Reasons for the decline in drawing last 200 years?

[Anonymous No.3292696]

https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/iRunwayInc/21-illustrations-that-prove-patent-drawing-is-a-dying-art

[Anonymous No.3292716]

>dying art

You mean, dead art.
I don't know if there are any rules for patent drawings but I imagine there is simply nothing to gain from making a overly detailed and colorful drawing of your product when it is merely meant to illustrate the idea, not sell it.

[Anonymous No.3292749]

>>3292716
Why did they good drawing at 1800s

[Anonymous No.3292754]

>>3292749
I dunno, maybe the whole oversimplification just didn't ring a bell to people back then and it was necessary to draw out the entire product and what it was made from.
Maybe the drawing was more meant to illustrate what it does rather than merely an indication as to what the product looks like compared to drawings of electrical devices that are more like magic boxes.

I really don't know, I'm just trying to think of something.

[Anonymous No.3292768]

>>3292696
The drawings are nice. I only wonder if any of these inventions were actually feasible, excluding the fire staircase and the like, which are just clunky and silly.

[Anonymous No.3292776]

>it's more anatomically correct so it's better

[Anonymous No.3292810]

>>3292776
Its more tasteful so its better

[Anonymous No.3292822]

>>3292749
People had more time to waste back then

[Anonymous No.3292839]

>>3292810
Yeah let's just say that everyone got their taste

[Anonymous No.3292847]

>>3292749
Educated people were supposed to have decent drawing ability back then. You'd look like a retard if you drew badly.

[Anonymous No.3292863]

>>3292822
Today no time for art, gotta play that frermium game

[Anonymous No.3292968]

>>3292696
Just another day in the new Weimar republic.

[Anonymous No.3292978]

Cameras
Art used to be very realistic. The purpose was to capture things as they were in reality.
But cameras could do that much easier and quicker. So they replaced art.

Artists also began to become more experimental. So we have abstract and modern art and all that shit.

And it seems to me like people nowdays just don't care as much. It's just not a respected field anymore.
Think about when you were in school. Compare the art department to the sports. Or any other department.
There's a big difference

[Anonymous No.3292990]

>>3292696
Nowadays we have designers for that you know? Oldcucks being idiots as usual.

[Anonymous No.3293023]

>>3292978
It was already changing before cameras were commonplace.
Anyway i remember my teacher in art academy telling us that maybe 1 or 2 students of our group would even be able to do an entrance exam of an art academy around 1900 because the rest couldnt draw for shit. Thats also because there is no focus on 'academic' drawing starting from primary school. Even model drawing courses dont really offer that.

[Anonymous No.3293035]

>>3292696
at least in the west:
>psychologism
>mental illness
>no mythology
>no idols
>art world sabotaged to a bloody mess
>every retard misinterprets subjectivity and relativism to mean they are special
>population continues to boom alongside phones and internet. any signal fully lost to the noise of stupidity.
>ignorance becomes a thing of worship
>widespread brain-drain
>people start to worship money like it creates things, rather than people
>remnants of art culture become a dead corpse to prop around like a cheap stripper because it still gives people kicks.
>arts & crafts
>kids seemingly born with dead imaginations
>copy culture and digital art

things ain't gonna improve.

[Anonymous No.3293036]

>>3293035
This is a golden age for art. The West and the entire world has never produced so much before, in so many mediums. No longer is the church or convention in charge of what kind of thing in what kind of style can be produced, now everything can be made and the only limits are imaginations or budgets. This is the best era ever.

[Anonymous No.3293038]

>>3293036
i can buy a million printers and shit out random trash by the billions. that doesn't make me a good artist.

please elaborate in detail why every degenerate with a computer is a good thing for art progress or even variety.

[Anonymous No.3293039]

>>3293035
Pretty much all of that applies to India too

[Anonymous No.3293041]

>>3293036
But there are no more true giants. Art became a commodity, pushed around, desperately deformed to fit some pathetic subcultures, in hopes to filch a little money out of them.

[Anonymous No.3293049]

>>3293041
>But there are no more true giants
*cough*

[Anonymous No.3293050]

>>3293049
>cyberpunkshit
come again

[Anonymous No.3293053]

>>3293050
Here's your fantasy then

[Anonymous No.3293056]

>>3293053
>>3293049
lmao

[Anonymous No.3293060]

>>3293049
This is meaningless pastiche without any artistical intent or profound thinking behind it besides a desperate bid to make it look *cool* and sellable to the average moron. None of these scapes and vistas slapped together with photoshop brush samples I wish to walk, with none of the characters stitched together from visual clutter like frankenstein monsters I wish to talk to.

