Actual art?

[JustHatched 12,123]

So since this is Arts and Entertainment forum, is anyone into actual art, stuff like Picasso, Van Gogh, da Vinci??

 

I am not and I do not get what makes some "works of art" worth so much, especially Picasso. Jesus fuck I feel like I could throw paint at the wall and come up with better art than he did.

 

I have known a couple professional artists, and they are weird a bit. The oddest was a Canadian lady, very nice but had an odd way about her, and it really isn't anything I can just say this or that was odd about her, just a whole package thing. And to be honest I am bit disappointed in our crew Canadians, she was way more stereo typical than you lot are  "don't ya know".

[Team_Bub_8487 194]

I'm into modern art, but modern in the historical sense of late 19th/early 20th Century, rather than contemporary art (i.e. past 50 years or so). 

As for the value of art, I've had numerous chats with my colleagues in the History of Art department at the university and all I can say is that it's an extremely complex and subjective phenomenon with no simple answer.

As for my personal taste (rather than the value that the "art world" places on things), I just like what I like. However, I also find that learning about the context in which art was produced (i.e. the historical context, the philosophy of the artist and the school/style they represent) can deepen my appreciation of a piece I previously dismissed. I think it's similar to music. Sometimes you just grow to like a certain artist/style you never paid attention to before without knowing why, sometimes it's because you learned more about the artist and it helped you understand where they were coming from.

[CandyRotten 161]

I sort of was when I was younger, about 10 years ago when I was in college I was doing an art course and became a little interested in artists like Andy Warhol and Roy Lichtenstein  etc but there was a slight issue that I wasn't actually good at art so when I naturally failed the course I was doing, I lost interest 

[Con 5,719]

I have a favorite painter/artist...

Paul Cezanne.

Born rich , his father owned a banking firm in 1839!!! but Paul wanted to experience life and not just the life of a spoiled rich kid. He rejected the attitudes of the socialites and even befriended a dwarf by the name of Achilles Emperaire, here is a portrait of him done by Cezanne:

 

This friendship was a huge deal, as even the average peasant did not want to be seen with individuals that possessed deformities, mutations, and birth defects. They were so moronic back then. Achilles also aspired to become a famous artist but his stature prevented his work from being taken serious and is one of the reasons Paul befriended him and tried to sell and promote his work.

Anyhow, I just always have enjoyed Cezanne's work. Another reason being, he has this painting, which he started painting a woman with an umbrella/parasol and didn't finish it but then years later on that same canvas painted something and left the original "amateur" work in it: 

Man In Blue Smock

In the background is the woman he began painting and never finished her. Many artists would be mortified to have something like that circulate. But Paul, my man Paul, just didn't give a fuck.

Man In Blue Smock is a painting where the same artists displays his amateur and expert techniques in one painting! That's like shooting your old SMG outta your X80 people!!!!!

So yeah anytime Cezanne's work comes to MOMA, NYC or The Metropolitan Museum of Art, I always go. 

 

PAUL CEZANNE

 

Edited July 19, 2016 by ConGamePro

[Beez 5,091]

There is art, real art, for any subject under the sun. When I worked at Cycle World there were paintings and signed prints of famous racers on the walls in all different styles. I even have some that are signed by the artist and the racer. Road & Track was on the 2nd floor and the car paintings were on another level than the bike stuff. True fine art. Moved east and worked at an off-shore fishing magazine, again a whole community of artist dedicated to fish and sport fishing painting in all styles and mediums. Look at what R* post on their Newswire of GTA fan art. There is some truly talented people creating art just because they love a video game. 

Art doesn't even need to be "fine art." Some of my favorite styles of art are WWI & WWII airplane nose art and traditional American tattoo art both of which would be called folk art. I also really like music poster art and my favorite artist of that style is Chris "Coop" Cooper who is best known for his devil girls. My favorite band, Pearl Jam, has a website solely dedicated to their concert posters called The Colors Blend. What else? Hot rod art from the '50's '60s and '70s ala Ed "Big Daddy" Roth, tiki art, surfer art all that is more folk art as well. I like a lot of poster art from the 1920s too with my favorite being Alfonse Mucha and all the beautiful women he painted.

Just today I stumbled on this guy, Tom Fritz, from a Google image search for something else. @Hatch you'll like this one. He's got some sick paintings of old school dragsters too!

[Con 5,719]

10 minutes ago, Beez said:

There is art, real art, for any subject under the sun. When I worked at Cycle World there were paintings and signed prints of famous racers on the walls in all different styles. I even have some that are signed by the artist and the racer. Road & Track was on the 2nd floor and the car paintings were on another level than the bike stuff. True fine art. Moved east and worked at an off-shore fishing magazine, again a whole community of artist dedicated to fish and sport fishing painting in all styles and mediums. Look at what R* post on their Newswire of GTA fan art. There is some truly talented people creating art just because they love a video game. 

