Discussion: Is Vector a Form of Art?
Original artworks can be highly sought after, but how does digital media fit into the equation? Because a Vector file can be infinitely reproduced, will this form of art ever be held in the same esteem as its traditional cousins? Join us in our community discussion: Is vector an art form?
Is Vector Art?
So here’s the question that I’ve had on my mind recently… Is vector a widely accepted form of art? There’s amazing vector artists out there, some of which we have interviewed on Vectortuts+, but are they held in the same esteem as painters, sculptors, or photographers?
Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items (often with symbolic significance) in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses, emotions, and intellect. – Wikipedia
If art is defined as something that affects senses, emotions and intellect, does vector come under this description or is it simply a medium for illustration? If vector isn’t art already, will it be considered an art form in the future?
Illustration by Sean Kelly
My Story
A few months ago I was selling limited edition Giclée prints of my artwork at a market stall in Melbourne. I was approached by someone who was an avid collector of local art and illustration, and everything was going great until he asked to buy an "original" piece of my work. How could I provide an original if my medium was Vector? I explained that I could make a commission with a one off signed print, but I was met with confusion.
"I only collect originals, I’m very sorry, perhaps you should draw in pencil. Goodbye"
Naturally I was pretty upset! Why would I change from Vector just to make my artwork "legitimate"? Vector takes hours and hours of obsessing over lines, colors, compositions — not to mention that to make one visual "line" I have to draw two vector lines.
Illustration by Sean Kelly
If one person uses vector and and the other uses paint, what makes one an artists and the other an Illustrator? Is it because most people have a recollection of painting at some time or another, and can imagine an artist working with paint? Not many people have any experience with vector programs so is it harder to imagine the creative process?
What Do You Think?
This is where I’m going to ask for your opinions. Is vector a form of art? If so why? If not, should it be? Leave your thoughts in the comments section below.
Enjoyed this Post?
Subscribe to our RSS Feed, Follow us on Twitter or simply recommend us to friends and colleagues!
By Kate McInnes
Join our newsletter!
Create a Tutorial, Get Paid!
Have something to teach the world? Want to earn money doing it? Tutorials, screencasts, and articles published here on Vectortuts+ are largely contributed by readers just like you! We'll pay you great money for good content. Find Out More
I don’t think Vector is a form of art. I think it’s a medium. Like you wouldn’t say that paint is art, it’s the painting that is art. Now whatever you decide to do with that medium is indeed art. I’m doing both vector and traditional illustration and I think I can safely say that they’re both art. Just different ways to create art.
vector is a medium with which you can create art. when it comes to its stand against traditional art, it has the same issues as any digital medium. additionally to a digital painting it becomes more complicated to the fact that it can be scaled to any size without any loss.
i think you can compare it with the, generally as traditional seen, art of printing. prints can be reproduced to a certain amount as well. and yet picasso prints sell at a great price xD
the bigger question imo is how digital art is treated in general, since vector is one part of all digital media.
art is generally depending on its purpose. and wether you call yourself an artist or not. independent of the media. potatoe prints can be art too, right?
I’m a vector illustration lover, I prefer the precise lines of the vector, it’s something unique!
And I think it’s a true art of course!
In that specific case, You can always do some silkscreen limited edition print, numbered and signed.
Isn’t the “original” but is really ‘one of a kind’ piece.
one should not question if vector art is art – it should be applied broadly if digital art (including rastorized art) is art/illustration. One can easily make it original by printing a gicle and putting a wash or doing someadditional little bit to make it original – it’s a loop hole, i know, but that’s what i’ve got for you. also, the blue man group touched on this very topic in their performance many years ago… it was very interesting.
Hey there! I’ve been following you for a while and I recently went through that same circular thought process.
I only switched from traditional media to vector style graphics and digital media to better please my clients. In the process, I found that my expenses to create my art drastically decreased.
In order to expand my business and get my name out there, I applied to the Island Art Association in my area. I was surprised that I was accepted! I only submitted my digital pieces as representations of my current art portfolio and they were overwhelmingly welcomed by the art community. My art did take some explaining and people seem to have lots of questions. But my pieces are being accepted as fine art.
There are a few stipulations on graphic/vector art though. The Art Association greatly frowns on the use of stock images that were not created by the artist submitting the piece. They prefer that any incorporated photographs or images be taken or created by the artist. This has caused a lot of contention in art shows in our area, but it’s gradually getting worked out. Some people are viewing the incorporation of stock images with graphic design as “collages” which are acceptable – as long as there is a point to the composition.
The Island Art Association believes that graphic design and vector arts are just the “new art” and that they should be embraced. They fear that if they do not embrace these styles that they will lose the interest of the younger community.
