[Giz]

international digital art awards - he is also author of several Sci-fi books and acclaimed multi-media artist.

You can see his winning entry and the top images from leading international digital artists at http://www.worlddigitalart.com/IDAA/idaa.html

[Pat]

I browsed the top 100 entries and was decidely unimpressed. I see better work here on a daily basis. While there were a handful of very cool pieces, more often than not I found myself playing "Spot the Poser Model" and "Layer Mask Abuse". Apparently "Digital Art" means Bryce backgrounds and lots of Text and Photo Manipulation. I think there were two painters in the whole lot.

Is this me just being snobbish? Or is this why people don't take Digital Art seriously?

-Pat

[Giz]

We don't want to get locked into believing only one truth about digital art and must appreciate that a general award like the IDAA appeals to a broad digital participation. Also the number of people entering who use a painting program to create their work was deicdedly less than those who do Photo-manipulation or one of the mmany other digital styles - but your opinion is no less valid - I don't think you're being a snob and if there's better work going around here i'd luv to see it.

[ceenda]

Here are the judges: http://www.worlddigitalart.com/IDAA/judges02.html

I think it's about time a new art competition was started where the winner selected by the public. Online voting, or whatever.

Though, in retrospect, digitalart.org does that nicely enough.

[Dr. Bang]

my grandma can make better stuff than this



and its even in 3rd place, sad.

[ceenda]

Dr Bang: Eww! Looks like someone picked up a trashcan full of 3D renders and then emptied it out on the street...

[ January 10, 2002: Message edited by: ceenda ]

[Giz]

maybe that's what it is

[Teaweed]

I remember seeing an article in a newspaper about a national digital art competition. Just by looking at the winner (which picked up $2000), I could tell what 5 filters/image effects had been used.

Yes, the general digital art scene is a farce.

[Ian Jones]

I have to agree with the general consensus here. I think that photo-manipultations are valid, but if its really obvious or ugly looking.. eg. a transition mask that sticks out!... then it sux. At least imo. Like that stupid 3rd place image. It sux. I genuinely hate it. I would love to know the real figures of ppl who actually think it is good, cos I may be wrong and if so I would love to know.

Has anyone ever checked out Cem Gul?

He has some pics in this style, that fit in to this kind of dirty, grungy, photomanip of human forms...

He also has others that aren't so "messy" that kick this stupid competitions ass several thousand times over. So where's the recognition for Cem Gul for example?

All said and done though, there is obviously someone out there that loves those winner's pics .ie the judges, so if they want to do it that way then they can.

pity they have coined the term. "International Digital Art Awards", I think that stinks.

Here's what we need....
"I think it's about time a new art competition was started where the winner selected by the public. "

Well said ceenda.

[Ian Jones]

OMG look at theworld digital art - splash page to see just how dodgy they are. That design is ugly, uninspiring, and clunky.

It is a pity that 'We' are supposedly represented by ...*drumroll*... World Digital Art.com

Bleh. So sad.

[morphgfx]

i think this contest is about "modern art", like "it haven't been there before? - ok that's the winner...". no matter if a 10 year old could have done it.
contrary (word?) most people here are into classic naturalisic/realistic art and illustration or graphic design.
oh, and don't waste your time argueing with those guys... it's useless... you'll just get answers like "oh you just don't understand art!" or "all your stuff is based on something that have been done before (i personally like to say "that's based on the knowledge of ages") and that's just boring..."). that's how it is.

[ January 11, 2002: Message edited by: morphgfx ]