Computers=Art?

I had an interesting conversation with a fellow artist a few weeks back and we talked the merits of the computer as an artistic medium. During the discussion, I was intrigued to discover that my friend didn't consider anything made by the computer art. This eventually led me to the realization that there are a good number of creative people who do not consider computer-made art real art. I mean art with a fine capital A. Computer art isn't ART?

Once I heard this opinion, we engaged in a VERY long conversation about it. The rationale of most artists who are against the computer as a medium suggest that it is merely a machine that detaches the creator form the subject. They see the computer as an oppressor of creative freedom, something that takes away the tactile relationship between an artist's hands with the paint and canvas.

I could definitely understand where she was coming from in this respect. As an artist myself, I enjoy using the computer for vector or raster art, but there are times when I do yearn for the traditional tools of paint and brush. I often crave for that intimate contact with the surface of the canvas or the muddiness of the oil paint. Nothing can replace the feeling of applying pigment in thick impasto onto the canvas, smelling the distinct aroma of the different paints.

That being said, the computer is still a legitimate medium. As a matter of fact, I'll go as far as to say that the computer is just as viable a medium as paints. To me the product is the most important thing to me, regardless of the fact that I consider the process to be crucial. In the end, the audience will only see the end-product, not the process. In my opinion any tool you can use to practice craft and ultimately create art is irrelevant.