Originally posted by reelitupandup digital is not art and never will be.
Sorry, but I have to disagree. To introduce myself, before photography interested me, I was hooked on 3d graphics. 3d graphics are virtual, the result is meant to stay intangible. And still, it is art.
Probably the reason why you refuse to include digital workflow in the same group as other artistic techniques is its virtuality. The intangible matter of what the digital photos (or anything else is made of, those damn bits in RAM) compared to working in darkroom with all those chemicals films and whatever else might be a bit frustrating. But the fact you cannot exactly see what's going on in the computer doesn't mean that digital photography (or anything else digital) isn't art.
The artistic aspect of photography doesn't come from the use of film. It's the photographer. A crime scene documentation cannot be considered art generally (generally because there are surely people who consider it art) because it wasn't created for that purpose.
Another reason why digital workflow might be harder to accept as artistic workflow is its easier use. Generally you don't need much talent to manipulate, improve and digital photo (to get appealing and/or different result) than with film, because of the
possible automation in post-processing application. And this might be main gripe, the possibility and insurance if the piece was created by mindlessly or unknowingly clicking buttons, or if it was hours and hours of hard work to get it right.
But in the end, digital isn't any less art than chemical, drawing or capturing holograms.
Originally posted by reelitupandup its easy to do digital as it is controlled by computers, a bit like having traction control in a car
No, it's not controlled by computer, it
might be. You might meet a digital photographer who only uses automatic procedures, and you might meet another one who actually knows the algorithms behind and uses them carefully and with hearth. There's
huge difference in the man sitting behind the computer, but there is always risk that there isn't any and everything is automated... Welcome to digital era.
There is a similar dilemma among 3d artist, whether using character generating programs is art. In those programs you just move sliders to get the desired character in desired pose, instead of doing it from scratch polygon after polygon. I think the worst thing about computers is that we don't know if what we see was created directly by a human who left a lot of his/her time and passion in it, or it was just some quick adjustments possible made only by some more clever program.