Not a photo, but a digital painting

[EdRyder]

WRONG.
It's one of my favorite pieces of art.
You're just wrong. It's not a matter of opinion.
It has nothing to do with what the audience says about it.
Otherwise, you can bring me literally any piece of art ever created and I can tell you that it doesn't truly "count" as art.

I am an artist, and I have heard old men, upon hearing some of the most genius music EVER created, dismiss it as "just noise".
They're wrong. They don't know what they're talking about and they're mistaking their personal taste, and their very confined, very specific experience of the music, for the GRAND, UNIVERSAL definer of what "ART" is.

Same here.

Sweet butter jesus!I hate that piece with all my heart.
That aside,It doesnt have anything to do with what the audience says about it-As i said it lies in the process of the artist.
Now if that artist in particular is confident he created a work of art-cool
Doesnt mean it isnt open to debate by you or I

 

[DV8]

why do they call it butter jesus? he's not even made of butter

 

[knowsbleed]

Sweet butter jesus!

why do they call it butter jesus? he's not even made of butter

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=291980

 

[04nbod]

That can be incredibly frustrating. I stayed in it for the little bits here and there that could still be learned- but I had to put up with a lot of bulls***t to be sure.

I think its a shame to let your potential further development as an artist be shut down by the arrogance and bull in an art program, because that's just a tasting of the arrogance and bull of the art world itself. You have to figure out how to exist within and around that. Being under-appreciated/overly criticized is a staple of being an artist.

It was horrible because I thought what was the point and so my work suffered. i became embarrassed to show my portfolio because i knew the work in it wasn't the best i could do. By the end i was skipping life drawing and going on the hype and I still passed my final assignment despite knowing it was ****! Its not stopping me painting but its not a type of world i want to work in.

Well,You were probably surrounded by trustafarians who had no business being enrolled there to begin with...
But again,there was stunning resin casts because they were taught the technique.The proper way to do it.
So just expressing yourself isn't really enough..
A dude in art school could paint a moody dark evil shock value painting of brains and guts inside a fridge and call it "Dahmers fridge"That jerk will probly score higher than you too!Even though the painting might suck major suckage,and he painted it overnight with a petrified whale penis..The Shock value will have the chumps a school droolin
Now Thomas kinkade steals that idea ,.. He takes his time and technique and makes it ten ways from awesome(the glowing fridge light is bouncing off the brains beautifully,I can see it now )
Bang!=Art
One guy just painted from his heart and "expressed" himself
The other guy used his skill and technique to create a work of art

The right brush with the correct stroke devastates "expression" all day
I pee a few times a day,trust me, it ain't art..No matter what lens I photograph it with

It was all awful. It was like they wanted me to fail. I wanted to be put in the painting specialism and learn in that area but they put me in mixed media where all we learnt to do all year was make home made paper! I guess thats why technicality means so much to me. Its all very well having a meaning but if you don't have the skill to present it you're scuppered.

 

[kainedamo]

It is odd that he would so painstakingly devote so much time and effort to creating what amounts to a photograph of a homely waitress at a Greek restaurant.

I couldn't be assed reading the article, and I had no idea this pretentious bastard actually thought he was being "artistic". I really thought it was more of a "look what we can do now" type of thing. The guy actually looks down on photographers? **** him. I have photographs on my digital camera at home right now that say so much more than his ****ty boring pose woman.

 

[kainedamo]

Great discussion about what is and isn't art. And as always Wilhelm's opinions should be put in book form.

However, I'd disagree with him slightly about "if the creator believes it is art, then it is art". I think art is different for each person. Its probably as individual as our brains And if I think something isn't art, then for me it isn't art. Just like Wilhelm says no one has the right to tell an artist their work isn't art, nobody has the right to tell ME that it is - I'll decide for myself.

Take for example the picture the thread was created for. Its a great technical achievement. But is it art? I'd say no. If the guy that did it thinks its a great artistic achievement, I'd disagree. Other than the amazement of how real it looks, its a boring picture. It doesn't say anything. There isn't anything behind it.

I've told this story before, but I was watching an episode of the Culture Show, and this woman's art was up for the big UK prize in best art... and it was ****. I mean, really really bad. She had this gallery full of clay models. And they were literally just hunks of brown clay that you would think a 5 year old child played with. While I don't think that technical skill = art, I said to myself "absolutely no effort went into these things". The presentor was like, "I don't like this stuff", and the woman showing her it was like, "but if it disgusts you, isn't that achieving something?"

