DIGITAL AND TRADITIONAL ART
A phenomenon not so commonly seen in the 21st century, this photograph reminds me of the meticulous handy-work that professional artists dedicated their time to, and have done throughout the ages. In a world where a camera can capture in minute details the depths of our three-dimensional surrounds, it can be seemingly futile to paint or draw an equal landscape or city scene.
Why does the professional artist enjoy the ritual dance of oil paint over immersive HD photography?
Does the manner in which we imitate our surroundings make a difference in their meaning?
I suppose an answer I would have is in the delightful process of imitation, where through learning and remembering, we gain new insight into what it is in the art that makes it so attractive. Photography has a split-second frame of capturing a scene, while a painting is a process that spans a longer time.
(Photograph above: Painter in Buenos Aires 2013, 2016. Digital Photograph.)
SKETCHING
What I would suggest, is the discovery of learning from copying what you see. If you compare the photograph of a painter (above), taken in the plaza outside Buenos Aires' pink jewel, La Casa Rosa. The sun was steady and he sat immersed in his painting and disregarding the spectator aside him as he studied the Archdioceses Catholic Church.
In study, sketching the contours and form of the painter has a different impression. In imitation comes a combination of what is seen in the photograph with what the artist witnessed.
Photographs have always had a way of limiting the way you can view a subject. Many artists would preach about live modelling being more immersive than learning from photographs, and I would agree, but I would also say that what a photograph does in study can be useful too.
A single perspective is the first way a student is taught about perspective; what better way to experience a one-point perspective than with a camera. Photography can open up a new way to view the world. It reveals that there are other ways to perceive the world around you, and that there is no single, objectively true perspective.
Sketching on the other hand is something more challenging than a photograph and comes with a natural bi-focal filter, our own perspective processed with our two eyes, causes distortions and is not a single point perspective. It is a thrill to discover the perspective that reveals the contours of our surroundings, and with every attempt comes new discovery that keeps people like the painter or one who draws engaged. The sketch can be edited without losing validity, it is flexible and carries character.
It is a long discussion going back to the beginnings of photography, yet still remains as relevant as ever, and a story the art world has long left haunting its grave as the attempts to validate art beyond Realism.
The truth that is learned from imitation cannot be translated to the discovery that is found in photography. While a photograph seems like it is superior when capturing detail, somehow misses the there-ness that can be latticed in a drawing or embellished in painting. This may be why the man at the park continues his work, and why I am drawn to the eternal hand-drawn artwork as well as accurate detail of photography; because I find my own thrill in imitation and the many ways we can experience one and the same thing.