Art doesn't even need to be "fine art." Some of my favorite styles of art are WWI & WWII airplane nose art and traditional American tattoo art both of which would be called folk art. I also really like music poster art and my favorite artist of that style is Chris "Coop" Cooper who is best known for his devil girls. My favorite band, Pearl Jam, has a website solely dedicated to their concert posters called The Colors Blend. What else? Hot rod art from the '50's '60s and '70s ala Ed "Big Daddy" Roth, tiki art, surfer art all that is more folk art as well. I like a lot of poster art from the 1920s too with my favorite being Alfonse Mucha and all the beautiful women he painted.

Just today I stumbled on this guy, Tom Fritz, from a Google image search for something else. @Hatch you'll like this one. He's got some sick paintings of old school dragsters too!

For sure. Art is anything that speaks to you. That is how I have always classified artwork. 

Now there are paintings like this one...sold for $44Million (non-GTA money)

 

I'm sorry but while it is art, no way is it worth 44M !

I get artistic merit but i am pretty sure if i had painted the same shit, no one would have thrown $44M at me. 

Then again, who knows, right. 

[Arruda 718]

15 hours ago, Con said:

Then again, who knows, right. 

Right. I'll paint one just in case, don't think I'll get anything for it, but it's those risk vs potential reward things.

Art stuff was the only thing I failed in school, ever. Perhaps that will make it worth more. Who knows what goes on the mind of these people.

[Beez 5,091]

That looks like someone put one  strip of masking tape on a white canvas, gave it 1 coat of blue paint then pulled the tape off. 

[Squirrel 5,180]

3 minutes ago, Beez said:

That looks like someone put one  strip of masking tape on a white canvas, gave it 1 coat of blue paint then pulled the tape off. 

They didn't even do a good job of it either!

I went to the Tate Modern once. I wasn't impressed. One piece was a stack of 10 panes of glass leaning against a wall. I've seen the same "art" a thousand times on building sites. Another piece was a lot of red swirls on four different walls. 

I think art critics are the biggest bullshitters around. They could make or break someone depending on what kind of mood they are in. It baffles me the amount of money spent on work that anyone could do. Hate to think it's my hard earned money being spent by some fat cat on crap like this.

[Banketelli 3,655]

My grandpa was a professional artist and so is my dad. Though he encouraged me to pick up the brush when I was younger it never really caught my interest and I certainly didn't inherit any talent. I'm counting on one of my brothers to carry on the family tradition. 

[Con 5,719]

3 hours ago, Arruda said:

Right. I'll paint one just in case, don't think I'll get anything for it, but it's those risk vs potential reward things.

Art stuff was the only thing I failed in school, ever. Perhaps that will make it worth more. Who knows what goes on the mind of these people.

Yes, that is basically what the defenders of these high-priced art pieces say. 

It's not an artist saying, my painting is worth this amount, as it is more the person acquiring it saying, "This piece moves me, I would pay $20M for it."

[Con 5,719]

 

[Con 5,719]

I've been looking at the works by Francisco Goya lately, he had two series of works that were truly haunting. The black paintings and the disasters of war are two of the most terrifying collections I have seen, mostly because the disasters of war is based on real life incidents that Goya witnessed firsthand. 

The Black Paintings:

This one is called Two Old Men Eating Soup....question is are they in a prison and is why one is on the verge of death? Is one bedridden and the other taunts him with the soup and makes the other suffer everyday by not feeding him, hence the skeletal appearance of one of them?

Witches' Sabbath certainly made me think of the movie The Witch, with its prominent black goat figure.  

Two Old Men  not sure if this one is part of a series on those two old men but in this one I took it as part 2 of the old men with soup, this is the old man haunting the other old man that starved him to death by only giving him a few drops of soup a day and now his conscience is killing him.

 

Disasters of War:

 

Trust me, I'm sparing you from some real horrific shit as these examples of Disasters of War are tame compared to some of the other images.  

Edited February 18, 2019 by Con

[Banketelli 3,655]

16 minutes ago, Con said:

I've been looking at the works by Francisco Goya lately, he had two series of works that were truly haunting. The black paintings and the disasters of war are two of the most terrifying collections I have seen, mostly because the disasters of war is based on real life incidents that Goya witnessed firsthand. 

 

 

 

Trust me, I'm sparing you from some real horrific shit as these examples of Disasters of War are tame compared to some of the other images.

Of course, I had to google that.? That's some dark stuff. Is that something you would hang at home?

[Con 5,719]

2 minutes ago, Banketelli said:

Of course, I had to google that.? That's some dark stuff. Is that something you would hang at home?

Probably only on Halloween.  

[Con 5,719]

So back in 2016 I began sharing some of the paintings I was discovering and enjoying but and life happens and things become forgotten. Thankfully, masterpieces of all kinds are still out here for me to discover and I want to begin to share some of my favorite works again. I will start with the paintings I have featured in my profile. They are just a few of my current favorites and plan on learning about them as much as possible about them and share why I appreciate them. I will include a piece of music anytime I find something complimentary to the work of art.

Suggested music: 

The Astronomer by Vermeer (1668)

 

The Astronomer is a painting finished in about 1668 by the Dutch Golden Age painter Johannes Vermeer. It is in oil on canvas, 51 cm × 45 cm (20"x17") and is on display at the Louvre, in Paris, France.

Nice Large Detail: http://oldmasters.ie/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/The-Astronomer-by-Vermeer.jpg

As you can see, the Dutch artist Vermeer was a bad man with the brush. I could just copy and paste wiki gargle here but I rather just keep it brief, so if you want to learn more about him, just look him up and you probably should cause look at that painting. In the 17th century, being a scientist was hot sh*t and many paintings of the profession were commissioned. While the identity of the scientist in the painting was never confirmed, it is believed he was a close friend of the artist and was in multiple paintings in a series, the other painting is titled, The Geographer, which depicts a similar looking man contemplating a map of sorts. 

Vermeer painted in the Baroque Style and it is believed that Vermeer only painted 34 works of art and while a genius, its evident he was very underappreciated as he never became wealthy and actually left his family in debt after his death. Did he squander his money? Was he a gambler? Was there illness that drained his earnings? sounds like stuff his biographies might talk about. [The Baroque is a style of architecture, music, dance, painting, sculpture and other arts that flourished in Europe from the early 17th century until the 1740s. In the territories of the Spanish and Portuguese empires including the Iberian Peninsula it continued, together with new styles, until the first decade of the 1800s]

I came across the painting years ago, being a fan of astronomy, it often appears in science magazines and blogs but never stopped to learn about it. This was one many paintings taken by the n*zis in WW2 that were retrieved at the end of the war by The Monument Men, yes those Monument Men. 

I love the painting because it reminds me of myself whenever I spot a globe. I just have to go look at it and hopefully get to touch it. I don't know why maps and globes really grab my attention, perhaps its my vivid imagination that instantly transports me to those geographical places. I like the work in the blue table cloth, blue was a very expensive color to buy and the way Vermeer folds the patterned fabric onto itself is just f*cking bad *ss. And the geometry that is played with the eyes, take the left corner of the painting in the background, it lines up with the top of the bottle and the corner of the hutch. I'm not gonna pretend I'm some art expert but I can see something going on with those lines. It's a simple moment but I feel Vermeer captured it superbly because it inspires exploration and seeking of knowledge and I see myself as that man touching that globe. Think about this, we can all replicate this painting, but think about how much more we know about the world and universe compared to what was known to astronomers back then. We just landed yet another more sophisticated rover on planet Mars last week!!!! So when we touch the globes today....we are very lucky to have unlimited knowledge at the touch of a finger. Like literally!! 

 

Edited February 27, 2021 by Con

[Con 5,719]

Suggested music:

The Art of Painting  by Vermeer (1666-1668)

'The Art of Painting' took two-years for Johannes Vermeer to finish. It is in the Baroque style and is oil on canvas , 120 cm × 100 cm (47 in × 39 in) it can be seen at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, Austria. The painting is also known by two other names.

Large Detail: https://www.eurotravelogue.com/2013/06/The-Art-Of-Painting-by-Vermeer.html

Yes, as you may have guessed, this is a painting of a painter painting a painting. The artist you see is Vermeer himself and the location is his studio. The painting depicts him with his model who he is going to transform into Clio, The Muse of History from Greek mythology, she is the patron of history. She is an allegorical figure, like the Statue of Liberty. 

The painting is a peek into Vermeer's studio but one where he makes us feel like we are the ones pulling the curtain to the side, a curtain which takes up almost a quarter of the canvas and I love the way it draws the eye to the chair with its cool brass tacks. As always, Vermeer's mastery of light is on display here and like in The Astronomer painting, the light is also coming from the left. 

The center of the painting is what I think made this such a masterpiece. Look at the fancy clothes the artist is wearing. The sliced fabric alone is insane!  It is believed he painted himself dressed in fancy clothes to convey the respect his profession had garnered during that time period. He wanted the artist to be viewed as an important and a valuable part of society. The orange socks and the way the sock puff's are expertly detailed and that marbled tiled floor.....look at that thing it is incredible. All the art scholars agree that it shows the artists supreme mastery of perception. The chandelier also is a work of art on its own as it reflects the light and shines and seems to just be floating, just tremendous. 

But my absolute favorite part of the painting is that map in the background. Not only is the map itself incredibly detailed with the terrain and key, Vermeer put those folds and creases that absorb the light that is coming from what would most likely be a window and we can see the intricacies of his brush strokes and absolute genius of his talent with the mini-landscapes on both sides of the ancient map. 

One last interesting fact about this painting that elevated it to the status of world treasure was that believe it or not, after Vermeer's death, he was pretty much forgotten and this painting surfaced in the early 19th century but was credited to a different artist who was better known. But later that century, a Vermeer scholar discovered it to be a real Vermeer and the painting's status took off, by the 20th century the owner decided to sell it to a buyer outside the country but an export restriction prevented the sale of valuable art. So that art lover and terrible motherf*cking human being, Adolf Hitler ends up buying the painting and after the war it was retrieved from his home and it was then returned to the museum in Vienna. Anyhow, I hope you are as fascinated by this work of art as I am and if you don't think Vermeer is a bad *ss, well then you haven't been to Japan.

 

 

Edited February 27, 2021 by Con

[Con 5,719]

Suggested music:

Spectrum Appearance of Banquo  by Gustave Doré (Date Unkown)

Detail: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/94/ec/b2/94ecb27d5943d86fb9c56cb22632065f.jpg

'The Spectrum Appearance of Banquo (at Macbeth's Feast)' also known as 'Spectral Appearance of Banquo' is a painting by Paul Gustave Doré.  The date it was painted is unknown and I could not find anywhere that could tell me the dimensions of the original painting. 

It is painted in the Romanticism Style. Romanticism (also known as the Romantic era) was an artistic, literary, musical, and intellectual movement that originated in Europe towards the end of the 18th century, and in most areas was at its peak in the approximate period from 1800 to 1850. Romanticism was characterized by its emphasis on emotion and individualism as well as glorification of all the past and nature, preferring the medieval rather than the classical. 

Gustave Doré, in full Paul-Gustave Doré, (born January 6, 1832, Strasbourg, France—died January 23, 1883, Paris), was a French printmaker, one of the most prolific and successful book illustrators of the late 19th century, whose exuberant and bizarre fantasy created vast dreamlike scenes widely emulated by Romantic academicians. This artist is one of my all-time favorites and I have enjoyed his works for decades, it all started when I discovered the amazing book "The Divine Comedy" by Dante Alighieri and in borrowing several copies of it from the library, I eventually came across an edition with some illustrations of Dante's travels through the circles of the inferno and those illustrations really brought to life the descriptions in the book.  I had to find out who had drawn those amazing pictures.  Doré was an art prodigy at the 5-years old and at 14 years old, he walked into a newspaper editor's office in Paris and told the editor that he could draw better illustrations than the newspaper  was producing. Obviously, the editor laughed but when the young man showed his sketches, he was hired on the spot, well almost, due to his age, they had to wait for the parents to sign the contract.   Today, Gustave Dore is best known for his illustrations of Dante's The Divine Comedy. Now it may seem unbelievable, but this magnificent work was originally self-published. Dore couldn't find a publisher who was willing to take a financial risk on the extravagant edition he imagined. He decided to take the risk himself and publish this amazing artwork in 1861. The illustrations of The Divine Comedy became an instant success. Many of which I will share at a later time with you all. 

'The Spectrum of Banquo' was a fantastic discovery for me as I had mainly focused on the Inferno illustrations but this quickly became one of my favorite works of his. I came across this painting and had no context to it. What I did know was how unnerved it made me feel with its dark brushstrokes and the white painted highlights of the spectators we see in the background but obviously the main attraction of this piece is the person seated bathed in what appear to be wrapped in bandages. What is going on in this picture? , I thought to myself. Who are these people and why is this painting so spooky? Well turns out that this is an image from a scene in William Shakespeare's play Macbeth (Act 2. Scene 4.) where the ghost of Banquo appears only to Macbeth, why is it a big deal? Well in the play Banquo was Macbeth's closest friend but when the two visit some witches, it is prophesied that Macbeth will be King but eventually Banquo's offspring would inherit the throne, this scares the sh*t out of Macbeth and instructs Banquo to be murdered. In the painting, what we see is Macbeth hosting a feast and the guilt of having his best friend killed is really beginning to haunt him, literally and figuratively and the ghost seems to be coming unwrapped from its mummy-like bandages.

