I feel no matter how far you take a computer in the direction of art, it will never be like the really thing. Blake might have been better off by working with Close to see if this was a direction Close wanted to work in. I do not see it as a copy right issue, I am coming from an artistic purest view. if Blake did this as an artist, it does not make the work his. Blake's own voice is not in the work and for the rest of time he would be compared to Chuck Close.
I am sure, I would by a bit peed if a computer could copy my style and texture of painting because that is what makes mine. A computer piece is not going to have the charm of clumps of paint falling off as it has on the wall. When I took digital art classes, my professors would say use at least a few filter, so people can't tell what ones you used. I guest if society wants all women to look the same why not art?
The Article
Well said Dan. Prints, whether analog or digital will never be more than copies. Like so many other things, computers can be a legitimate media for individual artistic expression. There is a huge difference between running a program that instantly converts a photo and manually manipulating pixels. The difference will be reflected in the price the final product commands. It is the digital artist's responsibility to control the scarcity of their work much as a single family controls the scarcity of diamonds.
ReplyDelete