I fully understand the idea behind it. Concept artists want to create pictures quickly. They need to turn around an image as fast as possible for the 3d designers to realise the idea.
The problem I have is in the misleading naming of these techniques. "Matte painting" as a technique doesnt really involve painting! You create the shaded layer and shape of what you want and overlay photographs to create what is essentially a composite photo. I really think this technique ought to have the word photo in it surely.
Then you've got other speed "paints" which sometimes use "brushes" which are so large they can sometimes be a selection of branches or a whole detailed tree! Surely in their notes the words " clip art used" ought to be applied! How is this different from using potato prints?!
These are amazing techniques and great for concept artists to create speedy images. Its is just my hope that these misleading namings do not lead to furthering the belief that digital art is easy and just cut and paste.
Another misleading term is " bases" these are things which have been traced, but you just dont hear the word "traced" any more because that's clearly cheating. Bases arent cheating supposedly! Fair enough if new starters are using them for personal work ( and even then its not helping you!), but you see pro artists openly describing how they did so and so " paint over" (there's another one!) . Its not an assault I'm making on these techniques ( per se) but to the untrained eye, or indeed someone wishing to learn, these misleading terms do nothing to help those wishing to start making their own art. It took me quite a long time to discover what "matte painting " actually is.
Maybe I'm just tired