/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.1480035]

Are there any abstract art guides or books I should read? I want to be an artist/painter but I really don't care about figure drawings or realism or nature scenes at all.

I've checked the sticky guides and they don't seem to help much. What should I do?

[Anonymous No.1480045]

The good abstract artists trained traditionally, so just train traditionally. All of that stuff is covered.

Pic related - it's De Kooning.

[Anonymous No.1480047]

If you don't have a background in representational painting, what exactly are you abstracting from?

>>1480045
this

[Anonymous No.1480049]

Mondrian

[Anonymous No.1480048]

Franz Kline

[Anonymous No.1480053]

>>1480045
>>1480047
>>1480048
>>1480049


I don't see how any of those traditional skills are relevant for non-representational art.

Except maybe some sort of color sense.

[Anonymous No.1480054]

>>1480035
You realize that the picture you posted is figurative, right?

[Anonymous No.1480057]

>>1480053
Yeah, because learning to handle paint well and learning the fundamentals of art totally won't help you make interesting abstract pieces

You really are clueless

[Anonymous No.1480058]

>>1480053
Right, you don't see because you don't know what you're talking about, but what those artists produced was built upon this foundation. They can't be separated from it.

It goes way beyond color. Color is just a facet of composition, but color alone is supremely complicated, and knowing its effects in the real world are part of being able to control it in abstraction. But there's much, much more. If you're looking for a shortcut around that, this isn't a very good place to ask. I make lots of abstract art, and I don't believe in shortcuts.

[Anonymous No.1480059]

>>1480058
godking Miro

[Anonymous No.1480060]

>>1480054

in the way a stick man is figurative I suppose, mostly symbolic

[Anonymous No.1480061]

>>1480058

I don't see why you need a foundation if you're just going to paint stick figures and simple shapes?

please elaborate.

[Anonymous No.1480062]

>>1480060
It's figurative. It's not up for debate, bro. All art is abstract, and abstraction happens on a continuum.

[Anonymous No.1480063]

>>1480061
That piece has great colors and a strong composition. If you tried to make something similar, chances are it would come off looking garish and crude, but by all means please, prove us wrong.

[Anonymous No.1480064]

>>1480062

what's your point though?
we're talking about abstract on the far end of the continuum

I can already draw figures like this, I don't need practice lol

[Anonymous No.1480065]

>>1480064
post work

[Anonymous No.1480066]

>>1480063
>That piece has great colors and a strong composition

Yep! I understand that those are important. But nothing about figure drawings or drawing real objects is relevant to this thread

[Anonymous No.1480067]

>>1480065

his head is a perfect circle and his legs are rectangles, you're missing the point

[Anonymous No.1480069]

>>1480065
>>1480062

explain why someone has to be able to draw perfect anatomy life like people before being able to draw the dude in OP's picture

[Anonymous No.1480070]

>>1480066
Learning how light interacts with form and thus color is crucial to the understanding of color overall IMO but to each his own

[Anonymous No.1480071]

>>1480069
You don't have to have perfect anatomy, but an understanding in how to represent the figure realistically can only benefit an artist who wants to make stylized figures, after all, the real figure is likely what you're stylizing

>>1480067
there is more to that piece than those shapes, and i doubt you even draw

[Anonymous No.1480072]

>>1480071
>how to represent the figure realistically
>realistically

it's like you're not even trying...

[Anonymous No.1480074]

>>1480061
Elaborating about 100,000 painting techniques, composition, methods of abstraction and so on in order to convince you not to make poor quality hobbyist art doesn't seem like a judicious use of time. I'm not invested in what you do, so I won't try to convince you of anything, but you're not going to get much help or support on this around here when you want to be slothful.

If you want to make stick figures and childlike art, why not just keep doing what you can already do? Isn't it weird studying some book in an academic manner in order to try to do that?

[Anonymous No.1480076]

>>1480064
>I can already draw figures like this, I don't need practice lol

So why would you be asking for actual training?

[Anonymous No.1480075]

>>1480072
>cant refute argument
>complains about semantics

[Anonymous No.1480078]

>learn figure drawings they say

this is terrible advice and a waste of time.

