please don't be gentle
All:
Made me kek
Humans:
Look like motherfuckin elves
Whale:
Is a masterpiece
you my friend have yet to reach the level of ascended meme master
sorry desu
>>2269203
Does anyone know of any contemporary art forums? I'm looking to find more artists. College is generally good but I want to find more ppl, I still haven't found anyone that I could help me truly work out a vision for the future. Most people aren't very ambitious. Maybe I just need to move to New York to find people
>>2269203
lol
Meme/10
I actually like the goat and the whale.
>>2269203
go back to your 4chan
>>2269696
this is 4chan
>>2269252
Theres a difference between ambitions and delusions of grandeur, you fall into the latter
>>2271729
I'm extremely delusional or visionary, I don't really care which because both are equally fun and exciting. I barely care about becoming a big name artist but I do want to be part of a larger movement and I want to be part of whatever our generation has to say (People around 25 and younger). And I want to make a contribution that is uniquely mine and not following someone else's path. 2020 is going to be an exciting decade I think.
>>2269252
Jesus you're pretentious as fuck. Your realistic paintings aren't aesthetically pleasing at all you didn't master realism or photorealism or even how to handle oil paint virtuously. I think you just gave up on it because you didn't know how to advance. This stuff you're doing now is utter garbage. Like another anon said stop with your delusions of grandeur, you're not a "visionary" artist, you an entitled prick who thinks he's better than he actually is and its pathetically obvious. Stop all the bullshit and start studying.
I saw you posting the same shit about a year ago, I'm starting to think this insufferable persona you peddle is just a troll, and man I hope it is for your sake.
>>2272207
So much hate man.
>Stop all the bullshit and start studying.
What, you want me to go try to be some european who I have nothing to do with so I can impress my professors and parents and get facebook likes? Sounds pretty boring.
>you're not a "visionary" artist
I don't think I am a visionary artist, that implies that my vision is the correct one that will go down in history. Of course I don't think that. But I do have my personal vision for the future of things which is basically my opinion on where I personally think things should go. I'm not claiming it's the right vision, just that it's my current thoughts.
>I think you just gave up on it because you didn't know how to advance
When are you guys going to realize that attacking my more academic stuff I was doing as a teenager isn't actually a valid argument against what I'm doing now?
>>2272207
What is difficult and sometimes irritating for me is that I've met almost no people who are actually interested in innovating and leaving behind the current and traditional ways of thought . That's not to say those artists who aren't trying to do that are inadequate by my standards or that what they're interests are invalid. I think other artists are great but at the same time I want to find those that have the same aspirations and interests I do.
>>2272220
That mentality is dime a dozen in art schools and even around the internet t's what most young "artists" are told to think, that they have to innovate and have some kind of pithy manifesto. The good thing about /ic/ is that it tends to be place devoid of all that nonsense. It's why most of us are here.
>>2272215
And why is your vision interesting or relevant?
Not hating, I'm asking you so you can ask yourself. What sets you apart? What qualifies you to make any judgements?
>>2272231
As someone in art school I disagree, professors mainly want you to look at the contemporary art world, go to exhibitions, find things you like, find your favorite artists and then make your version. The second you start to stray very much from the current art world they don't like it at all. Most don't like the internet stuff I'm doing now at all.
And you talk about that mentality like its a bad thing. Like striving for originality is foolish. But that's how art has always functioned since 30 thousand years ago in cave paintings. Art changed based on the time and place. If your part of a new generation that is significantly different from your parents(modern art world), grandparents(Pop art), great parents(Abstract Expressionism), and distant ancestors(classical) , you want to make something that is about your genuine experiences, not theirs. If I just make art like they did I'm making something about their experiences, not mine. That's why when I do it for too long it seems fake. Originality at it's best is authenticity. It's about making something that is purely from your actual life and culture and not dragged down by the institutional preferences and traditions which try to turn you into something your actually not.
