/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>1734694
These are examples of his "couillarde" style, meaning "ballsy".

>>1734695
This is an example of his more well-known fractured style, broken into what Cezanne called "petites sensations". This had a huge impact on later artists, especially Picasso and Braque, the developers of Cubism.

>>1734697

>>1734698
le stell liefe tru art xD

Here's Lovis Corinth, who synthesized elements of Expressionism and Impressionism. His style changed dramatically after a stroke that paralyzed the right side of his body, forcing him to learn how to paint with his left hand.

>>1734702

>>1734703
Here's his take on the temptation of St. Anthony, a theme covered by a multitude of painters through history.

>>1734704

>>1734702
>>1734703
>>1734704
>>1734706
This guy is awesome, thanks for sharing!

Cuno Amiet

>>1734763

>>1734764

>>1734766

Juan Gris, his influence is so underrated because you can see he infleunced most mid century illustrators.

>>1734702
Corinth is some of the most underrated stuff in the universe.

>>1734770
One of the better cubists

>>1734771

>>1734703
That expression looks quite disturbing

Hello! I have a question: Why I never seem to find anything realistically painted in these threads or in art history books regarding the 1900-1960 era. It surely did exist, but where is it? Why nobody posts it? Why it is kept hidden?

>>1734829
It fell out of fashion. Schools stopped teaching it essentially. You still got the remnants of the late 19th century painters who lived a few decades into the 20th century. But the traditions largely died out or migrated to illustration--it was considered the golden age of illustration and you got guys like Leyendecker, Rockwell, Cornwell, Howard Pyle, NC Wyeth etc.

You also get a few lone realist painters doing their own thing throughout the last century. Andrew Wyeth and Antonio Lopez Garcia come to mind, but I'm sure there were plenty of others as well, just not in big schools together following traditions. Oh, except in Russia, they never really gave up on the traditions of realist art.

>>1734829
faded into obscurity because it didn't matter for the most part.

i also have a feeling you have some horribly unproductive standards for 'realistically.'

plus you can't have looked very hard.

>>1734830
Thanks, I'll check them out and continue searching

>>1734832
>faded into obscurity
>you can't have looked very hard

Nuh uh

Gustave Klimt, Vienna Secession

>>1735012

>>1735017

>>1735018

>>1735019
compare with fellow Secessionist Egon Shiele:

>>1735020

>>1735025

George Tooker

Return to order/ magic realism/ new objectivity is such an underrated movement
The german scene is the only one that is talked about and non-german artists get ignored

>>1735043

what a cool guy. really sombre and quiet stuff, thank you

>>1734830
>Oh, except in Russia, they never really gave up on the traditions of realist art.
And they've been making amazing and culturally relevant art ever since.
...

>>1735066
Define culturally relevant

>>1735066
Suprematism, Constructivism, Rayonism, Kandinsky, Chagall...

>>1735081
>Implying I meant the Avant-Garde
>All those art movements, inspired by Western art
>Mostly due to Picasso
Shiggy

>>1735066
They may not be as culturally relevant, but the academies there never stopped producing great technical artists. The skills themselves weren't lost in Russia, unlike other parts of the world. While ateliers and stuff in America are currently trying to piece together bits of the past systems such as the French approach, Russia never stopped with their state funded schools.

If people are interested I can post some contemporary examples of Russian art that will make people shit their pants since it looks like old masters.

>>1735179
By all means, though frankly what art I've seen before from the Russian schools looks a bit stiff and uninspired. Superb technique and skill, but not terribly interesting to look at.

Years and years ago at CA.org there was a poster who was essentially a recruiter for a Russian art academy, she'd post lots of images and debate the merits of Russian tradition versus Western experimentation. It was an interesting contrast of extremes, while she made good points regarding the state of technical knowledge in the West it was also pretty obvious that Russian art, or at least her academy, had stagnated.

>>1735179
Please do post them. Maybe in a new thread?

>>1734694
russia had modernism too

stuff like this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Petersburg_Union_of_Artists

>>1735179
Except that the old masters were making ground breaking visual experiences around 1400-1800.
Not sure if I'll be blown away by any of this in 2014. It's like trying to impress someone in the year 2300 with Avatar.

>>1734763
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPKe9OfWs-M&feature=kp

>>1734694
Great taste. Cezanne is God-tier.

Pic related.

