[Quiet Man Cometh]

I think there is this impression that digital requires less skill than traditional (not that I agree with that), because it's so easy to edit and change things, and effects like bluring and such exists in digital that are harder to pull off in traditional art; you click a button instead of working with a smudger or fingers and you don't like it, you hit "undo" with no eraser marks to try and hide. Because of that I think people expect more from digital art.

I like traditional art, but that's what I learned to do and it interests me more, though I imagine if I had digital art programs on my computer and new more about the tools and techniques I would be more interested in digital art. It's just not a skill set I'm as familiar with.

I do like the blend though, when I see people that do it. The artist Scott M. Fischer (not sure if that's spelt write) that I see on some Magic the Gathering cards is someone I really like, and he blends traditional art with digital for his pieces.

I think another reason people may look down on digital art at times is because it's from a computer and there is no one original piece besides the file. Theoretically, you could print off as many as you like so there could be no shortage of prints. Fischer I know simply makes a limited number of prints and then destroys the file.

I find the debate between the two fairly interesting actually.

As for what I look for in art, I'd say that varies between pieces. Essentially, it depends on how and whether or a not a piece speaks to me. I probably wont react the same to two different pieces by the same artist in the same style.