/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4974579

>>4486077
>>4485947

>>3769071
>>3769071

>muh degenerate west and the jew perverted western art
This is true. Modern western art is just money laundering scheme by jews who traffic children. Slav art is pure as God.

>>3355116

Lets start with the premise that, people will classify things as good or bad.

>That art is shit
>That art is good

We all generally agree that some things are better or worse than others. You might eat a cake and think it's magnificent, and someone else not so much. You might eat another cake and think it's is only okay, But ultimately most sane people would agree there is better or worse art (otherwise why practice)

Lets think about that for a moment... the application of what is more good or less good, is on the basis of some greater principle (that of what is good), that even when unequally applied between different people, or different cakes, is still used as the measurement of it's value.

Simply in the admittance of 'taste' ( which is an assessment of Better liked or Worse liked art) there exists criteria to critique it with. From those criteria you can make an objective assessment. (fundamentals of Art)

As humans the trick then becomes learning and recognizing these things so that we can better apply it. Subjectivity comes from differences in this experiential, learning, growth process.

how do we stop rich businessmen from exploiting legal loopholes to dodge taxes and launder money?

another retard falling for the low hanging fruit. keep "expressing yourself" retard

retard derivative of a modern money laundering scheme. an entire generation of kids grow up thinking abstract DEEP shit will get them paid.

>"practiced saxophone to my capacity"
L
M
A
O
Stopped reading here, realized rest what a self absorbed narcissistic retard you were at this point. Just another idiot who fell for the modern art scam and shot for the low hanging fruit from the start, the one that requires no studying of fundamentals or anything technical. The one that trustfund babbies dabble in to "express themselves". Trash

>>2802563

>>2761585
>"Well yeah I guess that does totally make sense and reaffirm every stereotype I've heard, but I still think it's just coincidence"

>>2735855

>>2604155

>>2341829
What was your name, Chris?
That fucking texture tho. When you're marketing this shit, definitely emphasize that thing you do with building layer upon layer so you get that characteristic look. Then kinda think about why you're doing all this, what keeps you going with these paintings, what do you want to tell your audience, and communicate it most effectively.
I think your shit would look better if you used just pastel colors. Maybe try that for a piece, see how it works out?

Nevertheless I absolutely disdain modern art. Seeing this makes me want to work extra hard at my studies. Whatever floats our boats.

>>2066286
What more evidence do you need tho?
Observing his work yields the conclusion that he never really improved and resorted to trendy gimmicks to pass his work as "revolutionary", looking at his life you see that his jump to fame was mostly a product from leeching from gertrude's shekels, looking at his dad's work, it's pretty obvious that he did the "prodigy" paintings, and looking at picasso's work again, you realize that nobody has issued official investigations regarding the legitimacy of the "prodigy" myth, because it is the only thing keeping people throwing money at museums and colectors, no one would buy that shit should they discover they were masterfully rused into believing that crap was worth something because it was made by "one of the greatest that ever lived".
It wouldn't be much of a racket though, hacks like picasso are being fabricated everyday to keep the money flowing.