Is the gallery becoming all too predictable?

I am not with you here Alan, it is not too predictable IMHO. It constantly puts up new work with new members, although I do find there is a nucleus of people who comment and the same names always crop up, obviously folk with the same interest in looking at certain subjects or techniques. I find with any club/group/forum/website there are always those that do and those that don't bother to contribute other than show/exhibit their own works/views, many not attending in person to activities - take our most recent exhibition for example, I won't bore you with statistics.

Thank you Alan - I have expressed this view before and I got somewhat lambasted for it. I am certainly not criticising any of the artists nor of different ability levels - I just wanted to make the point that there is so little exploration and experimentation. We do occaionally see something to excite us that is different and exciting - for example currently Nacho Frades has been posting some unusual and interesting abstracts. I do rather think that we artists are in a bit of a dilemma - The paintings enjoyed by the older generation are not so popular with the younger generations and as we all get older so the preferences for the more traditional will almost surely continue to wane. The make-over programmes, Under The Hammer etc all help to demonstrate and influence thinking of younger members of society. Art group membership continues to decline and if we want to promote this great hobby and interest we have to reflect at least some of the current trends. I have detected quite a fall off lately in both commissions and sales of my own very traditional (and for some boring) watercolours - I was selling regularly through a gallery but nothing for two months and commissions are down so I am now looking more and more at bright statement making abstracts - I am experimenting and innovating. All I am suggesting is that it would be great to see others doing the same.

It's going to be as predictable as those contributing to it of course, and I'm not sure what can be done about that in practical terms - other than to encourage more to contribute and hope that they don't all produce the same sort of thing.... there's no way of regulating that. Is it predictable ...? Well - there's a reason why I don't post much, and that's that I do tend to natter a lot on the Forum, and don't want to be omnipresent on the Gallery as well. I have a fairly full set of galleries, but that's because I've been here for quite a while - I'm not keen at all on posting everything I paint (and rather regret posting some of those I did: I think a bit of pruning might be in order here..... ). I know you weren't talking about me, or anyone in particular, but I should be glad to make space for more original and challenging work, if it were coming along - the snag is that in these terms, it isn't. A lot of us do paint quite similar things: every now and then I've dropped a gentle hint - probably with all the subtlety of a Panzer tank crashing into your sitting room - that possibly a few themes have been overdone. I should not, for example, mind a bit if the big cat scenario were given a rest for a while: and you know I'm only picking on that one because actually there haven't been many lately, and I don't want to offend, or more to the point put off, people who contribute their work for us to see. One of the pleasures of the Gallery for me has been seeing how people's work has developed over the years - it would be invidious to name names perhaps - and as a discipline, I've found it useful to see how mine has developed: I can do things now with oil paint, for instance, which I just couldn't have done 5 years ago; and here, I can find it all laid out and dated in a way which I lack the self-organization to manage myself (especially given the tendency of my old computer to crash whenever it felt like it, always managing to lose a score of files in the process). I think Michael's point was partly that there's a shortage of abstract paintings - this doesn't trouble me in itself; what I felt was lacking in the past was drawings, but there have been more of those lately. In other words - the Gallery is a dynamic thing; it - like the Forum - gets into a rut from time to time, then leaps into life. Perhaps we need a bit more leaping, but there's no way to stimulate that artificially that I can think of. There's a fair amount of material I don't much like - but I can glide over that and wouldn't generally comment on it. You mention figure drawing - my only observation there is that, if we're going to show it, it has to be well done, and honest: ie, to explore form as part of a drawing or painting discipline, and not just to show that you can draw women's breasts while their limbs haven't been thought about properly and resemble nothing so much as inner tubes: that's certainly a predictable theme, and one which crops up extremely tediously. But even the exponents of art as an ogling exercise get tired of just churning out one mucky-schoolboy scribble after another, and move on. One has to take the long view, I think - indeed, I don't know what else one can do. Can't help with your loathing of Christmas, Alan - there will be festive pictures of some sentimentality, and indeed there will probably be one from me (although at least mine usually contain rats in various appealing guises; I say appealing......) - all I ask is that we might not be thrust into the season too quickly: I have a dental appointment and a 65th birthday to get through first, and am really not in a tinselly mood. It is still October ...... Still, there are those who carry the spirit of Christmas in their hearts every day of the year. Doncha just hate them?

