I love doing work in Bryce and Poser but feel restricted with size and time. When I was(am) doing conventional art, I would make large canvases (9 feet by 12 feet etc...). With digital art, I feel restricted because the [size and quality = very, very long computing time]. (unless you have many computers networked together, which means very, very large sums of MONEY).Does anyone out there feel the same way.

I used to feel that way, but with advances in printing technology, and the cost of computing power steadily decreasing, the gap between what is possible to accomplish with a computer versus traditional media is narrowing. Additionally, few people have the space to work on the scale you mentioned anyway, whereas anyone with a decent system, with room to move a mouse, can produce truly breathtaking works of art. :)

9 x 12 feet?! What? Do you paint buildings? :)

artists have done huge canvases for centuries..the Lourve has the famous 'lady liberty' canvas is the size of a billboard..;)

I wish I'd said that.. The Staircase Wit

anahl nathrak uth vas betude doth yel dyenvey..;)

There are so many different styles, techniques, mediums, materials, that I think everything has it's place. There are things you can do with CG that you can't do with oil and vice versa. I think artists can express themselves just as well in CG as on canvas. Maybe we just lose a certain connection that you get with real world art that you can't get through a screen?

---------
Phillip Drawbridge
Website 
Facebook

I think the beauty of CG lies in its ease of use. That and the fact that just about anyone can sit down at their computer and have an image finished in a relatively short amount of time. Granted, it does take some level of skill to do the things that masters such as Hobbit, Beton and others can do, but for a beginning artist, I can think of no simpler way to break into the art world, even if their first attempts are little more than shiny spheres and a water plane. :)

I haven't ever used any of the expansion-logarithm packages out there, so I'm no judge, but I suppose it's possible or will be soon to produce a decent 9x12 image from a much smaller digital file.

one advantage is your hands stay clean and no smell, huh... in fact i like getting my hands dirty and love terpentine gets me kinda high so why am i doing computers? must be the promise of afordable 3d printers lol and the aura of being modern. well truely speaking i sometimes come close to projectiling the whole setup out of the window and revert to ink and paper.

for some free stuff i made
and for almost daily fotos

One huge advantage...STORAGE. You can keep an entire gallery on one hard drive. Try storing the same number of paintings in a single room.

This is not my "second childhood". I'm not finished with the first one yet.

Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana.

"I'd like to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather....not screaming in terror like the passengers on his bus." - Jack Handy

One huge advantage...STORAGE. You can keep an entire gallery on one hard drive. < Yeah, until your hard disk goes south. Backup is a good thing. Depending on the traditional media, you do have to watch out that you are not poisoning yourself. I am finding out that dark scenes are easier to do in traditional media than 3d. With 3d you have to worry about your gamma, ambient light and direct light shining on monitor. When a viewer says "Your picture is too dark", is it because they may have problems with their gamma/ambient light or direct light too?