length: 1352 words 3.9 double spaced pages when i think of art i think of great artists of the past. Artists that have spent practically all their lives to produce visually stunning pieces of work. Artists such as michelangelo, who spent 15 years of his life to finalize a painting on the ceiling of the st. However, it is very difficult for me to consider a person who sits in front of a computer and plays with a pre programmed software as an artist.

As narrow as that statement may sound, in my opinion, it seems true and to the point. I took the class because like most classes at the university, i needed it fulfill my requirements. However, by the end of the semester i was amazed about art, more so then i ever was. Early painters had to face the difficulties of paint drying too fast or the paper fading.

Besides that, i witnessed how the great sculptures imagined the final work before it was even begun. Initially, they started from a block of stone or marble, having to carve out each and every layer. How long it must have took to create certain final works was incredible and for what, the mere satisfaction and thrill? maybe it is because artists of the past did not have breakthrough technology like we do today. Because if they did, then it is possible they would have taken easier routes to complete their work. So how can u consider yourself an artist when you are using someone else’s program in which you are limited to what the programmer has installed.

My basis is that computer graphics designers already have a three dimensional world to create images in. If a painter wanted to create an image where a person was walking away from the picture, the artist had to create that image and all the indications so that the person looks like he or se is walking away from us. A computer graphics designer already has the 3d image there and only needs to create the person and objects around it. First off, a computer artist must understand all the tools and functionalities of the program in order to create images. It is quite possible that it could take a person a decade to learn most, if not all, the tools and functions of a particular program.

For the first time, it is possible to convey the bottom of our dreams and really visualize the creatures that live in it. Now should that validate whether or not it should be included as an art form? traditional artists did not have margin for error. Traditional artists could paint over an error to cover up a mistake or they could carve out an extra piece to make the error look not as drastic. But it is quite evident that they could only make few mistakes before the work would have to be redone or start all over. However, in computer graphics one has the freedom to constantly make errors and the ability to erase or undo them unlimitedly. There is an apparent difference between a novice computer graphics designer and an expert. Just like there is between a child who paints his or her first picture and a painter who paints the mona lisa.

So the difference is visible between a person who creates his or her first computer generated scene and one that has generated thousands of scenes. But, to me i just don’t see the fine line of when you can actually label someone as a computer artist if in fact you choose to do so. I just see it in a way where the software is more important than the actual person.