Has POL become a victim of its own success? If any major Art Gallery was to offer the opportunity to predominantly amateur artists, regardless of style and skill, to exhibit their work with the same ease in which we are able to do so on POL., then isn't some predictability the likely outcome? I am simply grateful to be able to 'display' some of my work to a wide audience, after all, 'to be seen' is the primary aim of all 'artists,' just as the musician needs to be heard! I enjoy looking at the work of others and indeed, can be inspired by some as well as being indifferent to others, but I appreciate the effort made by all. With regard to subject matter and style of painting, I feel it discourteous of 'fellow artists' to imply that one has more 'artistic merit' than another. We are all at different levels of development and expertise and we all strive to experiment and innovate within our chosen style, medium and choice of subject. Who is it to say that someone 'stagnates' by 'churning out' the same stuff? Are landscapes regarded as the 'same stuff?' Are portraits the 'same stuff?' Surely not? Different materials and changes of style does not necessarily result in more interesting work for the viewer. Neither does 'keeping up with current trends' as this smacks of jumping onto the next 'in vogue' bandwagon. We paint whatever we want in whatever style we like and if some people like it then that's a result, if not then back to the drawing board or easel, and on to the next 'work of art!' Is it not the job of the artist to influence trends and not vice versa? With regard to what sells? no one has a clue! Although the 'emperor's new clothes' syndrome does have some bearing on the matter! It's satisfying and humbling to receive favourable comments about one's work. If however, one was to comment on the 'effort' made by the artist then we would all qualify! As it stands it's virtually impossible to comment on every piece of work that you might like as there's simply too many! Has therefore POL become a victim of its own success?

Whatever gets posted to the gallery is a work of art that someone has sweated over and is proud enough to share with us all... Its egalitarian gallery all are welcome regardless of their artistic status... Perhaps if you want to see, say more abstract art in the gallery? Well make some and post it in the gallery... It's not down to any of us here in the forum to decry what we do or do not find in the gallery. And what do we do? Ignore it...we pass on by without leaving any comment.

Well said Alan. Artistic merit has nothing to do with the points being made here. Keep painting subectsin styles which interest you but do also try out something different and new from time to time - you might be surprised just how enjoyable it can be both for you as the artist and for the viewer. By doing so you might also help influence younger potential artists to pick up the brush and in so doing help to boost to the flagging art clubs across the country.

The point is that we don't want to discourage people (well, that's MY point, anyway). There's so much work on the gallery just now - which is to be welcomed - that, as has been said, it's impossible to comment on all of it even if one wanted to. Looking over it over the last couple of weeks, we've had Rupert Cordeux, Satu Vertiainen, Alan Bickley, Dennis Rounding, Nacho Frades, Glenys Weston, Robert Dutton, Pratim Das - and of course many others. The differences between them are vast - and I don't think they're predictable at all even if the majority tend to be figurative - I don't have a problem with that, although abstract work would be welcome; and I expect it'll come, in time, in greater quantity. Is the gallery a victim of its own success - well; no, I don't think so. It's certainly highly populated, and has a high rate of churn: you can be on the front page one minute, and 5 or 6 pages into the hinterland before you've had a chance to boil a kettle. But then, it's not a virtual equivalent of a high street gallery, really - that could be done, but it wouldn't be the equal opportunity gallery we have here, in which professionals and amateurs, Sunday painters, the "self-taught", and the art school graduates are cheek by jowl. I like THAT element of it just as it is - conscious that it changes all the time - because I don't know where else you might find anything remotely like it. (The figure drawing/painting argument needs to be looked at aside from all else, because considerations enter into it that go beyond but still include the aesthetic, and it's unrealistic to suppose otherwise.)

We all have an opinion on everything we see on POL and of course Alan, it's yours and everyone's right to comment if one feels the need to do so. However, as an 'established' artist, to then decry a piece of work because you 'detest christmas' is hardly a basis for any comment. You also bemoan the fact that you haven't received the feedback you expected regarding your life studies and experiments with your new paints, but we all, whether 'established' or not, have differing views of what is considered to be 'artistic merit' and comment accordingly.

I knew exactly what Michael meant when he first made his comment . If I remember correctly I concurred with him. The Gallery sometimes gets a bit samey and predictable I just do a quick skim to look for little gems hidden in the depths of the predictable stuff which is entirely inevitable . We cant all like everything all the time . The boring stuff ( to me ) i just ignore . In general its a great facility . Thank you P O L team.

Good points Sylvia. There are a lot who don't comment, but if they don't look at my/our work who cares? I very very rarely look at what I know or think to be pros, seeing this as an amateur site and they have enough stuff in their bags to make their publicity widespread. I have in the past commented on their work and received no thanks/recognition at all. One of them I have met and painted with.