ITT: Post your favorite self-portrait
Artist: Jenny Morgan
Courbet
Velazquez
Lucian Freud
van Gogh
Lovis Corinth
>>2328881
Max Beckmann
>>2328885
>>2328876
Tim Benson
>>2328694
"Oh shit, I left the oven on!"
>>2328879
you wont make it
>>2328927
wut
>>2328930
you wont make it with that pleb taste
>>2329000
Just like most figurative fine art painters, can't do perspective.
>>2329087
lol wut? what perspective would you nees in there?
>>2329036
lol no
>>2329100
The ellipse of whatever that is going into the ceiling in the background.
Its okay one day you'll understand
>>2329131
So the roof can't go upwards?
>>2329087
Yeah, it looks fine, ya dingus.
>>2329131
show your superior redline faggot
>>2329231
I disagree, dingus.
>>2329248
then prove you are right
>>2329100
>>2329185
>>2329231
>>2329240
He's a portrait painter. He's spent all his time concentrating on the figure from reference/life.
His perspective is a load of wank.
>>2329257
His painting already does that for me.
>>2329267
>chair on table
>wrong perspective
>>2329273
If you think those objects/table on the bottom left look right, then you have a bad eye, and it's pointless even talking to you.
>>2328571
>>2329277
except that they follow the same 1 VP as the table
>but muh Scott Robertson autism superpowers
>>2329036
Van Gogh is fire, f am. But his work actually was really important so he gets taught in schools and plebs latch on to him because they think they can use him as a justification for muh style.
>tfw Van Gogh used patterns to achieve additive color mixing but plebs think the patterns were his end goal.
JUST
>>2329277
Redline if for us
>>2329292
Bad eye confirmed.
>>2329292
>thinks 1VP is accurate perspective
>doesn't understand ellipses and cylinders in perspective
I don't even know who that is.
>>2329424
>a fundamental such as perspective
>silly things
Hate to break it to you, but you're also an amateur. You don't have anywhere near the kind of authority to try and condescend to others that you think you have.
I never argued the overall quality of the painting, I pointed out what I noticed, sorry you got butthurt about it. Thanks for acknowledging I was right though.
>>2329441
I am an amateur but I wouldn't have the audacity to call out a great artist on his perspective when it is good enough and not exactly the point of their work. The perspective does well enough to describe the background and aid composition without being distractingly 'off'.
>>2329036
I already pay my bills with my art. So suck a dick I guess.
>>2329453
dude they are very iconic and well known paintings so of course you have bad taste for liking them!
>>2329453
so do i :^)
>>2329447
>I wouldn't have the audacity to call out a great artist on his perspective
"Great artist" is subjective. Regardless, what you are suggesting is an appeal to authority. Nobody, nor their work is above criticism, or at the very least discussion.
>>2329485
It's not appeal to authority, sure his perspective isn't perfect I just don't see the need to point it out for no apparent reason.
>>2329487
>no apparent reason
Noticing it is reason enough.
Amature as Kim K's porno, deal. Drugs made this a lot of fun
>>2328571
I see you made it back to the surface Frisk.
>>2329487
I agree with you. I don't think the painting needs to have perfect perspective since that isn't the focus of the piece. However when you speak as if one can't criticise a painting because it's better that what anyone itt can do, you sound like a faggot. Of course one might criticise it if they feel that the painting would have been better if it had correct perspective. Or criticise the artist if they feel that they are lazy. I personally would prefer if the perspective was worse, since it might give the piece a more interesting depth. But that's just my opinion. Which I am allowed to give. Just as any other faggot in this thread.
And cut the fucking trip.
