Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Digital Art - Printed and Displayed at Fine Art Exhibitions
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
I am Vice Chair of an art group in Lancashire one of our members who has been experimenting with Digital Art, mainly abstract work, has asked to enter and display his artwork, printed and framed, at our Annual exhibitions. The committee have agreed that digital art can be construed as fine art in itself, but we are in a quandary when it comes to calling the printed work an "original piece", which is in our rules for exhibitions, when the artwork is a printed copy of an original digital working.
As a committee we wish to acknowledge his work but cannot seem to square the circle. Most of the pieces at our exhibitions are sold being clearly marked with media and we have been doing so for over 40years. We only work in flat 2D works. We have built up a good reputation in our local area and some on the committee would not wish to see the door opened for other members wishing to place printed materials in our exhibitions.
Has any other Art Group been asked to include Printed Digital Art Material at their exhibition and how have they embraced it? We are not decrying digital art, and we have recognised that it can be included in the definition of fine art. So please try not to steer the discussion into that area. What we really want to know is can printed representations of digital art be displayed with other original 2D artwork?
Posted
An interesting post, Kevin. A tricky one. I'm a fan of digital art, it's only going to become more widespread. It's good that art clubs such as yours are willing to include it with more traditionally created work. I shall watch this post with interest, maybe someone has dealt with this problem before.
Obviously digital art has to be printed to be displayed on walls, maybe something along the lines of 'limited editions' may be the only way forward. I guess a limited edition of ONE, would make it pretty unique. ??? I wish you luck with this.
Lew.
Posted
Well Kevin, an interesting question and an important one with possible implications if you get it wrong!
Firstly though, you have already decided amongst yourselves that digital art is fine art. You've said that this isn't up for discussion, but I can categorically say that it ISN'T categorised as fine art. There is no grey area here, you have it wrong! Much of digital art is done by a machine, not by hand, (controlling a mouse doesn't count as by hand). Neither does a stylus on a screen, although I agree that it’s more like a drawing process. So that's that point dealt with, although I don't expect that you will agree, but I am right - this fact is widely accepted in the art world - check for yourselves.
Secondly, the importance of classifying digital art accurately in an exhibition.
No it can't be classified as an original. It's a digital print which can produce millions of copies, all identical.
But, you can have original prints depending on the process. For example, a drypoint etching is considered to be an original print, that's because each pull through the press will have been done by the artist (usually), including the inking up process.
Each print will bear some differences, pressure on the plate, ink variations etc, and these prints are known as a limited edition and numbered accordingly. The life of a plate will be limited, often between 10 - 50 pulls. But they are all classed as an original. Obviously there are many similar printing processes like this, all of which can be advertised as an original - digital printing is not one of them.
Best to simply advertise it in your exhibition as a ‘Digital print’ or digital art.
I hope that's been of some help, and I hope that you make the right choice!
Edited
by Alan Bickley
Posted
Thanks for the replies.
Lew, it is definitely a conundrum and one of the reasons I am asking the question here. It has been suggested to the member that if he was to be allowed to exhibit then the print would have to be a one off with an undertaking that he will not print any future copies. Difficult to "police" that sort of thing though. Also he argues that linocut printing should be subject to the same restrictions. It all gets so very difficult to manage. It would be so very easy to just say "No". But then we question ourselves about being progressive.
Alan, 2 posts in and you are taking the discussion into a place where we will never get an answer. For the last 6months I was tasked by our committee to research the very subject that you are attempting to quash, what I found was it is all a matter of opinion. Everything in the digital art/fine art debate seems to follow a circular argument which ends up expounding plenty of words on the subject but never getting anywhere. Unfortunately your comments do exactly that, you have a valued opinion and you cannot be wrong, but I came across so many others who have the opposite opinion, and they to believe that they can't be wrong. Please if you wish to start that sort of debate don't do it here on this thread, I have seen other forums go around in circles about the argument and I fear my question will get lost. Please if you wish to continue the question of fine art or not then start a thread of your own, it is a very interesting question and one that our club has concluded as a progressive club.
Posted
I’ve no intention of starting any debate on a new thread Kevin. I don’t need to as I am quite clear on this subject.
I’m simply stating what constitutes fine art, and digital art does not. Don’t take my word for it, do your research!
I’m not suggesting that digital art shouldn’t be in a gallery exhibition, everything has its place and should be exhibited.
Posted
As our technical world is moving onwards and hopefully upwards just accept a print for what it is ,label it as such, price it accordingly and let the poor artist display it . As you say how can you police it if he wants to print off and sell more copies , you can’t. The world is moving on.
I understand why you want to keep to answers to your original question but this is a general discussion forum , so be it if it wanders off your guidelines .