I remember reading of a class happening locally when we first arrived here on "digital art"....that's not art thought the painter to herself and dismissed the idea. What a difference a couple of years makes.
I guess this is not "true art" in a sense, but if they had used the words Digital Design that would have been different. Wish I could have taken the opportunity back then. But of course I did not have the computer I have today, nor any photo editing programmes and beside I was too busy producing "real art".
So tonight back to the Digital design and looking again at the different drop down menus and exploring further.
With the image above I began with a qbist pattern for the background. I like to see the effects of those patterns when the colours are inverted. Then I added the orchid picture which I posterised and bevelledI did add a frame, but ended up losing part of it when I cropped the image.
I used the leaf brush to add in the next layer and filled them with pattern which I then went to filters/noise/slur.
To finish it off I wanted to put an overlay of lace, used the same red as the leaves and a lace brush which left the nice pinkish tinge to the photo of the orchids.
2 comments:
Another intriguing 'change' Shirley. I like this, and applaud you for your patience with the program, not to mention your generosity in sharing your experiments. This piece definitely has 'depth'.
very interesting image.
i beg to differ on the art definition.
i always like to quote kandinsky when he said something in the like of - art is the transmission of force(energy) and not news.remember when photography appeared as a medium of expression?
and the controversy when the jacquard loom appeared?
Post a Comment