Can digitally painted maps be called handmade?

[LordEntrails]

One phrase did come to me (actually I wondered about parts of this when I replied above but didn't know how to phrase it).

One thing that an artist using digital tools might be able to market is the originality of the elements used. By this I mean someone like me can make a nice map using CC. I only use symbols (or brushes for someone in PS) that I did not create. Yes the map is original, but it's really sort of a derivative work. I've taken what others have done and re-arranged it and enhanced/altered/adapted it. But to me an artist may make a work that every element comes from their imagination. City symbols, forests, trees, etc are all original or unique to the artist's palette.

Maybe "that" is something that could be labelled and marketed? (Don't know, just thought it was an interesting thought to share.) Something like "All Original" or ...?

Anyways, hope my thoughts help you all consolidate your thoughts on the subject.

[Naima]

Can digitally painted maps be called Handmade/Hand drawn?

Spin off questions from the question above could also be interesting to discuss. Like,
how do we tag and differentiate traditional pen&paper from digital? Or does no one care to?

If you use ur drawing skills it makes no difference if you are using a digital pen or a real canvas and pencil ... What is different instead is I guess generating a whle world digitally throught softwares , then that would be all digital ... But yet a difference is if you manually go and edit those generated things with artistic skills...
So I guess unless the whole thing is digitally produced I do not see why digitally painted maps shouln't be considered Handmade/Hand drawn.

[Falconius]

I think Mouse hit the nail on the head with this:

I think the word 'hand' is actually a bit irrelevant once a work is no longer unique...

[Voolf]

I think the word 'hand' is actually a bit irrelevant once a work is no longer unique

For me it absolutely is relevant.
Let say a painter perfect the style so that he/she can paint same image once, then again, and again and again, duplicate it several times. Because painter skill is very high the image is almost same. Now, because it's the same, people say it is not unique anymore, but that dosen't mean it is not hand drawn. All of them were.

As an example i point to myself (LOL). In primary school a drew a Tramp from Lady and the Tramp cartoon. Some of my friends liked the drawing and ask me to draw for them too. I draw the same image so many times that it was basicly identical. Still every one of them was hand drawn, but not unique anymore.

When we talk about digital version. The duplication process is way simplier and its copy is 100% identical from hand drawn original. I don't see a reason not to call it hand drawn if the original was, because it's basicly the same image and of course we refer to the original piece even when looking at duplicate. If we are splitting hairs here, i would agree to say it is a copy of a digitally hand draw image. Keep in mind that an artist can also draw (not copy) same image digitally many times, hence, will not be unique anymore, but still hand drawn.

Just my thoughts, not trying to argue