Is Painting still relevent?

I'm old school in that I learned a technological approach to painting. Much of what I see today is based on drawing. More like colored sketches rather than using paint in and of itself.

Not that I think that is bad, I do it myself, and computers have blurred the need for impasto & glazing to achieve an image.

So my question is, have computers & photography pushed emphasis more towards drawing, so the technical aspects of using the medium of paints to achieve a rich surface become irrelevant?

Tags: painting, technology

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Maggie C on September 16, 2007 at 10:39am

I'm not a trained painter originally I trained as a designer but I think painting is still alive and well and yes there is a place for it. I know computers are now occupying an ever increasing space in the creative process but I don't think they can replace the moment or spark when the colour and brush hit the canvas. I love colour and my paintings are very organic so I often don't decide which colour I'm going to use until I actually start to paint. I think computers can lose that moment and in those moments magic can happen. Anyway Hi everyone great to see you :-)

Permalink Reply by La Mimosa on December 9, 2009 at 12:50pm

I agree to this statement. There is something that happens once I put the brush to canvas that I strongly believe a computer can not replicate.

There is definitely a place for painting...

Permalink Reply by Reina -76- ARTIST on September 27, 2007 at 1:22am

computer involvement within the art community is like pamela anderson posing for a life model class....whatever you see has been manipulated for the deception of the viewer.

Too many artists are depending on technology to "vibranize" their work.

Its staying power will be shortlived in history and worth no more than the computer program that generated it.

REINA -76- ARTIST

Permalink Reply by Dhanushka on October 9, 2007 at 8:10am

Painting are still relevant!!!!

But we need technology as well.. we can use technology to improve artistic talents, at least our lifestyles. Yes, sell paintings online or promote them online!!!

DWWs
---------
http://www.art2paintings.blogspot.com

Permalink Reply by Todd Camplin on December 22, 2007 at 12:03pm

Sometimes I feel that I am painting by number when I do highly graphic work, but I still enjoy pushing the paint around. Painting has evolved past just using paint. Many mix media, printmaking, and drawings have been considered paintings. I think that painting has adapted to the changes of time buy widening it meaning to be more inclusive to other processes.

Permalink Reply by Wade Spiker on March 28, 2008 at 11:06am

I have found that in many cases with my own work it is extremely difficult to get a phto of it to look like what my eye see's when I look at it. So often I have to do alot of mods to the picture to make it look like what I see. With the real paintuing you have that aspect of the surface helping and enhancing what the eye see's. How can a computer replace that?

Permalink Reply by El on April 19, 2008 at 9:47am

I think it is not just a technical issue with the use of technology as a support, but I feel it cannot replace the heart of a painting that only mimics the sensual (emotional) content only after it is expressed by the artists' interpretive effort. I believe NOTHING can replace that.

Permalink Reply by C J Rosenthal on December 15, 2008 at 3:40pm

Computer generated work is great. It certainly has, for the most part, usurped the eye of the public away from more traditional forms of art. I've been painting for thirty odd years, but my weekdays are spent as a graphic artist in front of a computer screen. It can be fun and challenging, and it keeps the lights on. But it is not painting.

To the lay person, not much has been lost. An image is an image, and certainly images of extremely high quality are digitally produced by the thousands every day, produced by talented and creative individuals...But for us, the painters, it isn't about the end product. Never has been. The process is the thing. Painting is tactile, it's sensual. It pleases our eyes and soothes our souls. It's in our blood, often literally. We live it and breathe it, we become one with our canvas, and we identify ourselves with our work. We achieve a meditative state while we are painting. The textures, the colors, the subtlety, that delicate tension between color and surface, the variety of effects we can achieve with glazes and mediums; none of these can be reproduced digitally. Painting has a soul. Unfortunately, it no longer has much of an audience.

Permalink Reply by Jack Crying Raven Anderson on January 16, 2009 at 4:40pm

Painting will never irrelevant.... It takes a special talent to paint.... I know a lot of photogs who cant paint. I dont do Photography. Were all good at what we do. As foa computer.... Its a program and a key board. where is the artistic skill?

Permalink Reply by Richard Gins on April 3, 2009 at 12:44pm

Picasso set a prescient that it is not what you are doing but how you are doing it. he had freed himself from identifying with the the media and paying attention to the creative power within. If Picasso was still alive, he probably would have pushed the computer tools to their limit like he did painting, sculpture and especially printmaking. To have tools means nothing if you have not mastered them and more importantly, are not willing to take the risk to experiment.

Permalink Reply by JET III on March 10, 2010 at 4:31pm

No way, maybe you are just looking at the wrong stuff!

Permalink Reply by THOMAS JOHN TAYLOR on March 14, 2010 at 3:27pm

USING UNUSUAL TOOLS IN APPLICATION ON LARGE CANVAS'S TO CREATE DEPTH, SHADOWS, AND INCONGRUITY THAT I USE AS A DIFFERANT PERSPECTIVE RELATIONSHIP, WITH A PARALLEL UNIVERSE. I THINK I AM AN "INNERNAUT", MUCH LIKE AN ASTRONAUT ONLY GOING DEEP INSIDE, THEREFOR INNERNAUT. I AM VERY RELEVANT IN 2010 IN THIS UNIVERSE, BUT AM EXPANDING INTO A MULTIVERSE APPLICATION, THAT IS ALSO INTERDEMENSIONAL, AND IRREVELENT, TO EVERYTHING, AND EVERYONE.