Is photography the downfall of watercolor painting?

For me photography was the downfall for 'realism'. With all types of paint.

The paintings from your linked contest doesn't even look like what I associate with watercolor art - I would expect this style http://www.birgitclausen.dk/cms/files/akvareller%2...

I can deeply respect people who render a painting that is so well done that people thinks it's a photography.... but it's not ART..it's a CRAFT!

Using a projector is considered cheating.

Well with watercolor you need to be flexible and do the painting again. White is not used in watercolor so if you put opaque white on the painting it's more of a gouache now. I would start over. In watercolor I usually do the same painting about 5 times. You might want to learn how to do watercolor properly.

Why couldn't the pictures of the jars be 100% watercolor brushwork? Maybe the level of skill is beyond your capacity to believe it's real.

Charles, you are right in a way. Photography did change art; all types of art because it freed the artist to depict what he saw rather than trying to make a realistic record . Cameras do that today so the artist should leave realism to the art of photography and get creative.

people who watercolor can't draw. because of the randomness of the watercolor's nature, it attracts weekend painters. watercolor is colorful, easy to clean, compact, and because it does things like bleed, it tends to promote loosely structured artwork which is perfect for people who don't draw. so what do people who like to dabble in art do when they find an easier form of expression that you can pop into photoshop and dabble to their heart's content. the same, btw, can be said for any dabbler, not just watercolorists

yes water color in its true form is often replaced by crap images, I would ban there use as we are losing a fine art, in my day it was washes on wet or dry and get it right quick or its muddled to those who cannot create one try another medium.