Hello,

it seems that, like in painting, everyone see things differently: one
will try to reproduce reality, one will make a king of Picasso (even if
Picasso has also made some very realistic painting :)), and another will
try to tell something with realistic object but which are in strange
scenes as Magritte!

This is a very good thing :)!

Fabian.

Post a reply to this message

>
>This is a very good thing :)!
>
>Fabian.
>

yup!

Post a reply to this message

I love modern art. Especially the kind that looks "real" but couldn't
possibly exist, like glass spiral trees or whatever. I even like just plain
photographs of things like mountains, fish, etc. Nature is beautiful. What I
hate are those really old, pre-renaissance paintings where people just
painted people and everything was flat. What's so aesthetic about a bad
painting of a chubby explorer with a huge mole that has no depth (except the
fact it's worth a fortune)? Even with the introduction of perspective, a lot
of paintings during the 1500s and 1600s still lacked shading and still only
showed people and buildings.

David
visit my homepage! http://thunder.prohosting.com/~davidf
---------------------------------------------------------

Fabian Brau wrote:

> Hello,
>
> it seems that, like in painting, everyone see things differently: one
> will try to reproduce reality, one will make a king of Picasso (even if
> Picasso has also made some very realistic painting :)), and another will
> try to tell something with realistic object but which are in strange
> scenes as Magritte!
>
> This is a very good thing :)!
>
> Fabian.

Post a reply to this message

I wrote:
>Great art must inspire.

Fabian Brau wrote:

> Hello,
>
> it seems that, like in painting, everyone see things differently: one
> will try to reproduce reality, one will make a king of Picasso (even if
> Picasso has also made some very realistic painting :)), and another will
> try to tell something with realistic object but which are in strange
> scenes as Magritte!

I did not include the one example that clarifies my position.

There was a winner in a recent IRTC called "Water Trick".  The artist had a
delightfully original and funny concept: that of tying a knot in water just
like one might with string!  To top it off, it had a high degree of
photorealism!  That is great art!

If there were an IRTC contest with the theme of "Kitchen Sinks", and someone
were to offer up something that looked exactly like that kitchen sink
photograph we saw on p.b.i. a few months ago,  that would be a really lousy
entry. I hope it would lose.

> This is a very good thing :)!
>
> Fabian.

The engineer next door to me teaches 3D computer art at a local art
college.  He said the most important thing is to make things that look
cool.  If you needed a photorealistic image of a sink, paraphrasing, take a
photograph.

A sunset for the purpose of a sunset is booooooooooooring.  A sunset with a
wooden Argo creeping off into it is cool...

Post a reply to this message