One of my favorite image making tools is Corel Painter 11. Today, an image maker can begin by making the best possible photograph, then edit to correct or enhance that image in Photoshop, and finally transform it into a “painting” using the “natural media” tools in Painter as the end step in the workflow.
Of course, you don’t have a photograph at this point - something a lot of pure photographers probably object to. But you have made an image. And using this approach, you’ve given yourself a tremendous new set of tools for making that image unique.
Painter does require a new, additional skill set, but it’s not that far removed from what Photoshop does. Certainly the interface and basic features are very similar.
The real question is whether you can or want to stretch your definition of image making to include this painterly approach.
Traditional artists have struggled with the same decision: to give up or go beyond what’s worked before; to learn a new way of producing a work of art.
It’s actually probably harder for artists to adopt this new direction than it is for photographers. After all, photographers have already experienced a sea change in going from film to pixels. They’ve already come to accept and depend on the electronic darkroom. It’s just one more small step to digital painting.
Artists have to give up all the physical aspects of their work and enter a brave, new virtual world.
Regardless, some folks from both fields will adopt this new challenge and make it their own. I suspect they’ll be seen as pioneers and pace-setters, and, probably, the profit-makers too.
I mentioned previously that I began (and ended) my youthful photography career in Vietnam as an Army combat photographer. Now that I’m old enough to retire and finally picking up a camera again, I’ve been thinking about what type of photography I want to do this time around.
I’ve been snapping everything, experimenting, familiarizing, fumbling too. It’s not necessary to specialize, of course. Plenty of photographers, even pros, shoot all kinds of subjects. I’m talking more about focusing on a niche out of preference and interest than because of any constraints the field requires.
After puzzling about it a while, I believe I’m most interested in photographing people. For me that starts with portraits - studio and environmental, but also includes events that draw people in large numbers and places like restaurants and clubs where people hang out, even when and where they’re working.
I especially like people pictures where there’s a story involved. Someone is doing something and when you look at the photograph you can’t help asking yourself what that story is. Why the person is looking like that or doing what they’re doing.
So, people it is. Oh and dogs and cats. They’re people too…
For a photographer, the aim seems to be control. The goal is to achieve a perfected balance of image elements. However, this tends to make all “excellent” photographic images look the same. Unless a viewer is familiar with specific images of a photographer, it’s nearly impossible to say with any certainty who produced an image.
Art, on the other hand, strives first for difference: a different style, or approach or use of the medium. While the works of lesser artists are often derivative, the works of master artists are always distinctive.
Digital image making, the merging of photography and art should result in excellence AND style.