Truly "content", made to cover up holes in the walls. A despicable word that is, just as "content maker". It's like people who call themselves that gave up entirely. Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.3293064]

>>3293035
>>3293038
Fuck off /pol/cuck, you know absolutely nothing about art, neither modern nor classical. Get back to your containement board crying about "muh idealized old times were everything was better" despite having 0 knowledge of this era other than the mainstream shit you stumble across on some social.

[Anonymous No.3293065]

>>3293060
>Mikhail Vrubel
thanks. this guy looks badass.

[Anonymous No.3293066]

Maybe I'm just jaded and biased.>>3293065

[Anonymous No.3293068]

>>3293065
He really is.

[Anonymous No.3293069]

>>3293060
>This is meaningless pastiche
>posts 80s psychedelic trash

[Anonymous No.3293070]

>>3293036
You're making the mistake of attributing to our garbage modern culture what high technology is responsible for

[Anonymous No.3293082]

>>3293069
You've no idea what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.3293086]

[Anonymous No.3293091]

>>3293082
>>3293086
>dude portraits, old art was so much better and full of meaning
genuinely fuck off you cuck.

[Anonymous No.3293092]

please keep posting awesome paintings.

[Anonymous No.3293096]

>>3293092
>tfw this was considered degeneracy at its time
IT'S ALL A CYCLE BABY

[Anonymous No.3293101]

>>3293036
Fuck you talking about with PRINTERS?

People back in the day could also pick up pens and pencils and brushes and draw if they wanted, it's not like art has been locked away at ANY time throughout history. You have fallen straight into the retarded old-music-better trap. The only things that survived the passage of time were things that people prized, whereas nowadays everything is still existent BECAUSE NO TIME HAS PASSED. God, it's such a simple concept.

>>3293041
True giants? Companies specifically contract out to artists whose imagery they want. Kevin Duc for BL2. Duster132 for the Maze Runner films.

And then there are independent artists who have developed their own sector of work. Ian McQue is highly famous and looked up to. Marcos Marteu-Mestre is a master AND THIS FUCKING BOARD RECOMMENDS HIS BOOK.

And in the classical era, art was also made on a commission basis! The Sistine Chapel WAS A FUCKING COMMISSION PIECE.

>>3293070
Technology does not exist in a vacuum. Also if you say that art made using current tech is good, you necessarily imply modern artists are good because machines cannot make art by themselves.

[Anonymous No.3293102]

>>3293096
more like a steep tumble

[Anonymous No.3293105]

>>3293082
Did you post a classical piece to try and distance yourself from your own shitty psychedelic piece you posted? Bold move, Cotton.

[Anonymous No.3293106]

>>3293091
If you don't care what makes these portraits so sound and full of life and you call Vrubel's searchings to 80's psychedelic art (which on itself isn't half bad too, the intent and feeling is there), there's no helping you. I guess people of these eras weren't weren't as brain fried and were much more sensible.
>>3293101
>COMMISSION
I know right.

[Anonymous No.3293110]

>>3293082
>le mexican girl with a peach
Well at least it's better than your druggie art

[Anonymous No.3293111]

>>3293096
>impressionists were treated like degenerates in their time, therefore my tumblr nose porn is also art beyond its time.

[Anonymous No.3293113]

>>3293105
They're both in fact were made by fellow artists. Serov and Vrubel were friends, among with Korovin. You'd have to research the subject before making an uneducated and demeaning lashout. But who am I talking with, you're here just to sling dirt.

[Anonymous No.3293117]

>>3293111
Did he post nose porn tho? Or perhaps he's merely defending art like this https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cb/0f/88/cb0f88f92f8f8b2f1d3adae24ff782e7.jpg Which you types also consider degeneracy.

Mistaking personal taste for enlightenment or degeneracy is a remarkably totalitarian concept.

[Anonymous No.3293118]

>>3293113
>You'd have to research the subject before making an uneducated and demeaning lashout

Are you saying I should *educate myself*?

Look, pal, you're confusing your own personal tastes for some kind of enlightenment. And that's not a good idea.

