite the proliferation of email. Drum machines, to my knowledge, haven't cut any significant holes in Tama's pockets. And so on...

Only those that wish to explore the possibilities of this particular medium. All artists should not

anyone can imagine doing anything, but as it seems; 99% of the computer artists do exactly the same stuff!

trying to

come on james fine art is in our hands (it's our duty)! real postmodern hasn't even started yet. 'art has died' is a trick of those who enjoy of the perls that 'art has died'.

Art Review is full of charlatans, lyers, and very negative souls.

true; and ironically, 99% of the computer guys produce the same work.

You haven't seen much computer-based artwork.

The surrealists were postmoderns, and on and on. I prefer not to acknowledge Pop art, which is more in its own limbo of pre-pomo kitsch.

God is dead, so what? Dead is a dead term.

Like most of its readers.

Refer to first comment.

Something new that can't replace the human element that makes art art, is nothing more than a tool. Some people are tools, but no tools are people.

At least, not until someone makes a significant breakthrough in AI or cloning. Then we get all the 'equal rights for Replicants' marches.

-james
www.twisted-animator.co.uk 'It's not easy having a good time. Sometimes even smiling makes my face ache...'

-Frank 'N' Furter

i've followed and done computer art about 15 years, and nothing i've ever seen has come close to real masters. so, i must have been blind.

sure, there is the one % doing original thing but the others are mostly slaves to the machine.