Believe it or not, once upon a time, lithography -- fine art lithographic prints -- were not considered art.  Thankfully over the last 150 years, the art world decided that lithographic prints are of great value. 

Paper lasts, so does electricity, which is to say that whether rendered as digital prints on paper or as digital prints on electronic space, there is a durability to digital art.

Now regarding the medium. technically speaking, the substrate -- materials used -- is the medium.

Twenty years ago rap music wasn't considered music, and look at what a lion's share of the market that genre now possesses.  50 years ago the same was thought about rock n roll, and 90 years ago, it was the exact same dynamic with Jazz.  In the world of architecture, during the thirties, the  Bauhaus School was shuttered because it was deemed to be subsersive -- non art. 

[begin sidebar]

For those who may not know, the Bauhaus (build house) laid the foundation for Modernism.  As well, those associated with the Bauhaus are responsible for pioneering the use of plywood and tubular steel in furniture and industrial design.  This can also be said for the use of steel framing (instead of wood) in commercial buildings.

[end sidebar]

"Collecting Digital Prints" is a peer-reviewed, white paper that I wrote to address some of the real concerns that collectors have about adding digital work to their existing collections.  There are reall precautions that should be observed, but with consistent methodical analysis and education, it becomes easier and easier to separate the wheat from the chaff.  

Of course at the end of the day, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  Still, it is my humble opinion that no amount of technology, whether from the iron age, the industral revolution or the digital millenia, can turn bad art good.  

lmcshane, as always...the pleasure is mine. 

RealNeo is a wonderful launching pad for ideas with a REAL constructive purpose.  It puts MySpace and FaceBook to shame.  I don't have an account on either of those sites, but I'm happy to be present on this site.  Why?  What's the difference?  This site is REAL.  This site represents what networking should be...empowerment, activism and creativity.  All the rest, including Twitter, are mostly a whole lotta 'nuttin.

Hollow.

Concerning the work of Andrew Reach, do you know him?  I visited his site, also reading his bio, and I think he would be an ideal candidate to be feature (with interview) on AD Mag.  If you know Andrew, send him a link to the e-zine, and tell him to give me a shout. 

I'd appreciate it.