[Anonymous No.3293121]

>>3293113
>mexican loli man and psychedelic edgelord were best buds

That doesn't mean anything

[Anonymous No.3293122]

>>3293111
>m-muh tumblr noses and porn are ALL art is today because I never actually took the time to look for good shit
I'm just showing how in every time its full of close minded cucks shitting on anything new or different without giving it a chance.

[Anonymous No.3293126]

>>3293117
you think aesthetic choice has no truth or morality in it? it's arguably the most important thing in a piece of work. then again, maybe you're one of those types that enjoy rolling around in the mud.

[Anonymous No.3293127]

>>3293126
>aesthetic choice

Aright guv, is Marcos Marteu-Mestre (keep in mind this page comes from a book recommended by this board) better or worse than your hippie faves? https://motivarti.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/058-1-mail.jpg

[Anonymous No.3293129]

>>3293127
>better or wose
>hippie faves
>cartoonist
i don't even know who or what you're trying to argue. you know there are schools that will teach you this art stuff if you pay them.

[Anonymous No.3293131]

>>3293129
Your argument is that muh psych art from decades ago is automatically better for some unexplained reason than modern artists' works.

You don't give reasons because you are arguing in a very SocJus fashion: "I shouldn't have to explain my points, you should just assume I am right and if you don't you're dumb"

Make your case, faggot.

[Anonymous No.3293134]

>>3293131
you're literally uneducated. others have point out you should seek education before talking about SPECIALIZED subjects. do you think anyone needs or even wants to hear your opinion on the molecular biology of some foreign plant species? it's the same kind of shit. just fuck off already. ppl are getting tired of it.

[Anonymous No.3293136]

>>3293134
This is new. "You have to be educated to like this art"

Bruh, there's always a reason that art isn't liked by the public and it isn't because they don't all have art degrees.

I do like your style though. Very...academically isolated. 1331 SocJus style.

[Anonymous No.3293139]

>>3293136
the public did like this art you retard. how do you think it exists now to be snubbed by you? the shit art no one cares for and those trashy formulaic cartoons vanish with time.

[Anonymous No.3293142]

>>3292696
., sculpture aspirants rushing into sculpture without standardized drawing and sketch courses that even The United Nations can say is the planetary standard , there is work to do , and art to make , Thanks be to The Divine Infinite Unity , The Difinity , Θε Δελτα-Διφινιτυ ,.

[Anonymous No.3293146]

>>3293121
Nothing means anything. Everything can be reduced to demeaning and oversimplified caricatures as you did.

"Scream in their faces, shake on their shoulders, call them the dearest name,- nothing will help. In the face of the damned irony - all is the same to them: the good and the evil, clear sky and the putrid pit, Dante's Beatrice and girl on the road. Everything's mixed like in the pub and in the haze. The wine truth "in vino Veritas" - is revealed to the world, everything - is one, one - is the world; I'm drunk, ergo - if I wish - I'll "embrace" the world wholly, fall on my knees before the road girl, seduce Beatrice; wallowing in the ditch I'll presume I soar in the skies; if I wish - I'll "reject" the world: I'll prove the Beatrice and the girl on the road are one and the same. Such is my fancy for I am drunk. And what can you ask from a drunk man? Drunk with irony, with laughter, like vodka; just like that all is "defaced", all is "disgraced", all - all the same."

There's no saving you, too brainfried on anime-like pornography, too drunk with irony, the warm portrait of an infant, something unachieved before at its time to you just a portrait of some mexican; illustration full of sorrow and strife or classicism and melancholic poetry to you is mere "psychedelic nonsense of an edgelord". Truth is, you're unable to enjoy art for what it is, you lack any culture required. This is pitiful. As if a peasant flipped through a foliant and couldn't see it for more than black scribblings on paper, better fit to make his hovel warm or at least wipe his asshole. This is the new kind of people, proud with their ignorance and insensitivity, faces so full of stupid importance, unable to stop for a moment and try to comprehend, for whom "art" are meaningless specks of content flying by while they scroll through their twitter feeds.

[Anonymous No.3293147]

>>3293139
Lol no, the public is not behind you. If they were, they would just repost your favorite muddy paintings that lack interesting subjects or focused techniques.

But they aren't reposting it, are they? They are reblogging Duster132 art, they're faving Ikimaru art, they're scrolling through ArtStation, they're liking stuff by Pascal Campion, they're using concept art for video games as computer wallpapers.

