Do the tools matter?

This morning I made an image with Ultra Fractal that wasn't fractal at all. This is not the first time I've done something like this, although with tools like DeluxeClipping and glyph it was much easier than it used to be. But as you can clearly see from the image above, this would have been trivial to do with something more appropriate for the task, something along the lines of Adobe Illustrator. To create something like this purely within UF is a peculiar kind of masochism.

This just makes me think of hyper-realist painters, people like Bert Monroy. Monroy creates his fine art with Photoshop and Illustrator and, if I didn't tell you that first, you would just assume they are photographs. Why would someone spend so much time creating something by hand that is indistinguishable from a photograph? On his site, Monroy states "To me, it is not the destination that is important—it is the journey. The incredible challenge of recreating reality is my motivation."

Hmmm. I can certainly say, as one who has merely modest skills with Monroy's preferred tools, that his skill is breathtakingly extensive. For him, the process makes all the difference. But should anyone else care?

And why am I picking on Monroy, when clearly the man can wield a mouse with panache? Because he reminds me of a dancing bear. If you ever see a dancing bear, you will be duly impressed; not because the bear dances well, but because the bear dances at all. So it is with hyper-realistic painting. So it is with doing rudimentary vector graphics in Ultra Fractal. It is only remarkable because it can be done at all. Remove the means, and you have little of interest.

This morning's non-fractal was not a serious attempt at art. It was a quick sketch to have a bit of fun. At least I know that. The really interesting stuff will be from combining these vector graphic tools with real fractal manipulation.

(UF parameters for the above image)