The Clair Bishop article

It's interesting to see this put into thought. It seems that digital art is a bit finicky when it comes to describing what part of it really is "art". With the technology we have today, it enables us to create all forms of work that can be considered a piece. Considering the fact that now most handheld devices have apps that allow some kind of drawing/movie program to be used on it, almost anyone can create something and call it their own "art". Though, with this convenience, we might tend to forget about the traditional style of how an art work was made. Like the article stated, the techniques and time used in making a piece of work is no longer really looked at; instead, it's the meaning of what the artist was wanting to state. We've begun to over look the effort put into a digital work, and only see it for its meaning most likely because of this easy access to its creation. Perhaps when working traditionally such as with analog and paint/canvas then those ideas pushed away can be brought back up again.