"The only difference between digital painting and oil is that it takes a "ctrl+Z" to undo your last stroke. With oil you have to scrape it off, but in the end it's the same thing."
Everytime you load a program in to your computer you have to agree to a copyright contract .
Every time I install a program on my computer the agreement states that I can do whatever I want with it, and modify it to suit my needs, and give it away for free to others, including mods. It also states that if I improve the program, I have to give the improvements back to the development project to distribute to everyone else who uses it, for free.
If I'm not mistaken Dali did more without photoshop than anyone with photoshop has or is ever likely to in the future....
At the time Quantel Paintbox came out, I seem to recall seeing many quite convincing Dali pastiches. It soon became a "So what?" - it was widely known that these effects were possible, so using them was no big deal.
"I would say my style is surreal/fantasy-based with a touch of sci-fi here and there. I absolutely adore the work of M C Escher and Salvador Dali. Who knows what they would have been capable of creating, should they have had Photoshop at their disposal"
What made Dali special was his vision, photoshop is a tool that helps with expression of a vision, and Dali seemed to have no problem expressing his vision using a different medium. Would Michelangelo have done a better job sculpting David if he had a pneumatic drill? - probably wouldn't have made a difference except possibly allowing him to do some of the rough shaping more quickly.
what I find really funny is that people seem to think that photoshop is some really fantistic tool for enhancing creativity. It's not. Infact in the greater scheme of things it equates more to a childs painting by numbers play thing.
You only have to look at some of the tools available to the motion picture industry to realise that photoshop is a low end mass market and very basic raster editing tool. Nothing more. It has no 3d tools. No ray tracing. Virtually no control over shapes and especially 3d shapes. Infact virtually every tool set it has is very basic and only designed for 2d. Adobe are not great innovators in digital imaging. Their target is low end mass market.
So don't waste your time worrying about it. Whoever wrote the original statement about dali is quite obviously so ignorant about digital manipulation that I'm amazed this thread ever got of the ground...
go check out maya as a start point for imaging. Thats what some of the cgi graphics studios use as a starting point for creating characters for their animations...
At the newspaper where I work, the artists work in traditional media: oil, charcoal, pens and pastels. Then they scan their work in so it can be added to pages.
At another newspaper, one guy worked totally in Adobe Illustrator and spent most of his time moving curves or various points.
But I don't think the mouse or a tablet comes close to ever replicating the experience of working with paint or charcoal.
I think the real statement is "Imagine the influence Dali had on the PS developers". I think artists inspire and influence technicians and not so much the reverse.
Bob
__________________
"New Rule: The more complicated the Starbucks order, the bigger the a-hole."
G. Carlin, 2008
Linear Mode