That’s been my experience with it. Take it for what it is but… art is art!
This is a poorly formed question.
By definition:
“An illustration is a displayed visualization form presented as a drawing, painting, photograph or other work of—- art—– that is created to elucidate or dictate sensual information (such as a story, poem or newspaper article) by providing a visual representation graphically.”
Notice that even in the definition an illustration is considered art. Art is an expression of oneself to communicate something. Math can be considered art if you broaden the definition, the question therefore is not whether what you do is art, it most obviously is, the question then is what forms of art are people willing to pay for.
Wasn’t “reproduction” the main focus of Andy Warhol’s art?
He worked with serigraphs and made thousands of pictures identical one to the other. Each one is still considered art.
By the way, a digital print signed and numbered by the author is often sold for very good money. I think it kinda depends on the collector.
I myself hate works done with markers (copic or pantone) and I would never buy a work in that media and I’d prefer a good digital print or a watercolour.
I can understand your frustration but I think the situation is improving. Digital art is starting to become a very respected media.
Wow, I was seriously just thinking about this last night. I was helping a friend of mine tag pieces for an art opening he’s putting on tomorrow and 99% of the pieces were, what most would consider, “traditional” art (created with tangible paints, markers, etc). I did a vector piece for the show and felt as if it would be looked down on by visitors simply because it was vector.
It was all drawn and painted with use of a tablet. Even though it reacts just like a pen, marker or paint brush, I think, as you said, people are unfamiliar with the process. I think if people saw the amount of detail required, sometimes pixel perfect for a vector piece to scale (as pica-ae mentioned) without leaving gaps or overlap lines, etc., they may have a different appreciation. I think this is pretty common when it comes to computers though as well. As a web developer, I’m confronted with many statements like “Well can you just make the screen shoot out popcorn? There’s a button that has to do it, just click that and have it up by the end of the day.” Amazingly, there is a large sector of people that view computers as a strange box that someone sits in front of and things happen that coincidently line up with the intended outcome.
It does become difficult to sell “original” art as a digital artist though and I think commissioned pieces may be the only actual solution to satisfy the “traditional” collector. The unfortunate thing is that digital artist are almost forced to sell art for cheaper because it’s digital; when the reality of the situation is that they’re only bypassing the scanning or photo taking process prior to being able to make prints.
Great discussion topic.
Oh, I had a very similar case when I was asked to provide an original artwork in order to participate in a contest.
And everything was ok till they found out I was a digital artist…
And still I am sure vector is a form of art, as it totally goes under the definition of the word ‘art’. And I always considered illustrators to be artists as well, as what they do also goes under the meaning of art.
zooming in at 6400% HAS to be an art form haha if not then i dont know what is.
Currently the first major U.S. museum exhibition of graffiti “art in the streets,” is taking place. 10 years ago would be laughed at and now is held at Moma.. Just like this example – time will tell.
psh, Adobe Illustrator users and there ’6400%’ zoom. Inkscape goes to 25600%! Dats’ just how us pimps role
ignore me, I just had to jump in there with that
But Vector kicks arse no matter the application it’s created in \o/
It might be hard/impossible to give a direct originial as a vector artist, but i definantly see myself as an artist. Its another media for sure, but hey- Everything evolves right?
That said i still love hand drawings n other art styles
http://fredskov.deviantart.com/gallery/ link to my gallery
I fully agree with Kasey. It takes time for forms of art to be recognized and actually accepted. Minimalism for example was initially rejected but is so prevalent in so much of industrial design and interior design and even marketing (Apple product are just one example of that). As everything begins to move more digital in every industry, it will begin to be accepted more and more. Just give it some time…
Of course vectors are art. I don’t understand why this is even being considered. It takes just as much skill to draw a successful vector illustration as it does to make a good painting. If a vector isn’t art, then what about PhotoShop paintings? What about sketching? In my opinion, anything created is a form of art. Any —– that suggests you draw in another medium just because they think traditional media is better than digital art is incorrect. I respect both, and I can’t imagine doing a fantastic painting like some of my friends can do, and I’m sure that they would have no idea where to begin creating a stunning vector piece. Just because there’s not an “original” artwork doesn’t mean that it’s not artwork. Hell, sell him the original vector file on a flash drive if the idiot is so fixated on having an original piece of work.
This makes me wonder if at some point, people questioned if sculpting was a form of art, or painting, or drawing, sketching etc. I don’t understand why someone wouldn’t consider a piece “art” just because it’s not a medium that they’re familiar with. This kind of stuff really makes me mad.
