/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3987743
I don't know just how "realistic" Proko had in mind, but lots of artists are known for their creative takes on photorealism. In the thumbnail of this drawing, it looks photorealistic, but upon enlargement, you see the artist (Seung Eun Kim) took liberties in designing (key word, designing) the shapes. He does this with all his photostudies. It's his style. Very angular and hatching-oriented. And it looks really cool, and even though it's not a 1:1 depiction of reality, I'm sure he learns plenty from his studies--both fundamentally and creatively.

There's a term for the modern artistic movement of copying down to the minutest details of photographs: hyperrealism. I wouldn't call OP and similar copy-styles hyperrealistic, but they're rooted in the same principle of 1:1 xerox copy. Creative decisions about the design are not made. I'd say the process is quite literally void of creativity if I weren't feeling charitable--but in fairness, I imagine there's SOME creativity in selecting what tools you use to achieve the hyperrealistic look. Ultimately the final image is very bland because it's actually a human-processed photograph. Values will never be compressed or modified for a moody effect, shapes will never be changed for a unique look, color is what you see in the photo.

Again, this is a modern phenomenon that follows the rise of high resolution photography, this wasn't something done throughout art history. Artists have always practiced realism, but not in this creatively bankrupt way. Sargent is another example.

Having said all that, whatever. Nonartists having shit taste is an eternal law. If it wasn't this, it'd be some Kinkade Disney kitsch (decidedly not realistic). If you care about being good and original, you'll do so regardless of mass popularity.