Paul Gauguin

>>1735606

>>1735609

>>1735613

Cezanne's always left me kinda cold, even though his ideas on form and his use of binocular vision had a gigantic impact on painting. Looking at his paintings though, I always get a bit of a 'meh' feeling about them, since the painters who followed him used his ideas in more exciting ways. The tables though are interesting, you can see how he warps perspective pretty dramatically on them, something that Matisse and the cubists nod to pretty often, especially in the Demoiselles where the table feels like it's sliding off of the floor.

Anyway, we should start Monday Night Modernism on /ic/ to counteract all the shitty concept art threads here. Especially for those of us here who like modern art (all 4 of us).

This is my favorite paiting of all time. And im not even fanboy of Renoir and his other works so much. But this piece man, this piece have all. This is the utimate woman portrait, perfection. Tension is just overwhelming me when i look at her. Mona Lisa can suck Renoir dick.

>>1736146
>Anyway, we should start Monday Night Modernism on /ic/ to counteract all the shitty concept art threads here. Especially for those of us here who like modern art (all 4 of us).

Seconded, even if I don't like most modern art it makes for good discussion.

Regarding Cezanne, I know what you're talking about... but for some reason his watercolor paintings are god-tier. They're just really really good and lively in a way many of his oil paintings aren't.

>>1736146

Having seen some of the Cezanne oil paintings up close, I always felt that Cezanne's and Van Gogh's paintings stood out the most in the whole gallery. Unlike seeing them in a computer monitor or books, seeing them up close was unreal as they became my instant favorites, so I couldn't share that same view of him at all. It was at that point when I just went "fuck fixed perspectives" if they're not going to achieve that bifocal three dimension look that I feel catches the eye more than heavy realism/photorealistic works.

>>1736146
And yes, we should do more of these. I started digital art after being impressed by digital concept art, but I discarded all that digital stuff once I saw these oil paintings by these old and modern masters up close - it instantly destroyed my infatuation for concept art.

I feel a lot of people would share that same feeling once they're exposed to these real masters of art.

Rothko

>>1736399
Funny thing about Rothko, I really don't care for most Abstract Expressionism... but sometimes the right picture can put a piece into context.

Got this as my background right now, despite what I think of Rothko.

>>1736396
Nice, I started off pretty much the same way. Went to school for illustration and liked a lot of contemporary illustrators like Tomer Hanuka and James Jean. By the time I was in my 4th year I pretty much hated most of it and my taste changed dramatically, I was able to finally see modernism for what it was and haven't gone back since. They had a Picasso show around here a few years ago and it blew me away, dude was from another planet. Never seen Van Gogh or Cezanne in real life, maybe I'd change my mind if I saw Paul in person.

>>1736401
do you have a vertically-set monitor or something

Amedeo Modigliani

More Gris

>>1736798

>>1736799

Thread needs more Vinny Van

>>1736866

>>1736867

>>1736867

what a legend

Remembered that Monday night's are usually busy for me so I won't be doing any weekly modernism threads on that day, looks like only 2 people cared anyway, lol.

Thought about bringing up Sargent in this thread since I saw him mentioned in another. He's an interesting figure because he was generally not really considered an impressionist due to his more mannerist tendencies but he was also a little too messy to be categorized with Boug and the gang. His reputation fell pretty hard in the 20th century because of his reluctance to go balls deep into avant-garde culture like his contemporaries, instead he mostly chose to play it safe and not rock the boat on his career. His resurgence in reputation seems to mostly come from illustrators and Sunday painters, which I think probably suits him. I liked Sargent in my 1st and 2nd year painting classes but the more I got into Modernism the more I disliked him. All those portraits, they're like photoshopped Cosmo covers, one after another of bankers, lawyers, politicians, actors, and general celebrities of his time. Rich cocksucker, one after the next. When you look at Sargent's pictures, there's not much there besides a bit of fancy brushwork. The only time he tried to really say anything with his work was "Gassed" which I thought was pretty boring, looks like something Rockwell would do.
Some quotes on Sargent-
"He is not an enthusiast but rather rather an adroit performer" -Pissaro
"He was not an impressionist in the sense that we use the word, he was too much under the influence of Carlolus-Duran." -Monet

>>1737084
I am a lurker and save a ton of images you post of these painters. So keep doing it.

Something that Im interested in is rounding up a collective of essays about modernism or art critique in general.

I was more into the theory of what they were trying to do as opposed to what actually happened.