Art is allowed to be whatever art WILL be. Railing at styles that you don't like is just retarded. Why not go enjoy the art you love rather than try to convince people who don't like your favorites to like your favorites? It will never work.

[Anonymous No.3293148]

>>3293134
Yeah right, follow your advice and shut the fuck up or educate yourself on modern and contemporary artists before sperging about "muh degeneracy" and "muh old times were so much better". Hell I bet my ass you don't even draw you cuck.

[Anonymous No.3293151]

>>3293146
>illustration full of sorrow and strife or classicism and melancholic poetry to you is mere "psychedelic nonsense of an edgelord".
Is this a troll? It feels like a troll.

[Anonymous No.3293152]

>>3293101
I hope that you're not trying to imply that because our technology is high therefore our culture is high.
>Also if you say that art made using current tech is good, you necessarily imply modern artists are good because machines cannot make art by themselves
Technology has provided us with a plethora of opportunities for artistic advancement that were never available to the old masters. If we were living in an artistic renaissance we should theoretically be able to look back at old masterpieces, and take pride in how far we've come since then, the same way that the humanists of the actual renaissance viewed the art of the dark ages before them. But this isn't the case, and the reason for this is that our culture doesn't demand the greatest art that we are capable of producing with our current technology, it's completely apathetic towards and tolerant of mediocrity. Yes, there does exist modern artists of high artistic ability, but our culture coddles all the garbage along with them because it doesn't value art in the first place. Similarly, while there are some examples of great architectural works being created, the standard norm is brutalist garbage. When fine cuisine and slop are treated as equals, the slop always prevails
http://www.thevintagenews.com/2017/01/10/world-not-big-enough-picasso-life-artwork-john-william-godward/

[Anonymous No.3293154]

[Anonymous No.3293155]

[Anonymous No.3293158]

>>3293152
Good art and bad art is almost entirely subjective.

https://i.imgur.com/YrTZfYi.jpg

This piece by Marcos Marteu-Mestre does not have the hyperrealistic coloring of late Renaissance art, but it has far, far more line direction than basically all Renaissance art.

If your standard for 'muh great art' is hyperrealism, there is fucktons of hyperrealism. But hyperrealism is not the only style of art worth doing.

Really, what the fuck is so good about this besides the coloring: http://www.womeninthebible.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/1.15.Judith_Beheading_Holofernes_Caravaggio-1.jpg

There is barely any emotion in it. The young woman looks like she's having a small spot of trouble deboning a chicken, rather than sawing off a man's head (which is probably because they were obsessed with using models and models can't hold a dynamic pose for very long) The only thing that actually conveys the mood of the piece is the man's expression, though if you've ever watched a man's head get sawn off it doesn't look like that at that point in the sawing.

[Anonymous No.3293159]

>>3293158
>Good art and bad art is almost entirely subjective.
Sorry, I can't muster the strength to read passed this

[Anonymous No.3293160]

>>3293159
Lol, nice surrender you have there.

[Anonymous No.3293166]

>>3293158
There is no point arguing with these idiots. They'll blindly affirm that old art was so much better despite having 0 knowledge on anything new. In fact in these 60 replies not once they gave an actual argument for that, only bullshit like this: >>3293134

[Anonymous No.3293170]

>>3293166
You're definitely right. I guess cuz some people produce anime porn these days, this entire art generation is bad.

[Anonymous No.3293172]

>>3293170
Anime porn is the most profitable

[Anonymous No.3293173]

>>3293172
Actually I'd say furry porn is the most profitable. I've heard of hundreds of dollars for commissions in that from certain artists

[Anonymous No.3293174]

>>3293173
What a great "culture" we have

[Anonymous No.3293175]

>>3293174
Drawn porn is a lot better than it used to be https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Justine_ou_les_Malheurs_de_la_vertu_%28orgy_with_a_monk%29.JPG/350px-Justine_ou_les_Malheurs_de_la_vertu_%28orgy_with_a_monk%29.JPG

[Anonymous No.3293178]

>>3293174
Back in times, the patrons were rich and few, so they could handsomely reward an artist, and cherrypick them. Now an artist is required to be a cutthroat, and filch money out of the lot of the same blokes as himself. So he now opts for churning out as quickly and efficiently as he can, to outcompete other cutthroats. Whether this or that is better, is up to you.

