Hello there!
Here's a colleague of some of my former tutors, and probably the most well-known artist I've talked to in real life. After just starting lurking this board a few weeks ago, I'm guessing of all the artists who's names I've memorised, through my 14 years as a painter, Jonathan Wateridge might be the one closest to the general taste of /ic/.
What baffles me about this board, is the fact that literally none of the names that has been brought up, are known in the 'real' art world. Complementary to this, there seem to be a consensus that art school and contemporary art is worthless to you lot. Does /ic/ even research the diverse plethora of 21st century art?
Watch the video, tell me what you think, and name some other artists that one likely could come across in the stables of internationally acclaimed galleries.
http://youtu.be/cJewz6JUJXM
The thing about /ic/ is that we draw ourselves, we aren't here to look at other artists.
The artists you see us talking about are the ones whose techniques we care about, because that will actually help us with our own stuff.
>>2459623
>5 minute video of how-to photobash
and not to forget
>name dropping
>now I'm almost as good as
>on the obsolescence of oil painting
I'm going to go ahead and say this is a bait thread
>>2459687
Most threads on /ic/ are carefully crafted for the sole purpose of being baits.
>>2459687 did you even watch the video?
You do realize 'painting is dead' was repeatedly proclaimed in early postmodern times, right? What he means is that in a world where you don't have to use paint in order to create images, the fact that it becomes an option rather than default makes it more interesting. It's not the easy way out. People paint for a reasons other than necessity.
And it's not bait, I just think /ic/ is quite simple minded, uninformed about contemporary art, and lacks historic knowledge. Why does it have to be fantasy art for you to become interested?
>>2459632
>we don't look at other artist
>we look at other artists to get better
You don't know what 'research' means, and you're contradicting yourself while trying to explain that you do the thing I ask whether you do - just not when it comes to art available in fucking galleries and museums. How the fuck would you know what you're missing out on?
>>2459623
There's something off in his technique which hurts the paintings. The concrete looks soft and lumpy rather than hard. Can't believe he builds sets to paint off only to make awkward perspective mistakes. Compare it with the art of Phil Hale whose style manages to look both more painterly as well as more realistic.
>>2459827
Also his compositions and design sense is much better.
>>2459827
Great, thanks! Although, in my OP pic, the scene is from a fake movie set. You don't have to be a genius to contemplate the possibility that it's not real concrete.
>>2459813
The acceptance of "contemporary art" (as you call it, but I know what you mean) and its overall replacement of technical, representational art in the educational scene has basically destroyed the lives of tens of thousands of young people whom otherwise would have been rightly prevented from attending what were once relatively exclusive institutions. You can't charge someone $40,000 a year to teach them the kind of stuff they could have learned in a weekend on wikipedia and expect them to be happy about it when they leave >$100,000 in debt without the professional credentials to work the front counter of a fast food restaurant.
"contemporary art" is trash, and perhaps worse, it's derivative trash that's already been played out by better artists than any of these kids are liable to be. Pollock and Duchamp may not be to my taste, but to their credit at least they were original in their time. These schools are just churning out deranged sycophants.
https://www.youtube.com/v/I9lmvX00TLY
>>2459838
>Although, in my OP pic, the scene is from a fake movie set. You don't have to be a genius to contemplate the possibility that it's not real concrete.
And yet in the model it still looks hard surface. It looks pillowy and soft because he was sloppy in painting it, not because he was trying to make it look intentionally fake.
>>2459871
I'm not going to argue much with you, since I'm not seeing it in the flesh, but I will point out that gestures such as soft focus is completely acceptable in painting.
>>2459844
I get what you're saying, but it doesn't apply to the entire art world. I went to a college where traditional life drawing was taught. It was optional, but a lot of the alumni are at least within the merits of what you'd prefer to Duchamp.
Pic is a guy a close friend from
college
>>2459915
Nice rez... kek
>>2459844
I've seen the video in the link before, and I'm happy to tell you I agree that it's absolute trash. Don't judge all artists just because cancer exists - not before you've done some research at least.
Another friend from college went to this school in Italy before attending a postgraduate at my college
http://www.angelartschool.com
>>2459927
I'm not saying that schools that teach in the traditional way don't exist, rather just that it seems like many of them really have either closed down or have greatly reduced the emphasis on "realistic" painting and drawing. Almost all art schools teach non-representational art, even among those that are known for the representational like Calarts, but the reverse doesn't hold true. This has serious consequences for people. If I didn't know what an "atelier" was and found that there was one near me I could have ended up going to the nearest art school and odds are I would have to take out a mortgage-sized loan to make finger paintings and macaroni pictures. I mean, I personally never would but I've heard many anecdotes of people whom really thought that art schools had some sort of standard they were held to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCHzD3mzdas
>>2459632
who the fuck is "we" cunt?
