Is art that has been digitally created have the same value as one that was conventionally made i.e. paintings, sculptures etc.?

I’ve seen a lot of interesting art that has been created digitally, but for the most part if I were to buy a piece of artwork, I’d much rather have something that is handmade, be it a painting, a drawing, photograph or sculpture. With digital art, I feel like it is too easy to “sellout”- and sometimes beautiful graphics are whittled down to just being a graphic on a printed tee, or produced in hundreds of editions so it becomes too commercialized. Maybe that’s why I love outsider art, which are made by people who were self taught artists, most of whom lived in asylums and had weird mental illnesses. They had no idea that their artwork even qualified as “art”. If you look at artists such as Henry Darger and Scottie Wilson, you find yourself staring at their drawings and trying to figure out what they were thinking, and then you realize that you can’t figure it out (because they’re crazy) , but it really is fascinating.

Going back to the question, I think all art is subjective anyway, so what really matters is whether or not you like it personally, if it stirs some sort of emotion out of you, then that’s great. I have a giant folder on my desktop full of inspiration, and once every couple of months I look through it and see my tastes changing all the time. Art is all about evolving, it’s never static.

Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6ALL