[Anonymous No.3293179]

>>3293175
Because there's a much greater demand for porn, than art

[Anonymous No.3293180]

>>3293146
Alright I had my fun so I'll admit to my baiting, actually I abhor subjectivism as much as you friendo

[Anonymous No.3293182]

>>3293179
Uh, what? There is a larger demand for porn, sure, but there is also more art being produced for more people. Concept art didn't even used to be a thing because there weren't big projects like films or games, whereas now there are dedicated freelance concept artists. You just insulted a fuckload of artists and the people who commission them

[Anonymous No.3293183]

>>3293180
Nesterov is great and I'm an idiot for charging at windmills disregardless.

[Anonymous No.3293186]

>>3293182
Have you ever heard of a starving porn artist "giving up" by drawing art that isn't intended to make people jack off, in order to pay bills? It's always the other way around

[Anonymous No.3293188]

>>3293186
Do you wanna know what skills you need to make porn? Anatomy. That is fucking it. That is all you need.

Do you wanna know what skills you need to make concept art or similar commission art?

Machinery, landscapes, foliage, architecture, character design fundamentals, anatomy, a wide array of texturing skills, skies, animals, monsters, product design fundamentals.

Most people who can only draw characters will easily be able to draw porn because their skills translate into it, but the big league people, are, SURPRISE, skilled at a much larger variety of things.

Back in the day artists COULD NOT make money off of simply drawing people anyway, whereas now you quite often can. Porn is just more accessible because people do not NEED you to draw their characters unless visuals are somehow important, but people will WANT someone to draw out their fantasies.

[Anonymous No.3293194]

ITT example of how this board acts as containment to keep retards out of art, education, and even creative jobs. they can't even find happiness among themselves.

[Anonymous No.3293213]

>>3293188
It's easy to become a pornographer because the demand for porn is HIGH. It's hard to become a concept artist because the demand for skilled draughtsmen is LOW. This is because of our SHIT CULTURE. Even with such a high bar-to-entry for concept artists, their pay is likely worse than a mediocre porn artist

[Anonymous No.3293216]

>>3293213
Source:my ass.

[Anonymous No.3293219]

>>3293213
Lol no, it's hard to become a concept artist because it takes fucking years to be as good as anyone else out there and become noticed. It takes a fraction of that time to become good enough at anatomy to draw porn for cash.

Did you know picture books are still being made? Porn free? Insane, I know. Comics as well. And graphic novels.

[Anonymous No.3293230]

>>3293219
>Lol no, it's hard to become a concept artist because it takes fucking years to be as good as anyone else out there and become noticed. It takes a fraction of that time to become good enough at anatomy to draw porn for cash.

You don't seem to understand that prospective concept artists have to be that great because they are numerous and in low demand

[Anonymous No.3293231]

>>3293230
How do you manage to contradict an earlier post in the thread so spectacularly when someone has said a different problem is that there are, apparently, FEW good draughtsmen.

Also, if there are MANY good draughtsmen, BOO FUCKING HOO. Supply and demand, bitch! Just because you're okay at something does NOT mean you deserve money for it! Art has ALWAYS been hard to get paid for. You do not HAVE to make porn, but it's an easy way to make money. If you don't wanna make porn, don't. Go get a different job. Not everyone gets to make fucktons of money on mid-tier art.

[Anonymous No.3293232]

>>3292696
>200 years
Photography. Next.

[Anonymous No.3293242]

>>3293231
There ARE few good draughtsmen. There are FEW positions for concept artists, or any position in art that isn't pornography. There is no lack of harmony in my posts, you just can't read.

>You do not HAVE to make porn, but it's an easy way to make money

THAT'S WHY MODERN ART CULTURE IS GARBAGE

[Anonymous No.3293250]

>>3293242
>There ARE few good draughtsmen
Outright lie. There are fucking thousands.
>THAT'S WHY MODERN ART CULTURE IS GARBAGE
>Implying porn art has never been made

Dude, porn is as old as humanity's ability to draw. It's just more easy to access because now, instead of having to talk to some shady guy at the speakeasy, you just need to google it.