[Anonymous No.1480079]

>>1480076
>So why would you be asking for actual training?

there's more to abstract art than drawing stick men with circles for heads, please go.

[Anonymous No.1480083]

>>1480079
yeah and what does it involve that isn't directly related to learning art and paint handling in a traditional way?

Basquiat was 1 in a million bro, don't kid yourself

[Anonymous No.1480082]

>>1480074

the fact that abstract artists at one point could draw illustrations well doesn't mean they used any of that skill to make their stick figures i.e see : >>1480078

[Anonymous No.1480084]

tell me again why I need to learn anatomy and shitty theories to draw something this amazing?

[Anonymous No.1480086]

>>1480079
>there's more to abstract art than drawing stick men with circles for heads, please go.

Sure thing, boss! Where should I go?

[Anonymous No.1480087]

>>1480084
You say you don't need to learn anything. All color and composition and material use is theory. I guess you don't need to learn it.

[Anonymous No.1480090]

i want to learn abstract art, not representational art.


are there any good books on it?

[Anonymous No.1480091]

>>1480087
Yeah dude, I made some "paintings" on my Wacom so i totally will have no problem making awesome large scale abstract works in various traditional mediums

you can buy relaly big canvases and acrylic paint at michaels

[Anonymous No.1480093]

no one can teach art. I'm not naive enough to think someone can be a teacher of art.

I'm interested in theories about abstract art, mostly what the artists thought about their own work.

[Anonymous No.1480094]

>>1480091
also did i mention that i want to be an artist/painter but im so arrogant that i refuse to accept advice even when i ask for it

so basically i dont care about how art has been done for 500 years and i just want to be a shit-tier hobbyist that no one will remember because im too cool for school bro

tell me what i want to hear bro

[Anonymous No.1480102]

>>1480094
>but im so arrogant that i refuse to accept advice even when i ask for it

OP already mentioned he looked at the sticky and doesn't want those kind of guides.

He wants guides on abstract art, not figures.

[Anonymous No.1480106]

>>1480094

No need to be upset. Some people don't find realism interesting or relevant to learn. Please go.

[Anonymous No.1480116]

>>1480102
I think you must be missing the fact that those are general art guides, not "figure" guides. There is plenty about composition and color and handling of materials, etc..

Further, figure study has proved so effective for all types of art that its managed to live on quite robustly, even in institutions not know for producing realism. The approach from the figure, right off the bat, can be to derive energy and inspiration from its energy. To think anyone working from a figure is beholden to realism is woefully ignorant and flies in the face of objective evidence from the last 100 years or so.

Stop coddling OP. If our help is not wanted, OP can go look somewhere else.

>>1480106
You've been advised and you've rejected the advice. The thing for you to do now is go somewhere else.

[Anonymous No.1480125]

>>1480102
you realize abstract means it's abstracted from something right? that means figurative art. if you want guides on total non-representational art then read Albers on color or something.

>anyone disagrees with me
>"please go"
also fuck your attitude.

[Anonymous No.1480139]

>>1480125
>Albers

Thanks

[Anonymous No.1480145]

>>1480106
And those people would be called ignorant rubes

[Anonymous No.1480150]

Why are all the abstract artists make threads and being so confrontational. It's like they all came in thinking they were going to show these plebs a thing or two.

[Anonymous No.1480154]

>>1480150
These people aren't abstract artists. They're lazy hacks who think because it looks simpler to make, that it is simpler to make, and they thinking jumping straight to abstraction and saying their shit is deep is a shortcut to being a good artist. Real abstract artists have respect for the foundation that got them there.

[Anonymous No.1480155]

>>1480150

they aren't confrontational, illustrators get mad at real art threads for some reason that remains unclear

[Anonymous No.1480157]

>>1480154
>Real abstract artists have respect for the foundation that got them there.

the foundation is what they let go of and ignore, since it keeps them trapped

the new generation of artists understand that art can't be taught.

