However, the software has been premade by other programmers. So how can u consider yourself an artist when you are using someone else's program in which you are limited to what the programmer has installed. You cannot go beyond for this matter. You can only create what the program allows you to. .
My basis is that computer graphics designers already have a three-dimensional world to create images in. Where as, traditional artists did not. If a painter wanted to create an image where a person was walking away from the picture, the artist had to create that image and all the indications so that the person looks like he or se is walking away from us. The painter has to create the three-dimensional image him or her self. A computer graphics designer already has the 3D image there and only needs to create the person and objects around it. .
First off, a computer artist must understand all the tools and functionalities of the program in order to create images. It is quite possible that it could take a person a decade to learn most, if not all, the tools and functions of a particular program. Computer graphics gives a person all the tools they need to express themselves. It gives a person the ability to create certain things with simple mouse clicks. For the first time, it is possible to convey the bottom of our dreams and really visualize the creatures that live in it. It is efficient, extremely creative, but very controversial. .
Computer graphics allows room for error. Now should that validate whether or not it should be included as an art form? Traditional artists did not have margin for error. Well not as much at least. Traditional artists could paint over an error to cover up a mistake or they could carve out an extra piece to make the error look not as drastic. But it is quite evident that they could only make few mistakes before the work would have to be redone or start all over. However, in computer graphics one has the freedom to constantly make errors and the ability to erase or undo them unlimitedly.