No.

If I put a piece of my own **** on a plate and put it in a room, I'm sure it would disgust people. Does that make it art? No.

H. R. Giger on the other hand, has some wonderful work that he did for Alien and Species. Its disgusting and frightening, and its art.

But maybe the creator of these hunks of clay with no work in them really thinks he/she did create some good art. I'd disagree with her, but I can't take her opinion away from her. (I'm assuming its a her). And she can't take my opinion away from me that I don't think its art.

Its occured to me over the years, that the snobbier a person is, the more "educated" a person likes to think they are, the more their opinions are completely ****ed and up their ass concerning what art is. I've seen some really stupid bastards on the Culture Show.

 

[M.E.H.Z.E.B]

http://www.drublair.com/comersus/store/tica.asp

Awesome!

 

[DV8]

yes . . . it's an awesome painting, but seriously . . . the thread title needs to be changed this is not a digital painting

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Not a human, but a Reptoid from the 4th Dimension

 

[DV8]

Not a human, but a Reptoid from the 4th Dimension

 

[Deep Thinkin'!]

Part of me doesn't really believe that its an actual digital painting.

In fact, I feel like this is a scandal.

Though, if real, the guy is talented.

 

[DV8]

Part of me doesn't really believe that its an actual digital painting.

In fact, I feel like this is a scandal.

Though, if real, the guy is talented.

all of you should feel that this is not a digital painting, because IT'S NOT A DIGITAL PAINTING

IT'S A REAL PAINTING

KD needs to do his research before making presumptuous thread titles . . .

 

[Deep Thinkin'!]

all of you should feel that this is not a digital painting, because IT'S NOT A DIGITAL PAINTING

IT'S A REAL PAINTING

KD needs to do his research before making presumptuous thread titles . . .

Ok, lemme rephrase.

Painting. Like it even matters whether it's digital or not.

You can still copy and paste in my opinion.

 

[DV8]

Ok, lemme rephrase.

Painting. Like it even matters whether it's digital or not.

You can still copy and paste in my opinion.

I was trying to get on your case, but there is a HUGE difference in the fact that it's a real painting and not digital . . . it speaks more for the artist than the technology that it's a real painting and not digital . . .

I'm just upset cuz the thread title makes everyone think one thing when it's another . . .

 

[Deep Thinkin'!]

I was trying to get on your case, but there is a HUGE difference in the fact that it's a real painting and not digital . . . it speaks more for the artist than the technology that it's a real painting and not digital . . .

I'm just upset cuz the thread title makes everyone think one thing when it's another . . .

No reason to be upset. For gods sake, isn't this something KAINE found?

We're talking about Kaine, nutty Kaine.

 

[DV8]

^I know . . . it's fkn KD fkn "insert insulting adjective" KD

 

[Deep Thinkin'!]

Damn you Kaine. Picking a topic that got poor ole' DV8 worked up. How could you?

 

[DV8]

Damn you Kaine. Picking a topic that got poor ole' DV8 worked up. How could you?

Lol! it really did . . . it really did

 

[Deep Thinkin'!]

Lol! it really did . . . it really did

*pats head* its alright now.

Now go take a nap and when you wake up, things'll be all better. :meow:

 

[JP]

All the Spider-Man and Superman posters are digital paintings. In that someone paints them, and then some jerk touches them up in photoshop.

 

[DV8]

*pats head* its alright now.

Now go take a nap and when you wake up, things'll be all better. :meow:

will I awake in good o' 1985? sorry I just watched back to the future

 

[Deep Thinkin'!]

will I awake in good o' 1985? sorry I just watched back to the future

Sure, why not.

 

[DV8]

Sure, why not.

schweet . . . . Lea Thompson was so hot back then

 

[DV8]

All the Spider-Man and Superman posters are digital paintings. In that someone paints them, and then some jerk touches them up in photoshop.

agreed. and I think 2 of the new Dark Knight posters were digital paintings too . . . but they look very 'painterly', in that they almost look like old school hand-rendered movie posters . . .

 

[JP]

agreed. and I think 2 of the new Dark Knight posters were digital paintings too . . . but they look very 'painterly', in that they almost look like old school hand-rendered movie posters . . .

The Joker and Batman ones are paintings.