The notion that the existence of porn somehow taints art as a whole is fucking insulting. You are nothing but a tradcon cuck to whom the idea of a vagina or penis is outright taboo

The rest of us acknowledge sexuality as a one of the many facets of humanity, but go ahead. Go look at your homoerotic art from the 1600s and praise it (Yeah, bitch, the vast majority of your beloved Renaissance men were gay as shit)

[Anonymous No.3293265]

>>3293250
As I already noted here>>3293152
the amount of modern artists at the level of old masters, given our technological advantages over them, is pathetic. This is evident of a culture that doesn't cater to master draughtsmen and doesn't encourage their growth. For example:
>John William Godward (9 August 1861 – 13 December 1922) was an English painter from the end of the Neo-Classicist era. He was a protégé of Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, but his style of painting fell out of favour with the rise of modern art. He committed suicide at the age of 61 and is said to have written in his suicide note that "the world is not big enough for myself and a Picasso"

>Dude, porn is as old as humanity's ability to draw
There has never, at any other point in history, existed an industry of simulating deviant sex with art. Any such attempt and the artist in question would be ostracized or executed or worse. You are out of your mind

>Yeah, bitch, the vast majority of your beloved Renaissance men were gay as shit)
Oh wait, you're just dumb as shit

[Anonymous No.3293270]

>>3293265
>"the world is not big enough for myself and a Picasso"
what a faggot. he was clearly worse than Picasso so he killed himself rather than getting gud. he shoulda just made porn.

[Anonymous No.3293272]

>>3293265
>There has never, at any other point in history, existed an industry of simulating deviant sex with art.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/07/07/franz-von-bayros_n_7717640.html
Oops. Ostracized, but still making money.

>Oh wait, you're just dumb as shit
No counterpoint? No justification for the Renaissance greats' obsession with drawing shirtless and worse men? All the detail on the aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaabs, and thrilling recreation of the male form in muscular motion? I can't blame them, drawing men made me gay too.

>He committed suicide at the age of 61
Your idol is someone who heard the words 'kys' and literally killed himself? Dude, are you SURE you should be on 4chan?

You need only look at people like Kevin Duc, who has made a lot of money doing concept work, to prove that your little anecdote is little more than an anecdote: http://kevinduc.com/

Also, nice work dodging around your fear of sexual imagery. Tell me, which part of you clenches when seeing porn; your balls or your asshole? Or maybe both?

[Anonymous No.3293280]

>>3292696
>drawing artists literally making over $50,000 a month
>thousands more making $5,000+ a month
>dying art
???

[Anonymous No.3293281]

>>3293280
Hehe, silly you. OP thinks that because anime porn exists, all art made in the past 30 years is automatically terrible and heretical and should be purged from existence, and we should go back to drawing God and Adam shirtless.

[Anonymous No.3293294]

>>3293272
>Ostracized
...

>No counterpoint? No justification for the Renaissance greats' obsession with drawing shirtless and worse men?

You conflate humanism with homosexuality because you're a stupid faggot

>you need only look at people like Kevin Duc, who has made a lot of money doing concept work, to prove that your little anecdote is little more than an anecdote: http://kevinduc.com/
You're attempting to discredit my observation of an actual trend (prospective concept artists struggling to find work while no such problem exists for pornographers) by labeling it an anecdote, then you attempt to disprove it by posting an actual anecdote.

>Also, nice work dodging around your fear of sexual imagery. Tell me, which part of you clenches when seeing porn; your balls or your asshole? Or maybe both?
I can only imagine that you were abused to end up this revolting, or maybe you're just a sociopath.

Pornography is a social disease. It saps men of their libido which would have otherwise been utilized towards accomplishment and greatness, and it dehumanizes women. Most importantly, it severs sexuality from its true purpose as a catalyst for marriage and family. That's one of the reasons why, among white people, virginity, marriage and child birth is at an all time low, while divorce, stds, depression etc are skyrocketing. Even rape is far greater than it was in 1960, even though porn is theoretically supposed to put an end to that

[Anonymous No.3293298]

>>3293280
>>3293281
drawing != art
painting != art
a drawing or painting can be art but it is by no means an attribute of the activity.

porn can be art but the reason artists resort to drawing it is because they are degenerate outcasts and what they want is more about exploring closeted fetishes than artistic concepts or expression.

[Anonymous No.3293309]

>>3293294
>prospective concept artists struggling to find work while no such problem exists for pornographers

Do you have any proof?
Ian McQue, Kevin Duc, Duster132, Keith Thompson, Julien Gauthier, Marcos Marteu-Mestre are all examples of freelancers who make money on their art. And then there are game and movie artists. Games usually have concept art teams of half a dozen or more people, while movies can have anywhere from half a dozen to dozens. All of the Star Wars films have had tons of concept art done for them.