>>1737105
*Something that I'd be interested in

anybody else? my contributions would be
-Greenberg's "Avant Garde and Kitsch"
-Rivera's "Revolutionary Spirit in Modern Art"
-Mondrian's "Plastic Art and Pure Plastic Art"
-Duchamp's "The Creative Act"

>>1737084
I don't really care for Sargent's more 'academic' style oil paintings, but I absolutely adore his water colours.

>>1737140
his watercolors are hit or miss, most of them has that opaque muddy look.

>>1737084

Wasn't Mannerism a late Renaissance/ early Baroque thing or am I retarded

>>1737148
No, that's basically correct.

>>1737148
Mannerism has sort of become a bit of a broad term, it's usually not used in a particularly flattering fashion. Depends on who you talk to I guess.

Seurat

>>1737409

>>1737410

>>1734829
Because realism is horrible, it is a creatively devoid style for the simple minded who want to see a display of skill instead of a creation.
Who the hell wants to see what we can see by simply leaving our homes?

>>1737084
OP here, I've been busy painting a mural today but will bump with more content tonight.

>>1734694
/lit/ has better threads than you guys

>>1737526

>>1737527

>>1737529

>>1737532
Paul Klee

>>1737533

>>1737535

>>1737537
van Gogh

>>1737548

>>1737549

>>1737550

>>1737548

Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec

>>1737568

>>1737569

Dorothea Tanning, Surrealism. Would appreciate any hi-res photos of her work.

>>1737575

>>1737577

>>1737578

>>1737579
Max Ernst, husband of Dorothea Tanning

Max Ernst, who was married to Dorothea Tanning

>>1737585

Jackson Pollock, heading the abstract expressionist movement at the end of the modern era

>>1737588

>>1737589
earlier work:

>>1737591
and very early work, 1930s, taking classes with Thomas Hart Benton

>>1737595
forgot file

Trigger Warning: The Rape by Degas

>>1737142
If you think Sagent's watercolours could be described as "muddy", you obviously don't know shit about watercolours

>>1737740
>you obviously don't know shit about watercolours
>says the guy who don't know shit about watercolours

it's muddy as fuck, stop sucking cocks.

>>1737746
>implying you're not just some faggot that lurks drawthreads and has read Loomis once, thinking you're some master of visual arts, but you really just spout buzzwords you learned on /ic/ and never create

>>1737768
>that projection

>>1737746
Perhaps you're confusing the use of browns and greys, colors which appear quite often in nature and are essential to any attempt at accurate portrayal, with "mud"?

>>1737776
go read my first argument post, I wasn't talking about the color but the way he handles the medium but that's a given since most plein air watercolorist has that opaque looks.

>>1737775
it's what 90% of this board is

>>1737790
I agree, but you do realize the person you're defending is totally wrong on this one, don't you?

I'll post just a few more of Sargent's watercolors, I'd prefer to focus on more avant-garde work.

>>1737746
Nigga your mom's pussy is muddy as fuck

I'm not that much into modernism anymore but I still enjoy Ernst's collages.

Ignacio Zuloaga

>>1737810

>>1737811

>>1737813

>>1737813
It's the fucking adam's family.

>>1737803
>oh no he's questioning sargent, he must be instant wrong!

>>1737808
hello there mom

>>1737815
yes, a cheerful group of mourners
>>1737816
>oh no he's defending sargent, he must be instant wrong!
I'm not even a huge sargent fan, but yes, that anon is definitely wrong. if he can explain his reasoning using coherent english then I'd change my tune.

pic mildly related, oil painting by Sargent.

Willem de Kooning, abstract expressionism (action painting)

>>1737823

>>1737819
>then I'd change my tune.

we all know that ain't gonna happen

>>1737824

>>1737826
It's easier to say that than it is to show sargent's watercolors are muddy. you've found a way to avoid forming an actual argument, good job.

>>1737829

>>1737832

>>1734694
When we're on the subject of Sargnt's watercolours, does anyone know where I can download a folder or something with all of them? I only have a few and it would take forever to save them all individually

>>1737836
>>1719014

>>1737836
maybe here:
>>1719014

haven't downloaded anything from that thread myself, so I don't know if all of his watercolors are included in the folder, or if they're decent quality.

>>1737838
>>1737840
Thank you based god

James McNeill Whistler

>>1737843

>>1737844

>>1737846

Umberto Boccioni, famed Futurist

>>1737848

>>1737852
early work, much more impressionist

>>1737853
This piece by Boccioni is typical of futurism. Bright colors, a keen interest in the depiction of movement, violent energy, and a praise of modernity and industry.

>>1737856
Edgy