>>2459948
I haven't lurked that many boards, maybe ten tops. This is the third time I see this pic, so I guess memes don't escape this board.
I just spent way to many minutes on the nearly one hour long video. I'm not saying he's wrong, but I am saying he's an animator and not really relevant to my thread about fine art and painting in particular.
How about not trying to explain something to me that I already knew even before I chose to apply for art school eleven years ago...
>>2459818
OP, to make it more clear to you - this board is for people who want to learn to draw, we aren't here to fawn over artists or talk about how deep they are or give you likes or some other shit. You are plain disrespectful.
The video you linked is a waste of time. It's an advert. It doesn't matter a single shit to me as an artist, especially as there are thousands of great artists and hundreds of years of great art on my fingertips.
But I had a good laugh when he pretended to paint with tiny cheap brushes for watercolor.
>>2459996
>on /ic/
>doesn't draw
stfu
>>2460066
Agree.
Isn't this what /i/ is for.
>>2460034
>my thread about fine art and painting in particular.
that's your problem OP, we don't look with good eyes at this kind of threads here, this is a board for learning fundamentals, not for fine arts
now gtfo
>I'm no photorealist in any shape or form
>I don't work with live models
>A camera sees more than a human eye does.
Jeez
>>2459623
This guy is just a cheap gimmick, good that it pays his bills but that doesn't change the fact that he's just creating convoluted storyboards.
Great art is not just entertainment, or decoration, or technical achievement. Great art speaks to and is enhanced by its context. These paintings are just pulp and disposable and his process only makes that more evident.
>>2460066
>>2460133
I've seen his work in the flesh, and I figured posting a video would be more informative than just OP pic. My biggest concern is the contempt /ic/ got for new opinion. In what way, shape and form can't you fathom that the artists I'm referring to WILL make you better at doing your own work, if you look at them. That's the entire point of researching. If you believe that the only artists you can learn from, are concept artists working on video games and comic book artists, you're a fool. Furthermore, who decided that /ic/ is fundamentally drawing related, and not painting?
/ic/ lives in a world of separation, and it saddens me that, in this case rather than merely post some names I can look at to further understand the peculiar section of the art world that you aspire to, you reply with the same sallow cynicism that the ironic postmodern world is ridden with.
And cheap watercolour brushes are an optimal replacement for fan brushes. Also, it's a newspaper's online video, the medium is the message. Don't let it distract you too much, sweetheart.
>>2460151
He explicitly told that he didn't work with live models for this specific body of work.
The camera DOES see more than the eye/brain. Or are all your cameras attached to 15 year old Nokias? Read up on phenomenological perception, son.
>>2460186
some cameras can even see infrared or xrays while the human brain can only see about 7 colors
really makes you think
>>2460176
I guess you haven't got a taste for history painting, senpai
>>2460193
When you are anonymous, the content of your post is representative of your quality as a human being. There is a strong possibility that you are a walking, talking, literal pile of human shaped garbage.
>>2460190
What about edge detection...
>>2460182
You walk the fine line between troll and mental problem which needs to spend a few years in a cushioned room. Next you are going to talk about how I avoid your 'arguments' and how it is typical for /ic/?
>>2460200
At least I work in a multitude of colours.
You seem quite black and white.
>>2460213
phase detection is a lot faster
>>2460219
>mistaking value for hue
And no, I do not work. On my canvas? I play.
>>2460221
>firez forgot trip
>>2460217
I didn't want to get into an argument, you cockup - I wanted to look at some artists you lot are into, who aren't comic book/video game/concept art, but who actually show and sell their work, painting by physical painting - not as reproduction.
>>2460230
That guy is banned for life. Try using his trip.
>>2460221
How is this even clever? I know what hues are. I know what saturation is. I know what values are. Have you ever worked in beeswax before? How experienced are you with spectragel? When was the first time you smelled matt glaze medium?
This isn't a competition, tool.
>>2460243
>saturation
>not chroma
The photoshop generation speaks and what a surprise, it's an ignorant shout.
>>2460237
how can a mod be banned?
>>2460259
ask him dude
>>2459623
This piece is fucking ugly
No amount of skill (which he has) can make up for a plain ugly piece of shit
It's like pasting snippets from different photos together, just no overall harmony, it's cringy as fuck.
That shitty woman's pose is also triggering me, this is like egyptian art in high definition.
>>2460253
Actually, face to face I would talk about is as high-key and low-key, but what does it matter... Can't win with you guys, can I?
>>2460276
What is your native language? Maybe it's just unfair that you have to argue in English.
>>2460265
At least you take it a tad serious. Maybe I was wrong. Now, show me something good.
>>2460278
In my native language I would call it 'fargemetning', but I'm Norwegian - so no, there's no excuse.
>>2460182
lemme jump into the discussion
after watching your video, I can't really say I learned something that can improve my work. Which is the main reason why I visit this board (and all the drama is fun).
