
Finger painting on the iPad - pg
http://drawn.ca/2010/06/30/finger-painting-on-the-ipad/
======
tsondermann
Bookmarking this for the next time I hear the "iPad is for consumption not
creation" argument. ;)

~~~
omaranto
As far as I can tell, when people say the iPad is for consumption and not for
creation, all they mean is it's hard to type on, at least compared to a full-
sized physical keyboard. (In that sense, it's probably true, too.)

~~~
Tycho
Harder to type fast on, but then again in many situations it makes typing
easier because setting up a full-size keyboard wouldn't be practical. People
forget that sometimes.

------
iamwil
Apparently, also in art, the last 10% take 90% of the time.

------
mwsherman
Imagine using a second iPad for the color palette

------
kyleslattery
I think the most interesting part of this is that he starts the painting very
differently than I (a non-artistic person) would. Instead of starting with an
outline of the head and filling it in, he starts with the large patches of
color, gradually adding more detail. Very cool.

~~~
jaaron
Most of art school is unlearning the "natural" way one might draw and paint
and relearning ways to look at things and build up paintings and drawings in a
much more iterative and incremental manor.

~~~
kranner
That's one reason I suspect the really "great art" will one day be made on
computers.

Computers make mistakes cheap. Fear kills creativity.

edit: scratch "will one day", substitute "is". At least the sort that would
never have been made on paper because the artist held their hand back.

~~~
TGJ
What made people masters in the past was the triumph over fear. Much like
typing on a computer when you think of the words that you are typing you type
slower than if you just let your hands work the keyboard. The great artists of
history overcame their fear and let their body and mind create. When you
bypass the fear there is not the same struggle to master the medium. If there
is no longer a barrier, you will get good media but everyone will be able to
do it and it will no longer be great.

~~~
kranner
Do you mean anyone with an iPad can paint like this?

Also may I ask: did you watch the video to the end?

The end credits mention that the making of this particular painting was
streamed live, in real time. I would say that takes a certain courage.

------
TGJ
He's good and the video is a great example of the endless possibilities that
await technology.

But, while watching I still get the feeling that it is not great art. There is
always the undo option for mistakes and it's not permanent. There is no
original that will ever be shown, everything will always be a print out. It
will make for a good photo to pass around the email lists but when it comes to
print it out and put on the wall you will always know that a printer did the
work and not a hand. It's like Rock Band vs a guitar. Both are great in their
own right but you'll always know which one is better in the end. Either way,
kudos to him for mastering another medium.

~~~
jacobolus
What? Why does “great art” need to be a singular physical object? Can a wood
block print be “great art”? Can a photograph? Can a Pixar film?

How is this act of creation in any way comparable to rock band? The painting
version of rock band would be something like a paint-by-numbers set.

~~~
TGJ
It is art yes, but it's not great art simply because it is done on a computer.
I am not trying to say that it is not good, simply that since it does not
exist in the physical world on a solid object it is not 'great'. When I see
the end result, I just see a picture. There is nothing. There is no evidence
of emotion in the brush stroke or feeling in the texture. His picture is just
a bunch of pixels. It looks good but that is it.

~~~
qwzybug
_blink_ _blink_

Walter Benjamin? Is that you? Your aura looks pink today.

[http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/g...](http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/benjamin.htm)

------
MWinther
Makes me wonder about the role of the brush/pen. Is it just an extension of
the finger, or does it bring more than that to the artist using it?

Considering the comments on the page, it seems to me artists have different
opinions about this as well. One thing missing is pressure sensitivity, of
course, but I wonder if the lack of a stylus touched upon in the comments have
more to do with what one is used to than actual advantages. I can imaging that
well-working pressure sensitivity in conjunction with a finger gives more
precision than using a brush, once one is used to it.

