They're both limiting media; the only variant here is degree. The Excel artist prints at a higher resolution... and that's about the only difference really. This is contradictory to your original assertion that it was "worthless" because of the technique used.
Quality of the lines, the resolution, the medium are all irrelevant when art considered on an individual basis and not comparatively.
For the record, I feel like creating my own piece. Not in Paint, but with snips of fabric, paper and glue. It will be a lot of effort, but that effort will be fulfilling. Maybe that's another reason why I appreciate this. There's effort involved that aren't necessary.
But then most of Pollock's work is just splatters of paint without "passion" isn't?
Edit: Arrrgh! I hate it when people delete posts. Now I don't remember what the hell I was replying to or what arguments were made.
Actually, I think Pollock's work is more the other way around — the pieces are the remnant of a bit of performance art the viewer never got to see. While I'm not in any sense a fan of the work aesthetically, it feels even more of a cheat since the process was what was important, not the product. Neither do I particularly care what sort of anguish Mark Rothko may have been feeling when he put a black border around a yellow rectangle — however poetic his intent may have been, he had a piss-poor way of expressing himself. At least the Warhols and Lichtensteins of the period were authentic: they were unashamedly in it for the fame and the bucks.
The method used is interesting, but art doesn't have to have a higher resolution to be enjoyable. I mean this is in a museum for crying out loud : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Malevich.black-square.jpg
Quality of the lines, the resolution, the medium are all irrelevant when art considered on an individual basis and not comparatively.
For the record, I feel like creating my own piece. Not in Paint, but with snips of fabric, paper and glue. It will be a lot of effort, but that effort will be fulfilling. Maybe that's another reason why I appreciate this. There's effort involved that aren't necessary.
But then most of Pollock's work is just splatters of paint without "passion" isn't?
Edit: Arrrgh! I hate it when people delete posts. Now I don't remember what the hell I was replying to or what arguments were made.