[RoadMaster]

heh, I bet roundeye remembers me asking him this question, but I want to see what others have to say about this. I've heard a bit of the ball being passed around before. So, who thinks digital artists are treated fairly in the corporate market? Maybe someone has a situation that they would like to share

This is both in my personal interest and research for my project. I love open ended projects

------------------
The Elves, EVIL sinister elves...

[faustgfx]

the only thing i can say to digital artists is get a real job for once..

------------------
sky high with a heartache of stone you never see me 'cos i'm always alone

[email protected]
icq#35983387
http://faustgfx.0wns.org
webcam trend

[Red Leader]

I know that a couple years back, Wizards of the coast (the guys who put out Magic the Gathering), wouldn't accept digital paintings, claiming that it "wasn't what the fans wanted to see." Even if your digital work looked exactly the same as your painted work, they'd only take the painted stuff.
Digital painters tend to get paid less in the freelance market too... it's still frowned upon a bit in some circles.
Not everybody cares though. And I'm seeing a trend towards digital getting accepted at par more and more.
The real bitch is that you can't really sell "original" digital paintings though, which sucks, as actual physical paintings could sell for a few thousand dollars.
[edit: fixed typo]

[This message has been edited by Red Leader (edited April 11, 2001).]

[spooge demon]

I first started to transition to digital commercial work in 94. I remember driving into LA to set up a clients AOL account so they could see WIP. I really think they had images in their head of bouncing chrome spheres on a chessboard and plastic figures.

Digital artist? Oxymoron?

Really I have not had anyone say anything about it for a few years now. Usually they don't care how it was done, or if they find out they don't believe me. But when they see they can play with it forever, then they are sold.

You know the "taste level" of most commercial jobs. The shinier and more contrasty the better.

Illustrators looking down on digital artists, that's a good one. Wait till I steal the light bulb from their Luci and we will see... Even among circus freaks there is a social order

[Lunatique]

I think in general traditional painters will always get a little more respect simply because everyone knows working in the traditional method is much trickier. However, as far as how GOOD the work looks, both traditional and digital artists are turning out incredible works. I'm caught in the middle: there's a part of me that loves seeing original oil paintings, fully varnished and everything, but there's also a part of me that gawks whenever I see great new digital art. As far as treatment goes, I work in the gaming biz, and people really don't care a whole lot. Among the artists, I think you do get a tiny bit more respect if you can work traditionally.

[micke]

I did some jobs for a commercial company some years ago and they did'nt want anything created on the computer at all. their argument was that the result is always too flat(!) I guess that they did'nt know too much about it then.
Red leader: Wizards of the coast accepts
digital illustrations now. I've made a couple for them.

quote

Quote:

You know the "taste level" of most commercial jobs. The shinier and more contrasty the better.

..And if it's not too shiny they tell you that it's too artsy

-Mikael
edit: just a typo

------------------
Mikael's artwork


[This message has been edited by micke (edited April 13, 2001).]

[r4bid]

micke: I was wondering which cards you have drawn (if you did cards). I play mtg and would love to be able to see some of your work.

And, I think that the digital artist is definitely a much more appreciated position than it was even 3 years ago. However some people are still just ignorant and stuck in their ways (some of my past art teachers) and can't deal with the fact that a computer is a great tool to use in the creation of art.
Hopefully the great work created by some of the artists here (most of you guys and gals) will eventually lead to a more accepting future for digital art and its artists by those currently unwilling to acknowledge them.

[micke]

r4bid:
It's 2 illustrations for a magazine.
I'm allowed to show'em the 17th.

------------------
Mikael's artwork

[Bradford]

not greatly.

------------------
[email protected]
icq:3704871

[r4bid]

micke: cool, cant wait to see them

[pimphofoo]

I think we deserve the second rate treatment we get. For a lot of reasons

1)Anybody who has tried to actually paint with acrylics and oil can understand the huge difference in difficulty from real world and computer painting.
2)A lot of digital artists complain that computers are not a shortcut, but then they treat it like a shortcut, explaining the widespread HORRIBLE anatomy and composition out there from digital artists.
3)Assuming we're counting animation as digital art, programs like maya are infinitely easier than traditional animation.
4)Textures are reason enough to see it as second rate. Mimicking vs. copy/paste
5)People who either a)download jpegs and modify them to post as if they did it and b)manipulate photographs c)are using pre-existing models like the one that comes with the latest lightwave instructional book and acting like they built them from scratch.

The biggest problem from digital artists is that they are fooling themselves and laypeople who don't look at art, but artists can see through what they are doing.