Most users here seem to focus on a career or something similar in an art world that heavily deals with the digital medium, but also requires strong foundations, which explains our focus on drawing, "video games" - more specific would be concept art - and mediums like (web-)comics. This should explain why the video you posted is pretty much useless for many of us. The only thing I find noteworthy is the last sentence this dude said, that the "very obsolescence" gives traditional drawing/painting a new role and possibly a new exciting factor. That is something that has been discussed many times here (photobashing vs. no photobash etc.)
>>2460233
> I wanted to look at some artists you lot are into, who aren't comic book/video game/concept art, but who actually show and sell their work, painting by physical painting - not as reproduction
Well, as I already pointed out this board mainly deals with the digital medium, there are a few guys here who paint traditionaly, but they're a minority.
Most physical traditional painters that get posted here are dead. Dudes like Bouguereau, Shishkin, Leyendecker, Mucha, (LOOMIS) etc. etc.
Looking at the catalog there is a thread about Kim Jung Gi who does physical drawings and sells them, but I guess he would be too "comic" for you.
I guess what seperates Wateridge from your video and most of /ic/ is our seeking for excellence in our craft (be it painting, drawing or shitposting) while Wateridge wants to communicate some abstract concept I don't really get and frankly - don't really care about atm.
>>2460233
Right now you are just a vapid piece of shit who has lost all objectivity.
>>2459623
>beard
>smooth hairless legs
Loses points for implausible grooming style
>>2460384
It takes one to know one?
Me: I want to look at artists you admire
You: Shut up asshole, I don't care about all the things you do, therefore you're [insert insult].
I hope you get well soon.
>>2460296
Thanks for the response. I think everyone, you included, misunderstood the purpose of the video. It was to show several paintings by the same artist at once, instead of filling the thread up with images. The point was not to teach you anything technical - you'd have to look at the paintings to learn anything.
Anyway, this is the thing. You're posting a painting by Sargent. I haven't seen the painting before, but I googled the title. This is how easy doing research is. Before it used to be the library, before that it used to be art museums only, but artists have always looked at their contemporaries. I probably only like 3% of all the art I see in galleries, but whenever I come across something worth looking at, I'm filled with real excitement, which makes up for all the crap out there. It so happens that I'm not only limited to representational work, it's the painting as form that excites me. It's the gestural brushwork, the blending, the juxaposition of contrast, size relative to my body etc.
I don't care whether people on here gets it, but alongside representational painting, I also love nonfigurative art, and I work in both myself, among other things.
>>2460296
(cont.)
Protip though: it's not called 'abstract concept' it's called 'discourse'
Discursive art is according to art historians today considered opposed to formalism. Formalistic paintings contain everything you need to know about the work, even as discursive art will usually comment on something outside of itself, often just by title, relations between imagery, or the nature of the materials. For instance, you could create a painting by just using mushroom spores and it will be read as dealing with anything from psychedelics to networking. (In addition, it could also be figurative and abstract, respectively.)
Works of art are analogs for poetic notions. This is fine, trust me, nothing wrong or degenerate about it, but it's important to keep in mind that it's not meant to be judged on the same merits as representational painting. They are both meant to be looked at, but what you derive from them depends on the associations you can access.
I get it, most of /ic/ don't care, but that doesn't mean that I take the same stance towards what you care about, even if I care about contemporary art as well.
Point is research is important no matter what you create, and I'm just asking whether you all have the same art of selected artists, who cover everything you need to know at a fundamental level.
>>2460446
It's depicting a special makeup artist fixing the wound on an actor in a movie set. You're telling me that hair removal and hair is implausible in the movie industry.
Just wow.
>>2460451
>OP: /ic/, you are all inferior faggots, but I will allow you to look at my glowing figure and kiss my feet and allow you to talk about how I am the greatest being
>/ic/ (in unison): fuck off
>OP: NOOOO!!! YOU VILE BEINGS! HOW CAN YOU BE SO TERRIBLE TO ME! ALL I SAID WAS HELLO! THIS IS A TERRIBLE WORLD THAT NEEDS SOMEONE! ME! TO RIGHT IT'S WRONGS!
>/ic/ (in unison): FUCK OFF
>OP: ... (ad absurdum)
Is this the shitstorm of the day !!!!
I better get out my notepad.exe and start copying things down !!!!
>>2460569
love this blog
i would appreciate if some of you posted some good resources for getting info and updates about the art world and just art in general. theres gotta be some useful websites that i dont know about that you do cuz thus far ive only see people post niche shit and other stuff thats pretty much useless. im not saying no one on here knows what theyre doing, but i dont know what im doing and it would be nice if some of you more seasoned artists took that into account and helped a brother out a little. im not asking for a free tutoring session just a place to start besides the sticky