>>2272234
What qualifies you to make any judgements
Anyone can make judgements, I despise the idea that only big art world critics and historians are "qualified" to make judgements. Anyone is qualified, and it's probably the common man who will have the more honest and interesting thoughts.
>And why is your vision interesting or relevant?
I'm looking at a culture I was genuinely part of from a young age and making art about it. I think that makes it authentic but I can't possibly say if its relevant or interesting, that's not for my to decide. I think the things I'm looking are relevant and interesting, peoples creative expression on the internet. But I can't say if my personal work is.
>>2272243
But do you think you should therefore make no effort to understand, truly understand, the work of your parents, grandparents and further ancestors?
Look at Dali, for example. The man was a master at realism and could draw in realism as easily as you and I can write down the alphabet.
To keep that parallel going, what you're trying to do is write a boundbreaking novel while ignoring the alphabet. Go ahead, try to write your novel without the alphabet. The alphabet is the work of your ancestors, after all. Their time, not yours.
Know your alphabet. Know the rules, then break them. In that order.
>>2272248
I never said you have the a big art world critic, but I do believe you have to be an art historian to some degree.
The history of art is one enormous discussion. Every piece of art is trying to add to said discussion as time goes on, which makes it interesting.
To add something interesting to the discussion, you need to know about it. You need to understand the red thread in art history, in human history, to understand what has been said before and what points are being made.
You're a part of history, whether you like it or not, and your work will be judged, or denounced, in light of history. What do some reaction images from current pop culture(which will be lost to comprehension outside of 4chan, let alone 5 to 10 years from now) say about the influence of the internet on the world? On globalization?
You use icons that are too obscure and you draw them with mediocre skill. All this comes down to one thing:
To the great discussion that is art, you basically jump in to shitpost.
>>2272252
Were at the point of the discussion where I say look at where I am with academic realism, post work from when I was 18 and 19 that is fairly advanced for someone that age, and then you endlessly say how it's inferior because you hate the idea of me leaving it behind. If I was Raphael himself you would be fighting me.
When I look at some of the artists I think really made authentic art about their genuine experiences,, many of them didn't understand classical as well as I do, yet they were far better than I am now. Lichtenstein and Warhol for example.
Also if you knew the almost fanatic appreciation I have for certain classical artists, Velasquez, Rembrandt, Raphael, Vermeer, I doubt you'd be saying I made no effort to understand. My Rembrandt book (rembrandt the painter at work) literally has every page covered in highlighter and side notes. I saw the jewish bride at the Rijksmuseum last month and I almost cried. I stayed in that room for well over an hour.
But sometime I don't think I need classical at all to make art about my genuine experiences. Sometimes I try to rid myself of it so I can look at what I'm actually living
>>2272256
Yeah to that I'll have to say fuck off. Art historians only look backwards, they aren't interested in the least with what's actually going on now that will turn into the future of art. I've taken a lot of art history classes, they are clueless about what people my age are about. Their vision is going to be the most skewed out of anyones. And if you look at art history, artists with great vision are basically never the institutional historian types. They are almost exclusively outsiders actually. They make things that are based on current reality and not history.
>>2272265
So you're trying to argue that this constant and logical flow in which art has evolved, which has a very clear and organic evolution, is just a bunch of completely isolated artists who had no idea whatsoever about what came before them?
I'm not saying you need to be an institutional art historian, you dufus. I'm saying that art cannot be made in a vacuum. Understanding your history(in this case, art history) allows you to build on that.
>>2272264
We're not hating the idea of you leaving realism behind. We're afraid you could develop a beautiful vision, with amazing ideas, but will only have amateuristic skills to express them with. That you yourself deemed your work at 18 or 19 as advanced, doesn't mean it is.
But alright, if we are to look past the technical skill of your work and look into the idea: Post more work. I assume the piece in the OP isn't your most recent work. If it is, I'd like to give my opinion on it by its own merit, without looking at the technical skill involved.
