Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

:iconmoni158: More from moni158

Featured in Collections

journals by Sachi-pon

Journals by Miss-Riah

Literature and Journals by ArtisticKittyKat

More from DeviantArt


Submitted on
November 12, 2011


143 (who?)

Artistic Limitations?

Journal Entry: Sat Nov 12, 2011, 7:19 PM

Thankyou to all those who shared their stories and opinions on my last journal, I haven't gotten around to replying to everyone but I have read every comment.

Another topic I want to discuss? A bit of a dead-horse? but then again I haven't really had a chance to talk much about this issue and I would like to hear other peoples opinions and whether or not they agree or disagree.

Overtime I have noticed an attitude regarding artwork and peoples means of determining how talented and skilled an artists is. By this I mean people have an attitude that if an artwork doesn't feature correct anatomy or the artists doesn't practise realism then they are a novice and are limiting themselves artistically. I have lost count on how many comments I have gotten along the lines of " your art is good, but I think its time to move on to more professional stuff, start doing some still life, portraits and landscapes". Obviously I encourage going out of your comfort zone and drawing stuff you wouldn't usually draw to expand your style and skill. I guess what I am trying to say is that painting photo realistically doesn't make you a better artist than someone who is very good at drawing in a cartoon style or a very abstract style.

Also if someone does realize they are limiting their ability to only one style? then isn't having one very refined style is ok? As far as I know there are no specific guidelines or universal rules on what makes you a good artist other than the personal opinion of each individual viewer. From what I have learnt, drawing from the imagination is much more difficult than drawing from observation thought observational drawings are considered more skilled?

So..the question is? what do you think? Is creative skill or technical skill more important? or does that depend completely on the individual?

  • Reading: This journal
  • Watching: This journal
Add a Comment:
Enigma-Dragoon Featured By Owner Jan 2, 2012
It's good to practice that other stuff once in a while. But if you've found a style you like, I say stick to it.
burn1213 Featured By Owner Dec 23, 2011
I think at first a lot of people start out by increasing their technical skill, like drawing hands, faces, anatomy, the typical stuff...and then they get so much practice at drawing anatomy and stuff that their hands sort of remember and then they move onto drawing things from imagination. In my style of drawing I think that both technical skill and creative skill are of equal importance but depending on what order you choose to focus on improving first defines the difficulty unless the person has amazing imagination.
Art for me is freedom therefore it depends on what style a person has which defines what is more important. In normal portait, still life drawing - the artist has to focus on improving the anatomy and technical side much more. The surrealistic or anime or whatever other style uses both technical and creative but there are also many styles in anime so that also depends. It's really difficult to say, I guess you could asses a work according to the standards of the style
natakarin Featured By Owner Dec 2, 2011
Personally I think that creative vision is far more important than technical skill. I think it's an artist's role to express their individuality and idea within a workpiece. For me looking at still life paintings is simply boring. I don't want to offend anyone but there are many great artists here, on DA who draw almost perfectly from photo references. I appreciate their talent and dedicated time but these works don't enrich me in any way. I don't think if I actually could call it art because it's just copying.
There can be technically average artwork which plucks heartstrings because of the impression it makes.
Bringin-Crazy-Back Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
AND ALSO! (Going on a rant here)


The only kind of art that is better than any other kind is the art that is inspired by something in yourself. If you can "feel" it, then it is true art, no matter what anyone else can think or say.
Bringin-Crazy-Back Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I think that it is good to reach outside of your comfort zone, but if you really don't want to, no-one can make you stay there, and there is no-one who has any right to tell you what you should do with your art. Most of the time, the people who criticize other people are people bruning green with envy. Don't listen to them. Do what you want, when you want, and only if you want to do it.
LycanFangs1941 Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I hate this, especially when people don't understand you are still learning and say your art is crap.

In terms of your question, it's dependant on the person, I think. What matters is that we all keep striving to have both.
I totally agree.
LycanFangs1941 Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
no prob, we artist gotta stick together XD
Spector-Q Featured By Owner Nov 18, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I consider myself an artist, even though I'm not nearly as professional as many (shoot, if I actually practiced, I might become downright good by most standards). Personally, I believe that one needs to let their crativity flow. While technicality has its place, art is nothing unless the artist a.) enjoys their work, and b.) draws (or paints or whatever) in a style that they themselves are happy with.

However, it is also my opinion that more technical styles are better suited for the professional market, as it appeals to more people, but again, THIS IS UP TO THE ARTIST. Do I make sense?
Add a Comment: