Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
What art
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
I think I have emotional response to both others work and how I work myself. I look , I see ...yea ok... or nah.
I can cogitate an idea for quite a while, a bit like a dog with an elusive smell. Sometimes the idea “ happens” often it doesn’t. Perhaps I should start a new art movement “ Hit or Miss “
I
Posted
Well the deleted initial comment - which just read 'What Art', has produced some interesting responses. I hope the poster feels some satisfaction that while his question, statement, or comment got removed as being incomprehensible (never mind comprehending the motives of painters) it has nonetheless brought them forth. I share most of Michael's feelings on all this -I don't question what I do, I just do it. And since I wouldn't call myself a professional any more, since I no longer paint primarily to sell (which is just as well, right now!) I paint what I like, when I like. I also agree with him on arty waffle, and on the problem of painting without an objective: this is true, and I hadn't thought of it before - it explains why I'm painting so much less than I used to. Maybe I'd better clamber back into the marketplace, first giving myself a firm smack in the chops. Yes - I do need a reason to paint regularly - I should have realized that before.
On genres - and expanding beyond the tried and tested - what I used to sell was landscapes, and that's therefore what I tended to paint (I still have some, by the way; form an orderly queue, cash and cheques accepted); I have painted portraits, buildings, animals, and drawn same - but I only once moved into abstraction, and I confess to having been drunk at the time...... it's a move I've never seriously made. I shall ponder Michael's words, indeed the words of you all; but I bet that if I did paint an abstract - you'd still know what it was "supposed to be", whereas the genuine abstract wouldn't necessary be about anything - or nothing readily discernible. Eg, what did Rothko's paintings mean? Don't know - but I know I (generally) like them.
So, food for thought, original poster - come back and have another go - in a few more words next time.
Posted
Art is a constant source of wonderment and absurdity. I hate all the fanciful waffle about it, but, at the same time, am drawn towards it. It can be interesting, funny, and ridiculous. The whole span of art from the cave paintings to the latest urinal or scruffy bed (being touted as art by earnest experts), is of interest. That interest may be admiration or flat-out laughter. It's still interest. By the by, I find cave art astonishingly 'modern'.
Robert mentioned Rothko. There is a great deal of modern/abstract art that I find absorbing. Rothko is everything I hate about abstract art. If you're looking for waffle, you find stacks of it attached to Rothko. He's all talk and no trousers.
I tend to like individual paintings rather than a whole body of any artist's work. Why I like them is hard to pin down, it may be the subject, the technique, the skill...or none of those. I'm quite happy to accept that I enjoy something without having to analyse it.
Whilst my appreciation covers all forms of art, in the end it's illustration that gets my vote. It covers all forms of art, usually with no pretension. Book illustration in particular strikes a chord with me, and there are so many wonderful artists in this field.
Here's just one...a Russian illustrator, Anton Lomaev. He has a huge catalogue of work. Here's a couple of illustrations from his version of Sherlock Holmes...
He's about as traditional as you can get. But illustration wears many suits.
You may find it pedantic. In the art world, 'illustrative' is used as a criticism. What do they know? The great thing about art, in all its creative forms, is that I don't have to like what you do.
He's about as traditional as you can get. But illustration wears many suits.
You may find it pedantic. In the art world, 'illustrative' is used as a criticism. What do they know? The great thing about art, in all its creative forms, is that I don't have to like what you do.
Posted
Thanks for posting those two wonderful illustrations Lew , I have never seen either of these before a wee bit reminiscent of Hogarth.
I must admit I have never made any distinction between “proper” painting and illustration if it jumps up and bites me and I like it , so be it.
First memories of art for most of us , is , illustration . children’s books and comics etc . Rupert Bear ,Peter Rabbit , Captain Marvel, even Enid Blytons Noddy .
Posted
It is very interesting to hear what the more experienced artist think.I don't know much about artistic waffle, being new to it all but I am one of those annoying people, who, ask why, about every thing. I do like Aboriginal art. I don't know whether it's the fact that it's bright and colourful or whether their art has a deeper meaning as it was used as a communication tool, initially or a combination of both. You can look at something and know you like it immediately and I wish I could stop there but then, I want to know a bit about the artist behind the painting. You wouldn't want me in a meeting, I'm the one with a million questions to ask and know one, going home on time.I never was popular because of all the questions I ask.
Edited
by Painful Painter
Posted
Keep asking PP , why not it’s how we learn. Waffle to one isn’t waffle to another. Learning about artists themselves and how they tick is amazing...
though I think the term waffle referred to here is used when artists or critics pontificate unnecessarily ,a bit like Toad from Wind in the Willows. Now those are wonderful illustrations Lew.
Edited
by Sylvia Evans
Posted
Fantastic illustrations by Lomaev Lew. I love that sort of work and book illustrations in general. There is so much wonderful work in children’s books which live with us for many years. When I left school and went to do an Art Foundation course I had my mind hopefully set on book illustration and/or portraiture. Sadly neither happened and life took over, but the interest remains. Sylvia mentioned Enid Blyton and Beatrix Potter, and there were the weekly comics some of which had superb work.
Have we lost something in the enjoyment of children’s books and comics because of technology with children scrolling through stories on their mobiles and tablets?
Posted
A good point about children's books being our first contact with art, Sylvia. In my case, I never moved away from it...because it's so good.
You must ask questions Denise...and question the answers.
You are right about mobiles and tablets, Tessa. At least from the point of view of this ancient observer. Methinks you may have set yet another tangent for this thread. It will be interesting to see if anyone follows it.
Posted
Lew those are great illustrations - I could look at them for ages without interruption. I have to agree also with the comments about childrens books - but there is a nostalgic influence at play.
When it comes to waffle the kind of thing I was referring to way back above is the descriptive passages used describe a work. In case anyone is still not sure here is an example:
This work was influenced by my fascination with the traditional understanding of meaning. What starts out as triumph soon becomes corroded into a hegemony of lust, leaving only a sense of chaos and the possibility of a new beginning. As spatial impressions become frozen through boundaried and critical practice, the viewer is left with an impression of the limits of our era.”
Posted
All my grandchildren are avid reader, age rang from 5 to 28, the five year old had been reading for about a year.
We have always kept books in the house for our own children and grandchildren, I have a passion for books that comes from being dyslexic. I was not able to read until ten or twelve years of age so become dependent on book with lots of illustrations, whilst not reading the story the illustrations provided the story for me. When I started to read I became aware that the stories in some books match my ideas of what it was about, the power of a picture painting a thousand words. My youngest granddaughters love two book we have that are about 30 years old neither have word but have the most beautifully painted illustrations, they love making up stories to match. I love illustrations and I suppose having now thought about it more , it has influenced how I paint. As has been said I like a paint or a pice of art no matter what genera it is , simply because I like it. I get very frustrated with art waffle, but don’t have a problem asking questions, as to why I chose to do something one way rather than the other. I for one am pleased that The thread is going well, so interesting to see what other think .ps all spelling and grammar mistakes are my own.