>>2272274
It's current. It was rendered very quickly in one night starting at about 8pm in the studio.
Hopefully mods don't think this is self promotion, here's my deviantart, old work is on page 2 and 3
http://ryanrebane123.deviantart.com/gallery/?offset=0
>>2272264
What cracks me up is that you place so much importance on authenticity and your own unique expression and write a hell of a lot meanwhile youre already cliched and outdated work sits in th OP. Its not working, time to change your mind again.
>>2272282
I agree, and I'm working on it. You got any ideas yourself, seriously I'm looking for people to collaborate with.
>>2272281
First of all: If you want a piece to be evaluated on its own merit, don't talk about the process. Whether you rendered it in 5 minutes or 12 hours makes no difference to the individual worth of the work. Unless it has to do with what the work is trying to say, don't mention the process. For all the audience cares, you shat on a canvas, scanned it in and cleaned up in photoshop.
2nd: Never skimp on a background. A piece is seen as a whole, a complete little microcosm. The background sets the mood for the piece, it is more than just a container for individual parts, just like the human body is more than just a pillar for the head to stand on. This background doesn't at all match with the feeling of "feels good, man" and, to put it kindly, makes it uncomfortable to look at.
I do think the grouping of the colours seem to have some order to it. Bottom browns are together, middle bright and colourful, top greens stand out. Interesting, though I wonder if this was on purpose. It doesn't seem like it.
The faces themselves serve their purpose. They are clear and people on 4chan could recognize them. I wonder if people outside of 4chan would understand half of it. They might, for example, just see a weird goat, a whale and a dog with a bad spongebob. If you want to make art about a culture, consider if you want it to appeal to said culture alone, or if you want it to be accessible. Consider your audience.
Last but not least: You say you want to break with art history and make something that stands on its own. Yet, you pick *reaction* images to work with. What are they reacting to? Right now, all they are is a group of smug looking drawings, disjointed and out of context, that might as well have been a page of sketchbook drawings studying this specific facial expression in different beings.
>>2272293
Good feedback, I don't agree with 100 percent of it but a lot of it is valid. What I was attempting to do is make the audience "feel good" by drawing reaction images for "feels good man". In general they would have a pleasant feeling because that's what the individual images make you feel when they are used as reaction images online. Also popular reaction images tend to be pretty high octane emotions, they are powerful. And ironically a lot of times that means quite a bit of subtly like in the goat and dog. The ones that are most popular are going to make the viewer feel that way the strongest.
Also it's sort of a proof of concept about a way the internet communicates. It finds images from popular culture(often obscure) and then uses it as a tool to convey a feeling. If this wasn't an artist to artist discussion I would have never said any of that but this is about critiquing to improve, not selling.
>>2272293
I actually think this piece would work better for people who aren't familiar with them already because they could just take them as they are without thinking "4chan". They would be able to feel the "feel good man" feeling more easily I think
>>2272299
I get what you're saying, but in that case, work on the background. A lot.
The background is very important. Right now it denotes neutrality, if not boredom. It in and of itself should also show feels good, man.
>>2272301
Good feedback. I've actually been struggling with the background. Do you have any suggestions?
>>2272304
A feels good environment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postinternet
Sorry to follow you into this thread Ryan, I just want you to know that if you have these aspirations in fine art you better be sure to check the assets your using in your collages are free for you to use. Some of the photographs and stuff. I have no idea if you took those or not, but since you didn't accredit my minions (terrible though they are, they do not constitute "found art") it opens the question of academic integrity in your work.
Taking an image off google and painting over the top could be a breach of copyright, and when you are selling your work or using it to promote your image an artist then it is very different from pirating a movie to watch at home. But for a lot of times you can just say "I found this image on x website" and it's good enough
Hopefully none of this lecture applies to you, just letting you know babe. I like ur work btw
Stop trying to pretend that your garbage art isnt garbage. You fucking pleb, go read the sticky and fuck off.
