/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

Romanticism

>>3137445
Looks more like romanticism. Impressionism generally doesn't try to look realistic or detailed, and relies more on visible brush strokes.

>>3137445
looks like neoclassicism, and the works date back to the mid 1700s, but what he was doing was probably better described as illustration back then.

More individualistic than the major movements that other artists were occupying during that time, but definitely drawing from neoclassical landscapes.

>>3137451
yeah more romanticism actually, what the other anons said, but this artists work was definitely more concerned with composition and storytelling than other artists of the time. I'd still classify him more as an illustrator than a straight up romanticist. At least in his personal work. He seemed to get a lot of portrait commissions which are done in the styles popular at the time.

There's a clear skull in that painting.

>>3137453
?
This is Romanticism.

>>3137457
Where?

>>3137551
Not really, this was done several decades before Romanticism became a widespread school of art - I'd say he's a transitional artist out of neoclassicism into Romanticism. He's one of those outlier artists that doesn't really fit into the era he was working in.

>>3137453
Paintings like this are more about chiaroscuro than anything else - he did a lot of work where the light source was the moon, or a candle.

>>3137449
>>3137450
>>3137453
>>3137551
It's not romanticism.
Romanticism is about framing ideal (often unrealistically idealistic) nature. Bright and saturated colours are common and wide open landscapes, and man and nature existing in harmony and symbiosis on the countryside.
This is a style that came before romanticism, which I can't remember the name of right now, because I'm a retard, but it was about framing nature as huge, dark and scary. They are often bleak, and the darks bleed out and "swallow" the scene. Impossible huge rocks and tiny unidentifiable humans are common. The colours are often spooky green/blue and weak yellow, with few sharp red highlights here and there.

>>3138398
A very deformed one. The bridge is the teeth, the moon is an eye socket.

>>3139497
This is blatantly incorrect, the romantics are very tonally diverse and much more interested in the conveyance of grandiose narratives, whether of the power of nature, as with Turner, mortality and the end of civilization, Caspar Friedrich, or insanity and the fear of the dreaming mind, Goya.

Your description your giving is more indicative of British landscape painters, who are romantic, of a fashion, but not representative of the movement in any way.

OP's post is perfect Friedrich-esque romanticism.

>>3137445
>that
>impressionism

>>3139775
>asking
>questions
what an idiot, right? fuck you OP you fucking idiot

>>3139688
Nope

>>3139785
Art history minor, nigger, step up.

>>3139497
dumb wrong

In art history, Joseph Wright of Derby was assigned to Romanticism. That's what I was taught at least. The influence of alchemy in his pieces supports this. He fits perfectly between Friedrich and Turner.

>>3140023
wrong file

>>3137445
comfyfism.

>>3139777
it doesn't deserve its own thread tho

>>3139497
>Romanticism (also the Romantic era or the Romantic period) was an artistic, literary, musical and intellectual movement that originated in Europe toward the end of the 18th century
>painting in question is from 1791
>exhibits all the traits of early Romantic painting
>isn't Romanticism because reasons
Also the phrase you're probably thinking of is sturm und drang.

>>3139497
It wasn't about the ideals of nature, it was about nature's power and beauty. Nature is multifaceted in romanticism, it isn't just the fluffy bright happy side of nature.

>>3140023
see this looks more like an illustration to me. a good painting but very "le wrong generation" in regards to wishing people still painted like caravaggio, so he's illustrating his idea of what those paintings looked like

>>3143092
Illustrators wish they had half the sheer talent of Derby. Poor fucks (like you probably) are failed fine artists.
>le
Go back.