tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-151943704764403107.post1740723871048061887..comments2011-12-14T16:13:44.883-08:00Comments on The Non-Starving Artist: Thinking out loudSFCounthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06509778061295530108noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-151943704764403107.post-33818871028784111072010-09-12T11:11:20.918-07:002010-09-12T11:11:20.918-07:00Having wondered the same thing, my research netted...Having wondered the same thing, my research netted that as a photographer the only way I could call an image the original, was to print one and destroy the negative or file. Copy the original and everything from that point then became a print. <br /><br />I would imagine the same would be true for digital artwork. Just like with film, there are purist who will only consider images that have been created using the original medium, as the "real thing".<br /><br />In photography I see the difference, a film camera is a simple camera offering no buttons or preset effects, everything depends on the photographer catching the right light and composition. The digital camera affords us some "help" along the way. However recent Ansel Adams negatives show his genius was in the developing or post processing, just as it is with the digital photographer. So, is it really that different? <br /><br />Having painted on my tablet, I still do not know..but, I too enjoy the convenience and versatility the tablet offers, though the texture and tactile characteristics are missing. <br /><br />As for the future... I think holographic will be the way to go.. now where did I put my projector?Denise Beverlyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06757177839483601143noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-151943704764403107.post-67600816044669309972010-09-12T11:06:26.800-07:002010-09-12T11:06:26.800-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Denise Beverlyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06757177839483601143noreply@blogger.com