Re: Photograph? Watercolor?

[R V <muunstruk@xxxxxxxxx>]

I feel no need to compare your image to a watercolor or a photograph.
It is digital art, a completely different medium of its own.
It's a well composed image with good colors, which stands on its own merits.

Have a nice Sunday!
Renate

PS:  Do you work with a Wacom Tablet?  It was the most helpful tool in
my exploration into digital art.


On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 7:10 AM, Marilyn Dalrymple
<marilyn160@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> There was a very appropriate comment  made concerning my image in this weeks
> gallery stating that if I wanted an image that looked like a watercolor, I
> should just paint the image in watercolor (the comment is paraphrased - I
> didn't save it).
>
> Like photographers of the past (realizing they didn't have the tools
> available to them that we have now) I use the tools accessible to create the
> image I want.  I don't see anything wrong with that.  (I have shown both
> watercolors and oil paintings in shows, so I do know how to use those
> tools.)
>
> Having said that - there are photographers who say the same as the person
> who made the paint vs. photograph comment.  Certain photographers feel the
> painterly photograph is not a *real* photograph.  Likewise, painters say the
> image is not a *real* painting, so both are irritated with me.  (In order to
> perturb so many, I must be doing something right {:->)
>
> I will be having a solo show that will include several of my questionable
> images in May, and have been invited to show several of the "experimental
> images" in another gallery show.  I guess I'd better wear my thick skin to
> both shows.
>
> Marilyn