Digital Art

1. Does digital photography encourage hyperreality? Where is the fine line between "enhanced" and "fake?"

2. Mitchell states that "...since captured, 'painted' and synthesized pixel value can be combined seamlessly, the digital image blurs the customary distinctions between painting and photography and between mechanical and handmade pictures." (470) So does this make digital art more "artistic" by pulling it away from the objectivity and the dryness of photography? Is digital art a bridge between the old and the new (painting and photography) or is this a completely new development in visual art?

I think that digital art both adds and diminishes artistic qualities . It adds artistic qualities for the same reason that Mitchell states; people can alter and reproduce it to display their personality, a touch of human-ness. It diminishes artistic qualities in that it may take things too far and make it completely unreal and almost fake, taking it away from the "human-ness." Thus depending on the view, we can see it as a bridge or a completely new development. If seen as "artistic," it can be seen as the bridge between the completely humanly "painting" and the mechanical and objective "photography." If seen as "un-artistic," however, it can be seen as the outcome of advanced technological era of today, which makes it a completely new development in visual art.