On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 9:16 AM, P N Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote:
> And thankfully you are free to do so, the smiley aside. But I count "digital > manipulation to the extreme" a a pejorative description of this genre, so I > felt a need to defend it. Fine art includes many layers and many tools, all > of which are valid. Photography is certainly a valid form of expression, but > so too is digital art that employs the camera as a tool. Well, for starters, I guess I was talking more about the work of the first artist shown and discussed, Kristan Horton than the others. I didn't mean my comment to be pejorative. It's just not a type of art that speaks to me. I mean, hey, if I went to see it properly displayed at an exhibit I'm sure I'd enjoy it, but I doubt I'd go away feeling deeply moved or affected by it. I've seen and experienced lots of art that has moved me; this isn't it. ;-) I think you hit the nail on the head, Paul, when you called this digital art using the camera as a tool. It just doesn't strike me as particularly photographic. The original image seems to long since have been lost in the process. I guess that's what I meant when I called it digital manipulation to the extreme. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, just that it's not my thing - neither as a creator nor a viewer. If you (or any one else) like it or find it interesting, that's great. I'm the last to criticize either the artists or the viewers. Art's subjective, after all... cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
