is digital art going to take over traditional art?

No, digital art won’t make traditional art forms obsolete. Every time a new technology has introduced to some art, people pronounced older art forms dead. 

Digital Art in no way will replace any form of traditional art. 

Also, most digital artists start out by learning to paint and draw in a traditional way. Their way of thinking is in terms of traditional mediums and paints. 

The simple answer is traditional art uses traditional mediums that have existed and been developed and improved over time. While digital art uses digital technologies to produce art.

Go to my profile and portfolio and you can find all about Photoshop material there…

“Digital design is like painting, except the paint never Dries”

The best example is photography. Actually, after its introduction major parts of the painting industry did collapse.

Portrait painting came out of fashion soon due to the preference of portrait photography by the middle classes.

But at the same time, photography freed painting from its need to document reality as perfectly as possible and soon we got Impressionism et al.

This is/will happen with digital arts. Digital arts might take over areas that were previously dominated by analog or older technological art forms, but they definitely don’t dominate the current art production.

Even after 150 years of photography, movie, video, and computer-generated art, painting is still the most sought-after and most expensive art form, while photography is valued at only a fraction of it.

Resources:

Check out the Comprehensive List  of  Digital Resources needed to Start your Digital Art & Digital Sculpt Journey:

• How to get started with Digital art- A Beginners Guide
• The best iPad for Nomad Sculpt- 3D Art
• The best iPad for procreate
• Top 10 Best Tablets for Digital Artists
• The Best Human Anatomy Books For Digital Artists
• Essential & Must have tools for Digital Artists

Digital processes can be used to achieve amazing things in art. One thing that they do extremely well is to manipulate the image using algorithms. 

This can lead to some very desirable effects that are not easily achieved through traditional means (I’ve included some examples below).

Likewise, traditional methods of making images can lead to outcomes that are not easily achieved by digital means. The one thing that traditional painting does extremely well is to create texture. Each stroke of a hand-held brush will alter the paint surface in ways that are impossible, at present, using digital processes.

Here are a few examples of my own digital works, texture not included :

“The object of art is not to reproduce reality, but to create a reality of the same intensity.”

Will digital art take over traditional art forms due to the advancement of technology and software like Photoshop, paint pro, sketchbook and etc?

That’s a new version of an old question and the answer is still, no.

Digital Art in no way will replace any form of traditional art. It is a new form of art, just as acrylic paint was, and watercolor paint and photography were, just as oil painting was, and assemblage, collage, Impressionism, Fauvism, hyperrealism, surrealism, abstract and more. Digital is a new form of art, a new means of expression, a new tool for the artist. It will not replace anything.

Photography has been around for over a hundred years and it was supposed to end painting with pigments and a brush painting.

Painting has been around for at least 35,000 years. It connects to the human experience in depth and in ways that defy explanation. Make a mark through the sand on the desert floor with your finger and it connects a person to the wonderful planet…nature to nature.

Oil painting is poetic and alchemical.

Technology can have its own voices, stories, and expressions. Rather than one thing toppling another, it’s more apt to be a case of both and sometimes intermingled.

What if it did replace?

What if it did? We would be left with a world of no more paintings. Artists who do not like to incorporate digital tech into their work would be left with nothing. It would be like saying that robots can replace humans. 

It is simple, not possible. Once, it was said photography would destroy painting. Painting flourishes today. There is a different look and feel to traditional art versus digital art.

It is because of this that I do as much of my pieces outside of the digital aspect. 

I can photoshop anything into a piece of art but it does not look the same or feel the same. By no means am I downplaying the importance of what digital art will become, after all, some consider my work to be at least partially digital.

Digital art has a long road ahead of it to be completely accepted. Many galleries will still not show photography and it is over 150 years old. It is really up to the digital artists how far we can take every aspect of it.

They may both become Equal

Though it may become equal.

Most of the people working in digital-only are either traditionally trained artists who have learned digital and switched due to physical limitations or are illustrators who may or may not be traditionally trained and find it easier to meet commercial deadlines by working digitally.

There are two other much smaller groups: those who started out as photographers and have used digital as a way to switch to producing works that are more “painterly” or “illustrative” and those who have just become completely fascinated with digital as an art medium.

This brings me to the second part. Most traditionally trained artists who work in digital, only do part of their art digitally, and there are plenty of people who have some training in both, who use digital *only* as a final prep to get their works formatted and prepared for printing and only when they are used as licensed images or for mass printings (like posters, wall art or postcards).

Whether an artist prefers digital to traditional media will have more to do with their attitude toward art media than it will be related to specific trends.

For example, if part of their satisfaction as an artist is pulling a brush or other tool full of paint over a canvas, they will most likely never switch to digital as a primary medium.

Also, in some cases, an artist’s personal economic situation will inform their decision. 

Despite the expense of traditional art materials, they only equal the cost of a computer and software if you buy a very large supply at once, so traditional media is still more affordable at the front end.

Not to mention that there are crafty ways to produce art materials out of the trash or from recycling/repurposing.

Traditional and digital art both have their own places in the  market

I largely think both have their own places in the market. But learning to create any form of art takes time, effort, and patients which is responsible for the increase in cost.

Digital art becomes more affordable compared to traditional art. Lately, I have observed that digital art has been providing sales support to traditional artwork.

I have attended a few pop-up exhibitions and artists are creating small artwork that is being sold at affordable prices.

I feel it’s a great step to have art enter new people’s lives. I really liked your question did make me think a lot about this too. Plus art has become therapy and if you are into art try coloring art once you’ll love the experience.

ARTISTS ARE ALWAYS VERY VULNERABLE WITH THEIR CONTENT IN THE INTERNET”