SCIART-L Archives

SciArt-L Discussion List-for Natural Science Illustration-


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Karen Ackoff <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
SciArt-L Discussion List-for Natural Science Illustration- <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 4 Nov 1998 18:23:06 -0600
text/plain (37 lines)
I agree and then some.

Teaching graphic design, there is an even stronger pull to "go digital".

I insist students learn hand rendering skills and also things like how to
specifiy type by doing character counts and simple mathematics. If students
understand the process, then the computer becomes an even more powerful

My favorite quote, by the way is --

"The only thing wrong with computer art is that it looks like it was done
on a computer." -anon

I agree. The computer is powerful tool, but the tool is secondary to the
design, conceptual understanding, etc. that goes into a piece.

Karen Ackoff
[log in to unmask]

>> I vote for having both traditional and digital methods being taught
>in all programs.  Seems to me the UC Santa Cruz has successfully
>combined both in a program that lasts only a little over a year and
>offers a grad. certificate.  Others are doing the same combination.
>> G'ma Elaine
>Traditional media must stay.  I say again, traditional media must stay
>in the programs of any undergraduate art program.  Am I biased? Of
>course I am.  I consistently see students creating computer generated,
>oops I used that term, I mean digitally enhance, what are we saying
>now? Anyway, students creating artwork on the computer who completely
>miss the mark on understanding light, form, composition, value and
>more. ...snipped...