Talk:Digital painting
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] stupid article
digital painting does not mean imitating traditional painting. you cannot compare apples to pears. digital painting offers much more variety than traditional painting. but it needs an artist to make it alive not a button or pen pusher. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.238.49.78 (talk • contribs). 16:49, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] link update
changed the link leading to Deviantart, since it was outdated
[edit] added new info.
New picture example. Added text concerning digital painting 'tools'
[edit] Removed Images
Certian images have been removed by me because they have been added to a category that makes them speediable, most likely Category:Images with no copyright tag. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 16:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] New Image
I've added a new image. It's my own, so there shouldn't be any issues with it. escapologist 
12:58, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Links Section
With all due respect to Kathryn Smith, I don't think her work is relevant to this article. If you look at her website and the explanation of her technique, it is more "photo manipulation" or similar to rotoscoping with a single image. Typically in the digital painting community this way of working is most often frowned upon. Here are some links I would suggest starting with:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/
http://www.goodbrush.com/
http://www.furiae.com/
Also, I don't understand why at the top it says "See also: Vector graphics" The only thing that links the two is that they are both art and created on the computer, and that's about it. In the category of computer generated art, they are miles away from each other.
