I am curious about the emerging battle between the natural and the digital world. There are so many arguments that it is really hard to have any firm decision. Both have their firm foundation within all realms of art and both seem to create different reactions within the human element. The unfair advantage here is that digital can do all things natural can and then more. However, natural does not have the ability to transcend any further once it is a finished piece. At the same time, because natural artwork has no room for error and it takes real talent to create a 3D imagery onto a 2D piece of canvas there are endless arguments for which is the best.
You can create just as colorful and vivid artwork on either platform, it really boils down to a preference of style and taste. I suppose either style of using art (digital or natural) could be mimicked, however digital is going to be much easier as far as clicking over a certain area and having a giant chunk of the piece colored in. As far as pointillism goes, that could be compared to digital pixels, and although it is much harder for the human hand to draw a perfect and straight square. There really is so many different arguments that can be tossed back and forth that I am simply choosing to not pick a side and to leave it at the fact that both have their strong points and value.
On a different note, I am curious what the general population feels about this topic. What I mean more in particular is with marketing and advertising. Just because all that there seems to be used or around us is coming from digital media, does not necessarily mean it is the only or best method to use just because it is the most fastest. It makes you wonder how many lost arts are dropping from many different cultures due to the technology takeover. We must stop and smell the roses from time to time and do our best to preserve the arts in all of its forms so it does not become a lost art. If you want to further discuss this current topic feel free to email me directly at email@example.com