Yes, vector can be art. But it depends on the original intention of the vector work in question.
Vector – or any medium breaks down into two different categories- Design or Art. The difference being how you want people to respond.
It’s design if it serves a function. Design inspires people to act. To walk into a building or sit in a chair. To buy a product, use a service or learn something new. Everything about design aims to achieve this goal. Design motivates people into action.
It’s art if it’s about form, not function. We appreciate art. It’s nice to look at, ponder and hang over the mantle. But art doesn’t always raise a call to action. In fact, art tends to raise questions.
In the end it all boils down to what you are trying to achieve with the work in question.
If someone is willing to put it in an art gallery i would say it’s art.
I agree with a lot of the comments and points made above.
To me it’s very comparable to digital photography. While traditional photography contains an art form in of itself in physically developing the image, digital photography doesn’t rely on this. The final image regardless of how it’s created, is what can be considered art (or not depending on your perspective). How often you can reproduce something is irrelevant.
I agree that there will always be people who consider themselves “purists” in this right, but to me vector artists exist and are legitimate in sooo many ways.
Seeing as the argument still rages over whether photography is art or not , and that has been going on since the beginning of the 19th century.. don’t expect a consensus any time soon!
In my personal opinion, of course it is art. As far as I’m aware the boundaries of what is and isn’t art changed dramtically along with Dada and the appearance of Duchamp’s “Readymades”. Surely if a found object can be deemed art then so can a vector image, seeing as the latter is closer to more conventional art mediums/techniques.
If we dismiss vectors as not art, then how can printed work be art? I can’t see anyone refusing to describe Andy Warhols work as art.
This exact discussion has been going on in the print world for over a century. By print I mean lithography and intaglio etc. But, I don’t believe the potential customer your article cites would reject a Toulouse Lautrec or Picasso print if it was actually made by one of them. Perhaps this discussion about ‘what is original’ is really a sub topic about ideas etc. In print we would number the prints and the smaller numbers, early prints, would be worth more than later ones. Maybe similar restraints could be placed on digital works. Once huge difference is that if a customer buys the vector as a digital file, they could make copies themselves. Very unlike an intaglio print in which they would need the plates and a press to reproduce the work. I think for some people this gives a sense of less value. So the next question would be, should it?
You and Nathan (two posts down) both posted the thoughts right out of my head. When I first read this article for debate I immediately thought of printmaking.
How about when Warhol wouldn’t even print his own screens for canvas production, does the lack of his hands on the squeegee make it less art and more about production? Does that make it less of an original? Does re-using a screen over and over again make it even lesser so? Does a certain number in a print cycle have any significance towards its reality as a piece of “art”? Maybe in this case people have something against the authenticity of a Giclee print?
Or what about this scenario. Say you setup your art work entirely in vector format. Halftones included. And then you print your negatives through an inkjet printer, ultimately to burn them to a screen. Finally you get your image inked onto a nice hand made paper. Would the appearance of this end product negate somebody’s belief that vector isn’t art, even though your original medium was a fully scalable real vector based form? And ironically, how many pieces do you think people have seen that were done this way and they have no idea to the trace of where it began. In the end it looks like ink mechanically pressed to paper. There are so many questions, and lots more that can come from discussing them. But in the end, vector is definitely art and a testament to how art and technology can play very well together.
As long as there has been art, there have been “copies”. Vector is just an incredibly versatile “original”. It’s cool, it’s what it is, and it is assuredly a Form of Art…
If someone is going to argue that anything printed is NOT art, then those same people must give up the right to call block-printing (like Japanese “ukiyo-e”) art. There aren’t many who will try to convince you that block-printing is NOT art, though the process is the same: you create one original and print.
Perhaps it’s that people have a hard time believing that a printer can produce art as it’s not a hands-on process (aside from loading paper).
Great discussion topic.
It can’t not be called art. My personal take on digital art is that it is the latest evolution of printmaking.
If you look at music, there is a lot of music played with instruments as well as a lot created totally electronically. Both have their pros and cons but they are all music. Same goes with pictures!
An interesting thought, though, is if you make one vector print and then delete the original file….
Also depends on the environments in which you propose, generally in the most “old” digital is still regarded with suspicion, is thought to be a game just because you do not dirty your hands! I was painting, and now I have completely changed environment and artistic friendships because they think I’m crazy and that I am wasting my time ..
Failure to “uniqueness” of vector products is no longer a “problem ” that we carry with us a long time, some people will never accept it …
You’re right in considering the fact that it is also easy to understand why people do not use a program to create vector, so do not understand the commitment it takes.