The erratic yet brilliant strokes of different paint shades and the unfinished quality of this painting give it a life outside the Macbeth context and I still think that the item hanging from the ceiling looks like an upside down cross, which we know it isn't since that is not an element in the play. Even knowing that the painting is about a scene in Macbeth, I would love to know what your first impression of the painting was and what you thought it depicted before learning the truth about the painting? I know I had a strong response to it the first time I saw it. I hope you enjoyed looking at it as much as I have since I found this piece by one of my favorite artists. 

I'm kind of frustrated that there is very little information regarding this painting. There are no YouTube videos dedicated to it and I have yet to find where the painting is being displayed today. My guess is it is in a private collection since no Art Gallery or Art Museum seems to be holding it. 

Edited March 9, 2021 by Con

[Con 5,719]

Suggested music:

Impression, Sunrise by Claude Monet (1872)

Impression, Sunrise is a painting by Oscar-Claude Monet. It is in the Impressionism-style and is oil on canvas, 83cm x 63cm (18.9 in x 24.8) it can be seen at the Musee Marmottan Monet in Paris, France.

Impressionism is a 19th-century art movement characterized by relatively small, thin, yet visible brush strokes, open composition, emphasis on accurate depiction of light in its changing qualities (often accentuating the effects of the passage of time), ordinary subject matter, inclusion of movement as a crucial element of human perception and experience, and unusual visual angles. Impressionism originated with a group of Paris-based artists whose independent exhibitions brought them to prominence during the 1870s and 1880s.

Detail: https://static-secure.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Music/Pix/pictures/2014/8/22/1408706216871/Impression-Sunrise-Impres-014.jpg

The first thing that struck me as odd the first time I came across this work was its unusual title with the comma in it. It turns out that the title had to be made up on the spot as Monet had not named it when he entered it to an exhibit where art critics would judge the works. Monet didn't know what to call it since it wasn't a clear image of the subjects. So he referred to it as an "Impression of a sunrise" and that is how it became known as "Impression, Sunrise", but people that is not what makes this painting special. You see at the time, the art world had a set of rules for artists, especially painters, they had to do their best to hide their brush strokes. If any critic noticed the strokes, the work was considered inferior and the artist an amateur. Many paintings done in this style (before it got its name) were always rejected and were never exhibited in any of the respected galleries.

Anyhow, Monet has this work reviewed by a popular and respected critic and the critic mocks the painting and basically says in his review that the painting is unfinished and compares it to wallpaper and he then takes the word "Impression" from the title and probably said in private, "These Impressionists do sh*t work".

Naturally, Monet and other artists who were painting with unconventional techniques and wanted their brush strokes to show embraced the "Impressionist" label and continued to defy the societal art norms. Thanks to Napoleon III the art movement took off when he commissioned a gallery showcase called "The Exhibition of the Impressionists" in 1874 and is where the world saw "Impression, Sunrise" for the first time and absolutely elevated not just Monet but an entire art movement. 

After the painting became popular and became regarded as the painting that started Impressionism, it would go on to be criticized for the "unrealistic" sun. The issue the critics had was that the sun was way too bright for the scene, which depicts a foggy-morning at the Harbor in Le Havre, Monet's birthplace. It was considered the only "flaw" in the piece. But once the Photometer was invented and aimed at the painting, it was discovered that the sun is actually the same luminance as the surrounding colors but when you remove the color, the sun blends into the sky. Here is a link that will show you what I'm talking about: http://www.webexhibits.org/colorart/monet.html

What I personally love about this painting are those erratic brushstrokes that shouldn't make sense. When you zoom in to the painting, you can see just how masterful those strokes really are and how when you step back they create that amazing illusion. Those brilliant orange or red, I believe the color is cadium, of the sun's reflection on the water is just fn cool. Like I can see him just swiping his brush left to right with no care in the world creating that magnificent effect. The blues and grays of the smoke stacks and boat masts just dance all over the canvas and as much as my brain says, look at that mess, there is no denying a photo emerges. I just like the serenity of the people on the boats, just cruising the harbor. 

"Impression, Sunrise" is from a series of six painted canvases that depict the port "during dawn, day, dusk, and dark and from varying viewpoints, some from the water itself and others from a hotel room looking down over the port. 

In conclusion, I find this a masterpiece in every sense of the word and a very important painting because without the Impressionist movement becoming respected, my guy Paul Cezanne might have just went into banking with his father and quit painting. This painting has a truly rich history and there is so much more that has been discovered about it. 

Edited March 9, 2021 by Con