you're asking if digital art can be classed as *fine* art? why shouldn't it? it's just a medium like any other, there's be no distinction between digital and non-digital artistic endeavour for a good many years now. I've been to numerous exhibitions where the sole or predominant medium was digital, whether it be digital manipulation of the visual image, which I first became interested in when Peter Greenaway began his *Television Danté* project in the 80s (that became Prospero's Books) or a completely digital creation, such as the well-known fractal evolutionary work of William Latham, who I met at our local Uni some years ago.
I don't really understand your question though
Would you say that digital art which is represented in fine arts galleries is a lot different from "fine art" digital art in a digital art exhibition?
aren't they the same things?
Where does the sci-fi come in? Sci-fi is a literary/film genre, it is not per se a *fine* arts genre, although that's not to say that sci-fi can't be classed as art. The fact that Matrix Reloaded was A-listed for Cannes and the Palme d'Or shows that even mainstream box office sci-fi can sometimes be considered to have worthy artistic merit. But you aren't going to be able to walk into a public gallery and find the *sci-fi* section, artistic *genres* don't work like that.
Edited by - Tawakalna on 4/11/2006 5:16:17 AM