[Anonymous No.1480163]

>>1480157
You don't know what you're talking about. They let go of it to varying degrees, but don't ignore it. You have to learn the rules before you understand how to break them effectively to convey what you want in the piece. Otherwise, you'll never make anything above the level of kindergarten scribbles.

If art can't be taught, then how did good artists get to the point that they did?

[Anonymous No.1480167]

>>1480163
>If art can't be taught, then how did good artists get to the point that they did?

by making a lot of it and/or experimenting

[Anonymous No.1480171]

It's gonna be a long fucking summer.

[Anonymous No.1480175]

>>1480155
Prime example. Why some "artists" fall all over themselves to distinguish themselves from illustrators is beyond me. you both do it for money.

[Anonymous No.1480188]

>>1480175

its like the difference between a person who paints houses and a painter

a person who lays bricks and a person who designs the buildings

one is a craft, the other is art.

illustrators aren't artists and illustrations aren't art.

[Anonymous No.1480193]

>>1480188
>If only any of those analogies applied.

The skill sets for illustrator and artist are exactly the same. Their commercial goals are the same (get paid).The only difference is an arbitrary line of expression vs. commerence. As if Fine artist don't have markets to cater through.

>Well we don't whore our work and reproduce them endlessly.

See every print maker ever, hell see Warhol, he made fucking living recontextualizing images of dead white women and soup cans, the king of mass production. He also started as *gasp* an illustrator.

[Anonymous No.1480194]

>>1480193
*to

[Anonymous No.1480197]

>>1480193
not so much an illustrator draws for a living and a fine artists sucks dicks lol

'i would like to show in your gallery pls.'

'ass, grass or gas[hot air].'

[Anonymous No.1480222]

>>1480045
Miro

[Anonymous No.1480229]

>>1480222
>Miro

Miro what? Why are you citing that post and writing Miro's name?

[Anonymous No.1480246]

>>1480229
that is miro, he can only talk like a pokemon.

[Anonymous No.1480264]

>>1480246
No, that's Willem De Kooning's maritime mural. Better luck next time.

[Anonymous No.1480268]

>>1480264
the commenter is miro, not the painting you angry internet monkey

[Anonymous No.1480269]

>>1480268
So you're naming the commenter miro as a joke about how he/she talks like pokemon talk? Fine. I don't know how pokemon talk, but I don't need to pursue this.

[Anonymous No.1480270]

>>1480269
ok..i'm being to think most /ic/ regulars would fail a voight-kampff test..

(this is a joke too)

[Anonymous No.1480302]

>>1480035
I-I want to folow my styyyyyyyle moom I'm uniqueeee I dont wanna learn to draw, I wanna do stuff my wayyyyy *closes door furiously* *puts on linkin park-indie band at max volumen*

[Anonymous No.1480306]

i don't know why this board falls for trolling so often

[Anonymous No.1480310]

>>1480302
I H-hate modern art, it's all just pouring painttt on canvasss...I want to draw my wayyyy *closes door furiously* *comments on /ic/*

[Anonymous No.1480481]

>>1480302

but I don't want to "learn to draw", that's the point lol---I don't find realism drawings interesting at all

[Anonymous No.1480484]

>>1480481
Then you're fucked, pal.

[Anonymous No.1480487]

>>1480481
"I want to learn how to do a back flip, but I'm not interested in learning how to ride my bike first"

[Anonymous No.1480490]

>>1480306
Because we have the anger of /v/ and the dense skulls of the newfags.

[Anonymous No.1480497]

Here is a book written by Kandinsky (very early abstract artist). It is called Concerning the Spiritual, available free here: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/5321

[Anonymous No.1482092]

lol not even /mu/ is this adamant and hard-headed with everyone having to learning music theory

[Anonymous No.1482169]

>>1482092
Nobody has ever gone on /mu/ and said
>hey guys i want to do some guitar shredding but I don't want to learn to play it first

[Anonymous No.1482184]

understand what words mean, have meant, and how they have been used (mean and meant) when you use them to describe something that you want to create, such as an abstract painting.

here are two entry-level bits of information on the word abstract in and of itself. if you would like to research the usage of the word in our culture, that will be up to you to make that effort. this should be a helpful enough starting point for your information.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/abstract
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=abstract&searchmode=none

[Anonymous No.1482489]

>>1482169
That is a terrible analogy that doesn't apply.