Vector is just the filter between the artist’s imagination and the audience. Whether I use a pencil, acrylics, oils or collages, it does not matter. What matters is the end result and how your art made an impact on your viewers.
That person who “only bought originals” did not buy originals. He only bought only what he can hang on the wall and brag about his acquisitions to his friends.
Art is not something YOU touch, it’s something that touches you.
Note: Since this is a more broad subject this talk shouldn’t be subjected to just Vector, similar problems are faced throughout most forms of modern digital art.
Are literary accomplishments not art? Is Beethoven’s masterpiece not art? Any self respecting art connoisseur(or artist for that matter) cannot dismiss these art forms based on the fact that they are duplicative, digital media is much the same, a piece may very well be more sought after being one of a kind but no matter of the quantity, it remains art.
Ron really nailed it with this:
“It’s design if it serves a function. Design inspires people to act. To walk into a building or sit in a chair. To buy a product, use a service or learn something new. Everything about design aims to achieve this goal. Design motivates people into action.
Art is about form, not function. We appreciate art. It’s nice to look at, ponder and hang over the mantle. But art doesn’t always raise a call to action. In fact, art tends to raise questions.”
Just my two cents. Cheers
Kate, Why do you make me doubt?
VECTOR IS ART!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Art is in the eye of the beholder, no? So first and foremost, anything can be art to somebody. As for this particular point, I would say that just because you create a picture or painting in the vector medium, which is infinitely replicated, it does not change what is art. It may change the physical value of such art to some collectors, in the same way a mass printing of Van Gogh’s Starry Starry Night would be worth significantly less than a version painted by hand by the artist themselves, but no one would contest that the piece of work still is indeed a great piece of art.
I think it’s unfortunate that those who embrace digital formats that can be infinitely reproduced are finding this problem. You still put in the time, work, creativity and thought of an artist in any other medium, only your file cannot be “original” so to speak.
So although the medium has changed, I would argue art is still art, regardless of the medium.
Couldn’t you offer to sell the prospective buyer the .ai file and the exclusive rights to reproduce the image? That’s like buying an original, right?
I think his problem was more the kind of look he wanted.
well, when i start a vector piece in illustrator or something else, i make my drawings first, then i put the colors with pencil colors, markers, or inks, so in this case i ever have the original pieces from my vector art in this case, is this art?
I don’t see how vector art could not possibly be considered a form of art. Like all other forms of art, an artist is simply using the tools that they have readily available to create a viable outcome, which is in turn meant to be symbolic, expressive, or create some form of reaction within anyone who sees it.
Considering when the first art was made, such as stone painting, these were because the artists felt the desire to be creative and draw on the walls. This is simply the same thing, but instead of picking up a stone, we pick up our mouse, or our graphics tablets.
Art is a visual depiction of an artist’s ideas, intentions, or emotions. Vector Art falls, in my opinion, into this analogy.
Vector format is a template, palimpsest, a trace of thought before the stroke of brush. It is idea incarnate in the faintest, most subtle dimension, existing only in a state of fragile, pre-emergent incubation.
Vector is Art in the same way that a sketch is the picture, and gestation is life.
i think every human creation…..is art….
Great question and one that I have pondered often. Whether pixel or vector work is art is moot question. Yes it is.
But, like others I have had people say, “Oh, you did it on the computer…” and dismiss the value of my work somehow. That hurts.. They like it, then suddenly they don’t or think was done to easily or something…
Jeez…I wish they knew how long it took to learn the techniques, etc. Yeow!
If it hits you somehow….it’s art! Nuff said…
My great aunt have been making prints from before I was born. All from silkscreen to copperplate printing – I’m not sure if thats the right term – and a lot more.
When she prints her artwork she numbers the pictures (f.ex. 2/20). And after that destroys the plates. So if someone wants an original, print it up and number it 1/1, which means there is only one copy. This is a solution that have worked so far.
Q: Is Vector a Form of Art?
A:Yes, if what you make is intended to be art, it sure is!
Q:Is vector a widely accepted form of art?
A:Most people don’t know what vector is. I think if you tell them what it is and how it works they would accept it as art. I think the reason why digital art has had a hard time being accepted is cause people don’t really know how its done and don’t understand that the computer is just a tool. Can you make an oil painting without brushes and paint?
it’s not a discussion,
It’s a fact!
Old article, but to add my 2 cents:
Of course it can be a form of art. But the question is misplaced. No picture is art, merely because it got painted with oil. The term “art” is something very subjective imho – so a detailed illustration with a strong and well thought message is ART, no matter if it’s drawn with charcoal, pencil, ink or any digital medium. And some toughtless and badly done image will not be more valuable if done with a more “artistic” medium…