Talk:Digital painting

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 September 2020 and 18 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Qchen018.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

stupid article
digital painting does not mean imitating traditional painting. you cannot compare apples to pears. digital painting offers much more variety than traditional painting. but it needs an artist to make it alive not a button or pen pusher. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.238.49.78 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.151.248.137 (talk) 12:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd question that as there are a great deal of artists who use digital tools to produce work they would have once produced with oil, watercolour or inks and that many of the general public would have a hard time picking as digital. Digital is a different medium but it does inherit all the characteristics from the various fine arts like painting and photography as well as adding it's own.

Having said that I do think this article needs quite a bit of re-writing with better links, references and definitions. Guthriej (talk) 01:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

link update
changed the link leading to Deviantart, since it was outdated.
 * It's hard to find the link you are referring to because there are no footnotes. This style of bare referencing has been out of date for years. --Adoniscik(t, c) 00:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

added new info.
New picture example. Added text concerning digital painting 'tools'

I added new image in technique section to illustrate digital painting in steps. It has copyright ©, which as allowed to be put by its owner Daipayaan Chakraborty AchaksurvisayaUdvejin (talk) 12:46, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I added new image in technique section to illustrate digital painting in steps. It has copyright ©, which as allowed to be put by its owner Daipayaan Chakraborty AchaksurvisayaUdvejin (talk) 12:46, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Removed Images
Certian images have been removed by me because they have been added to a category that makes them speediable, most likely Category:Images with no copyright tag. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 16:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

New Image
I've added a new image. It's my own, so there shouldn't be any issues with it. escapologist  12:58, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Added new image for illustration, which was allowed by its owner to be put here. Thanks AchaksurvisayaUdvejin (talk) 12:48, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Links Section
With all due respect to Kathryn Smith, I don't think her work is relevant to this article. If you look at her website and the explanation of her technique, it is more "photo manipulation" or similar to rotoscoping with a single image. Typically in the digital painting community this way of working is most often frowned upon. Here are some links I would suggest starting with:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/

http://www.goodbrush.com/

http://www.furiae.com/

Also, I don't understand why at the top it says "See also: Vector graphics" The only thing that links the two is that they are both art and created on the computer, and that's about it. In the category of computer generated art, they are miles away from each other.


 * Agree. There are so much digital artists in the internet that there's no need for some examples, especially if these examples had no deeper information about the topic. I removed all links, except the one from devianArt 84.142.225.44 16:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

My response is that you are incorrect. If you look at my art work you will see that most of it is digital painting. I do include some photo manipulations on my site as well but I am a digital painter first and foremost. Thanks, Kathryn Smith.

Image copyright problem with Image:MacpaintWP.png
The image Image:MacpaintWP.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --11:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

"Computer painting"
Why is there a Computer painting article? Isn't this the same thing? Esn (talk) 09:13, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

'Computer painting' vs 'Digital Painting'
While superficially this seems redundant I think reading the articles concerned reveals why they both have a place.

Digital painting as defined here is more akin to pictorial fine arts where computer painting (perhaps a misnomer) is closer to computer science. In the former an artist uses the computer as a painting tool, software and hardware are used that mimic and go beyond modern traditional (physical) painting while with the latter we have art generated from formulas, like fractal geometry, that are converted into visual information that has a pleasing aesthetic appeal but not the literal mark making of a painter.

The resulting images are aesthetically quite different and the methods of production equally so. Guthriej (talk) 00:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Historically Important Software / Hardware Missing
The history section could be strengthened by acknowledging the key players in the invention of digital painting.

The article should include mention of Alvy Ray Smith, who along with Dick Shoup at Xerox PARC, created SuperPaint in 1974, and later Paint (8-bit, with color look-up tables) and Big Paint (24-bit and later 32-bit) at N.Y.I.T. Alvy Ray Smith is credited as co-inventor of the alpha channel.

The Quantel Paintbox was the first commercially used painting application that featured pressure-sensitivity or touch-sensitivity. It was a huge leap from previous applications, and while it was not widely known outside professional imaging circles, should not be omitted from this discussion.

Sonyashannon (talk) 01:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)Sonya Shannon

The link to youtube
In the footer of this page there is a link to a youtube video. Is it a spam? Or, if it isn't, can we replace it?Samuele Papa (talk) 17:43, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

2 references?
There are 2 sections called reference, what in the world? Who ever did that needs to fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.220.166.81 (talk) 19:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Multiple edits
I fixed the problem with two sections called Reference. I also added text, with references, to section Sketchpad. I added several graphic tablet manufacturers because I didn't think it was right to only mention Wacom when there are so many alternatives from other manufacturers. I investigated the subject of graphic tablets for two weeks before I bought my first graphic tablet, and continued to research the subject for some time more because the information in wikipedia did not give me enough information. Wikipedia only mentioned Wacom and did not describe how a graphic tablet works and what programs they work with. After doing so much investigations I felt a need to complete the texts in wikipedia to simplify the choice of a graphic tablet for others with the knowledge and some reference links which I got a lot of help from.Roger491127 (talk) 07:34, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Digital painting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.corel.com/servlet/ContentServer/us/en/Product/1166553941991
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080422225004/http://www.wacom.com:80/intuos/12x19.cfm to http://www.wacom.com/intuos/12x19.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:18, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Can't verify Reference #1
Link in citation [1] of the article leads to moca.virtual.museum --which doesn't provide any basis for the Place of painting in digital art section.

I dug around the site for some time, still to no avail. Consider deleting this section if no one else can find it, either.

&#62;&#62; ryrygreen &#60;&#60; (talk) 03:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Digital painting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140621130749/http://www.moca.virtual.museum/ to http://www.moca.virtual.museum
 * Added tag to http://painting.about.com/lr/graphics_tablet/1917/1/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:01, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Digital painting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131207210703/http://pixelpoppin.com/kidpix/ to http://pixelpoppin.com/kidpix/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:54, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20131029185723/http://paulinevandeven.blogspot.nl/p/over-digitale-schilderkunst.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:11, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: although the earliest archived version of the external page is subsequent to the first addition here of material apparently taken from it, the site goes back at least to November 2012. If this had been a backwards-copy, we'd expect some of the earlier content of our page to have been copied too, but the only overlap is with content added on or after 17 March 2013‎ by  (see this Earwig result). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:11, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Fixing this article
This article obviously needs some help - it includes information that is dubious or not specifically relevant to digital painting, places undue emphasis on specific topics/pieces of software, and has a paucity of good sources. I am doing what I can to fix the most glaring issues but I'm not at all a subject matter expert here. It would be great if someone experienced in digital painting could chime in and help steer this article in the right direction. I would think that the main emphasis should be on how digital techniques replicate those of physical/traditional painting techniques and whatever the implications of that are for the artists and those who appreciate it - some of what's here might actually be more relevant in other digital art articles. Mkcaldwell (talk) 00:56, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: ENG 102
— Assignment last updated by Greeneryz (talk) 03:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Mapeh
MeKja 210.185.177.64 (talk) 11:39, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Writing and Literacy in the Digital Age
— Assignment last updated by CcDc15 (talk) 04:48, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I rewrote the intro and removed much inaccurate information/opinion. Still needed is the background on creators who use programming to create digital paintings for example Chuck Csuri. The article would benefit from a critical eye as to wiki style and intention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Surefirebrand (talk • contribs) 03:23, 30 October 2023 (UTC)