You don't need technical theory to do cubism or abstract shit like Pollock et al .a better analogy is someone goes on /mu/ and wants to learn screaming screamo death metal but not music theory...perfectly fine

[Anonymous No.1482491]

Auerbach is so fucken terrible why does he use models for his portraits lol lol

His buddies were real artists he just shits on the canvas and scrapes it offand repeats the process.......if u can smudge a painting without noticing it then its shit...majority of his stuff requires no skill at all. None
What a shame . he can probably paint well if he tried

[Anonymous No.1482493]

>>1482489
>that is a terrible analogy
>cubism is pretty much screamo death metal
K.

[Anonymous No.1482494]

>>1482489
okay that one hurt, you got me buddy. my coveted 10/10 is yours.

[Anonymous No.1482557]

>>1480481
>but I don't want to learn to draw
>but I don't want to learn
>don't want to learn
>learn

You're fucking stupif

[Anonymous No.1482563]

>>1482557

Lets agree to disagree.

[Anonymous No.1482566]

>>1482563
ok but only if you admit your stupif, and i am smarf

[Anonymous No.1482581]

learning the "rules" before breaking them will make for a better overall artist, with richer work.
nobody is going to stop you from trying to produce abstract work, and you might be naturally good at it, but you most likely wont be. we cant teach you how to make abstract work, but we can teach you how to draw, so you can figure out how /not/ to draw

[Anonymous No.1482597]

>>1482581
shut the fuck up

honestly /ic/

all images are abstract ALL OF THEM, there is nothing but abstract, understand?

[Anonymous No.1482607]

>>1482597
All art is abstract because it's a simplification of reality. Nevertheless, you're being very obtuse if you can't understand the difference between realistic figurative work, abstracted figurative work, and non-figurative work. They all use similar principals, but they have various aims.

Time and time again it's been shown that those with strong fundamentals make the best highly abstracted work and non-figurative work, and examples have been given. That's what's being communicated here. That's the advice being offered. Take it or fucking leave it. End of story. Goodbye.

[Anonymous No.1482608]

>>1482597

Thats like saying all propositions are false since they only approximate the truth and never fully capture it.

There's abstract and then there's "abstract"...

[Anonymous No.1482615]

>>1480193
haha holy shit you really don't understand that was ever a difference? For most of his career Norman Rockwell was not considered an artist, only an illustrator.

[Anonymous No.1482619]

>>1482092
>>1482169
>>1482489
>>1482494
>>1482494
/mu/ totally has music theory trolls, I'm guessing non of you guys have been there?

[Anonymous No.1482621]

"I'll buy it!" - walmart

[Anonymous No.1482678]

>>1482615
>Most of his career
The fact that any of his career he was considered a fine artist even though illustrator was a blue collar job at that time in history mean the whole fine arts/applied arts dicotomy is shit.

Ed Hopper is considered a fine artist when he spent his entire career as an illustrator, so what now?

But honestly, who gives a fuck, why is defining one as higher art even useful?

>TRADE paidgy

[Anonymous No.1482899]

reminder that you are getting trolled still.

[Anonymous No.1485611]

>>1482619
the point is they're trolls. /mu/ doesn't care about theory as the end all be all, it's just a tool to use. if you asked them on how to make noise or drone music, they wouldn't cry for like 50 posts about learning fundamental harmonic theory just so you can break those rules.

[Anonymous No.1485630]

>>1482489
>You don't need technical theory to do cubism
Picasso would like to have a word with you

[Anonymous No.1485796]

>>1485611
I spent years on /mu/.

/mu/ is a board for people who listen to music. Very little of it has anything to do with people learning to make music. The sticky is primarily concerned with how to get music.

/ic/ is primarily for learning. That's why it's called a "drawing board", rather than a "looking board". That's why the first thing the rules say is "User-created artwork is submitted for critique". That's why our sticky is about learning methods. That's why /ic/ is called artwork/critique.