Is there a clear distinction between digital and non-digital illustration? This might be in terms of style, production or the use of interactivity. What is the future for digital illustration? Note down your thoughts.
The earliest memory I have of using a computer to produce ‘art’ is the Microsoft Paint application, which had very basic tools and it was quite obvious that a computer had been used. When comparing this to the present day, it is now possible for someone to create an illustration so realistic that is nigh on impossible to tell whether it was created digitally or not.
Indeed, some artists create work using Photoshop that is defined as hyperrealistic, which means it looks just like a high-resolution photograph. Hyperrealism is a term also used for analogue artworks done in the same style. Although the ability to produce these is extremely impressive, an observation often made regarding hyperrealism is that is it ‘boring’ or not creative as it is just ‘copying’ what already exists, or is already possible to achieve through photography.
In a similar vein to the comment above, it is also fair to say that quite a high percentage of the digital art available online, in my opinion, is quite repetitive, for example, those in the fantasy art genre. There are so many possibilities when it comes to digital art, that it seems quite restrictive to only do what is popular – it also does not allow for the creator to add their personal style and thus make the work more distinguishable and stand out. I have noticed that many of the successful artists and illustrators I have come across, are successful because they have created their own niche in terms of a recognisable personal style and creative voice.
Another possibility of working digitally is to alter pre-existing images, as can be found in the notorious airbrushing of magazine covers to remove blemishes and reduce someone’s body size. Less controversial is the ability to make adjustments such as brightness and contrast, or to add filters for particular effects. Other popular features include being able to customise brushes and add textures, which can originate from real-life surfaces such as paper or wood.
Technology can also offer shortcuts such as allowing the computer to make ‘suggestions’ or alterations automatically. It could be said that this potentially detracts from the hard-earned skills and ability of artists who have taken the time to develop their practice. On the other hand, the ability to work digitally has made art more democratic as there are less restrictions in terms of cost (after the initial expenditure), space and potential (worldwide) audience. It could be suggested that the effect of digital technology on the world of art is similar to that of the introduction of photography and the impact this had on the traditional art scene, with the possibilities of mass reproduction of an image and thus making it open to everyone rather than just the elite.
The invention and resulting popularity of the iPad (and other tablets), along with such software as ProCreate, has opened up even more opportunities for both seasoned and aspiring artists. It provides a portable and compact way to be creative on the move and on location.
Working digitally can be overwhelming. Photoshop, for example, is so vast, but just learning the basics is enough to allow a novice to create a piece of work. If the user is already a traditional artist in the ‘real’ world, this cross-over can be even less daunting as these pre-existing skills are transferable. The standardised terms that have been applied to computers and applications is a way that companies have made these more user-friendly. This practice is evident in the names of tools, for example, which have been taken from the analogue version and applied in the digital, such as ‘canvas’, ‘brushes’, and ‘eraser’.
A popular way of working is to blend the non-digital and digital by drawing a design in analogue using pen and ink, before scanning it into a digital application, such as Photoshop, and adding further details, colour, texture and/or effects.
One of the definite positives of technology has had on the creative world is that it allows collaboration between individuals regardless of location or timezones. Files can be worked on and saved in the ‘cloud’ so that all participants have access to make changes and the like as required.
On the flip side, some might say a less positive aspect of working on a screen is that it does not have the tangibility of traditional media, although there have been massive improvements with the ‘feel’ of the surface of a graphic tablet when using the supplied pen, so that it resembles paper. Traditional work is also completely unique and permanent (dependent on the materials used), whereas there is always the possibility of data being lost. Other potential negative implications of producing artwork digitally include the issue of copyright, as it is almost impossible to prevent images being downloaded without permission, and the risk of work being copied and used by another person is always present. There is also the massive implications of energy usage in the current climate emergency, for example, when one considers the massive storage capacity required for all the data being saved in the ‘cloud’ (otherwise known as enormous server machines that require constant cooling).
In terms of the future digital illustration, there are several different areas that are developing at astonishing speed. Interactivity has progressed steadily from the viewer of of an artwork/illustration having an almost exclusively passive role in which one could be an observer (unless someone was allowed to touch an artwork, which is highly unlikely in most gallery settings), to the present day in which virtual reality headsets allow users to become totally immersed within digital worlds. This technological development massively increases creative possibilities, which are yet to be fully discovered and exploited.
Another interesting option that is becoming more mainstream is the 3D printer, which would certainly be of interest to illustrators who work digitally in 3D as it allows them to print a ‘real life’ replica of their design rather than being restricted to a flat representation when printed on paper.
Non-fungible tokens (NFTs) are also an increasingly popular option for creatives. Fundamentally, this involves the creation of a unique digital asset, which in this context would be an artwork/illustration. It is unique due to the individual code that is allocated to it once uploaded to a digital platform. As the NFT is a one-off, it has the potential to become a collector’s piece and therefore be sold for a high price.
Presently, perhaps the most contentious technological advancement, in all aspects of society, is Artificial Intelligence. In terms of art and illustration, A.I. has received quite a negative response from practitioners as it’s very ‘nature’ goes against the creative process, that is using one’s imagination, personal experiences and physical input to create a piece work that is unique to that individual. Employing A.I., it is possible for someone to use a program to simply enter a section of words that are then translated into an image. Additionally, A.I. is able to trawl through all of the artwork available online and combine elements from these to produce a ‘new’ artwork, which raises issues of copyright for the original creators.
Computer technology is now so deeply engrained into everyday life (certainly in developed countries), there seems to be no realistic possibility of returning to a pre-digital era. I must say that it is quite unnerving to find my fingers trying to press Ctrl+Z on a surface to undo a ‘mistake’ on a non-digital drawing and then to realise that I do not have the option with a pencil and paper!
As with most aspects of life, there are both positive and negative sides to the issue. In summary, working digitally does allow a great deal of flexibility for the artist/illustrator and there are many exciting developments to explore further. It is important, however, to heed warnings about the influence of A.I., for example, and the impact this could have on the livelihoods of creative practitioners.
Bibliography
Adobe (n.d.) What is NFT Artwork? NFTs Explained for Artists. Available at: https://www.adobe.com/uk/creativecloud/nft-art.html (Accessed 26 September 2023).
Coursera (2023) What Is NFT Art? (How Does It Work). Available at: https://www.coursera.org/articles/nft-art# (Accessed 26 September 2023).
Shaffi, S. (2023) ‘It’s the opposite of art’: why illustrators are furious about AI. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2023/jan/23/its-the-opposite-of-art-why-illustrators-are-furious-about-ai (Accessed 26 September 2023).