I feel painful for the paint... actually for the cost... x.x
But yes, it is interesting to see how they build up the 3D-ness.

Dakukuu... well, if the person using digital, it would be easier to change colour...
That is why I like digital, layers. x.x

I think it just has to do with scanned quality, or the vividness of colors. It can also vary on the person's preference for "perfectly smooth texture", as opposed to having any hints of colored pencil, paint, paper texture, etc...

One thing you can do, similarly to photography, is to use an image editor program like Photoshop to help adjust things like light levels, saturation, etc. I think as long as it came from scanned artwork using traditional tools, it's considered traditional.

On a website I think digital works well because its viewed digitally. I just don't think traditional pieces read well on a digital forum because its not what people are used to seeing. Traditional art can have so many qualities that just get lost when being scanned or photographed. The hand-made aspect that makes traditional art so beautiful can get lost and instead of that beauty website viewers see grainy-ness/noise and lines that aren't smooth like the vectors they're used to seeing. I think that might be why traditional art isn't responded to well, online anyway.

I prefer digital work. Its not that I dot appreciate traditional, I do. I even have a background in fine art. I just love to do digital art more. I still get periods of time where I just want to paint, draw, work with clay/metal. But most of the time I'm happy just working on my computer.

Poet: it's not that it pains me because I don't like it. Xuvrette said it, the cost! I feel like I'm going to cry for the painter and their wallet.

Xuv: that's true, but not everyone is a digital artist and not everyone uses layers like that. My digital style is closer to painting. I mix all my colors together on the canvas.

Kouki: That's probably true. I don't know why so many traditional artists won't use photo editing software when there are plenty of decent free ones out there. People who don't want to at least bother to make a photo of a sketch black/white or spend five seconds fixing the levels, give traditional arts a bad reputation.

Empresses: Do you really think that much is lost for traditional arts? I admit that there's some things that would look as perfect, but sometimes the digital copy of my art will look better because I can cheat and tweak the contrast slightly or something. A good scan/photo can pick up almost everything in most traditional medias perfectly.
I prefer digital art for some things myself, mostly because I can't make it myself.

Ah yeah... well they should be incorporating the oil used into their price if they sell it.

I think the traditional art styles I prefer just never come out right. Even scanned in on my cannon out outrageous DPIs. It just seems to never have that same life it does in person. I especially have trouble getting muted colors to work the same way they do in the original pieces even with tweaking brightness, contrast, saturation, and the individual levels in photoshop.

I wonder. if a person does the exact same drawing traditionally and scans it in and digitally which one they would prefer. I might do that someday if I get the time just as an experience. But so far, I haven't liked my traditional pieces that have been scanned. I love how slides/photgraphs of them come out though.

I only have trouble with light blues. That's the only light color that doesn't like to show up. I prefer or like the same all of my black and white work digitally as opposed to traditional. Mostly, I work in high contrast and vivid colors so I never have trouble.

That would be an interesting experiment. I actually have a few line arts I've scanned before I traditionally colored them and now I'm trying to color digitally.

I think the styles I do digitally and traditionally are just too different. Digitally all of my work is smooth with color pallets that are more simplified and clean. Traditionally, my work has a tendency to be textured with complex color and the materials I use are the sorts that give scans a graininess/noise to them. Even the paper I use has a deep tooth to it.

I only really buy traditional art from either conventions or street artists(unless you consider dolls/figurines art).
I think part of what makes traditional art so great is when you can watch the artist at work, or seeing them put the effort to go out and display them in public outside of the internet. It takes more effort to do it since it has to stand out to compete with others, and compel the person to want it. The internet may have a psychological effect, that since people(not really art enthusiasts per se) can easily just print art they find on Google(legal or not), they're less likely to pay for art than if they saw it framed in a real life store.

I have made a ton of money(and still do) selling digital forms of art which have unlimited supply, but have made a grand total of $2 with traditional art which can't be reproduced in the same quality.
...Granted, it was only my great grandpa who wanted the doodles I drew at family parties. >_>

I do both, but I prefer doing traditional.

It bothers the hell out of me too, that digital art is considered "higher quality" or "better". Yes, in digital art it is easier to get a very clean, professional look - especially when you factor in the quality loss traditional art can go through when scanned. But that's about it as far as that area goes.

Both have their merits and drawbacks.

As for contests and seeing your characters drawn poorly...eh, all of the character designs in my most recent project are licensed under a Creative Commons - Attribution license, meaning I'm not allowed to complain if someone draws them as a terrible-looking stick figure. Since it's hopefully going to be published and hopefully going to have a fandom one day in the semi-distant future...I want to encourage them rather than be an elitist jerkwad, and even seeing the crappiest art of these characters inspires me to write about them more because hey, it means someone liked them enough to think they were worth drawing.

I'm considering running a contest one day where I actually give a small participation prize for all entries...but I need to have more gold and/or stuff to do that first.

Hm... Do you think eye strain is any different between digital and traditional art? I know for me, my eyes get tired, dry, and sore so fast while drawing digitally for long periods of time(just as I am while typing this post).
I haven't tried any traditional art recently, though.

Although, I kind of noticed with certain things like playing the piano, my eyesight gets blurred temporarily afterwards. Not really sure if it's related to drawing, though. It could just be bad eyesight in general, since I need glasses to see any further than 8 inches. I also heard it might be the brain at fault, though... like if you are super focused on something very engaging?

I have read somewhere that, your eyes would feel more dry or stress because you blink less when you are facing the screen.

But that doesn't explain the piano though. XD

When working digitally you should be taking your eyes off the screen every 45 min and blink for at least 1 minute (2 minutes is recommended). Its supposed to help with the strain your eyes go through from looking at screens. Really, that's the case any time your staring at a computer screen for extended periods of time. They burn your eyes.

I find it interesting that we blink less when we are looking into screens. Actually that includes TV screen as well.

I find it strange too, especially since you're basically looking at the same thing whether you're looking at a screen or looking at a piece of paper - photons. The screen emits its own light whereas the paper only reflects it, but roughly the same number of photons are reaching your eye either way.

i think the difference comes from the flickering of screens. papers bombard your eye with a constant stream of photons whereas screens are constantly flickering. Its not really detectable, especially with screen having higher and higher Hz. But, its there and I think it might be enough of a delay for a person's eyes to be constantly adjusting.

Flickering... I know about fluorescent light flickers...
Our LCD/screen flickers too?

yeah. but they flicker at such high frequencies that our brains don't process it. I'm pretty sure our eyes do though.