How can there be a trend AGAINST concept artists, if concept art was not even an industry until film became an industry? You're talking in contradictions.
>Pornography is a social disease
Porn is depictions of sexual imagery. A social disease is something like collectivism.

>utilized towards accomplishment and greatness
No proven link between libido and production. Every single man in the world jacks off and they used to jack off back in the day too. Soldiers, artists, architects, construction workers, engineers. They all jack off.

>and it dehumanizes women
Sorry, what? Is this tumblr? You are ACTUALLY SocJus.
Porn 'dehumanizes' men too, by the same standard. In fact, porn that caters to men dehumanizes men FAR MORE. In porn, they are just a dick, but the woman's face is focused on because viewers want to see her reactions AS A HUMAN. You have walked straight into outright lies.

>sexuality from its true purpose as a catalyst for marriage and family
Woah, SEXUALITY is the catalyst for marriage and family? That is cynical to the point of oblivion. No, I don't think the catalyst for family is "I WANNA BANG HER", I'm pretty sure the catalyst is "This woman is so lovely and we could make a good family together"

>Even rape is far greater than it was in 1960
Outright lies https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/38/Rapes_per_1000_people_1973-2003.jpg

[Anonymous No.3293312]

>>3293298
Again, why are you focusing on porn when the person pointed out that illustrators (non porn ones) make tons of money? You literally just proved my point: somehow you think that the existence of porn taints all art.

[Anonymous No.3293321]

>>3293312
i'm not the same person. you're more arguing against your own confusion of what you think people are saying than you are with the people in this thread. which is typical of these kinds of threads.

[Anonymous No.3293324]

>>3293321
>i'm not the same person. you're more arguing against your own confusion of what you think people are saying than you are with the people in this thread. which is typical of these kinds of threads.
>>3293321
Porn = degeneracy is still a retarded notion, cupcake. Are you Christian by any chance?

[Anonymous No.3293326]

>>3293324
>Porn = degeneracy
>arguing against your own confusion of what you think people are saying
do you by any chance have a reading disability or is over-extrapolating bullshit something you like to do? i'd very much like to see what kind of artwork a brain calibrated like yours produces.

[Anonymous No.3293338]

>>3293294
>Pornography is a social disease. It saps men of their libido which would have otherwise been utilized towards accomplishment and greatness
>uses his sexual repression to fuel his art
>wonders why people call him a fag for only liking paintings of naked men wrestling each others

>and it dehumanizes women
women in the west have more rights now than ever.

>Most importantly, it severs sexuality from its true purpose as a catalyst for marriage and family. That's one of the reasons why, among white people, virginity, marriage and child birth is at an all time low, while divorce, stds, depression etc are skyrocketing
Lmao, does your local priest knows you browse a site made to share pictures of perverted japanese cartoons? Quick, flagellate yourself to espiate these filthy sins! No seriously you are such a prude you're almost a living parody.

>>3293298
>porn can be art but the reason artists resort to drawing it is because they are degenerate outcasts and what they want is more about exploring closeted fetishes than artistic concepts or expression
Uh yeah? There are people who draw art for fun as a hobby and others who are passionate and want to create something to express their uniqueness and the deepest parts of their being. Exactly like there are people who choose a simple job and other who try hard to become surgeons, engineers, scientists etc.
I don't exactly see your point here.

[Anonymous No.3293340]

>>3293309
>Do you have any proof?
Refer to >>3293186

>Porn is depictions of sexual imagery
Porn is the simulation of sex. Humanist nudity is not porn

>No proven link between libido and production
Why does nearly every high culture throughout history practice sexual modesty then? Please read http://www.sacred-texts.com/nth/tgr
/tgr16.htm

>Sorry, what? Is this tumblr? You are ACTUALLY SocJus.
Porn 'dehumanizes' men too, by the same standard. In fact, porn that caters to men dehumanizes men FAR MORE. In porn, they are just a dick, but the woman's face is focused on because viewers want to see her reactions AS A HUMAN. You have walked straight into outright lies.
Porn caters to men because the desires of men hold up the industry, therefore it's more common to see the man drawn in a way for self-insetion to be as easy as possible. SJWs don't really care about the objectification of women, only attractive women, because they're just another breed of apathetic hedonists

Woah, SEXUALITY is the catalyst for marriage and family? That is cynical to the point of oblivion. No, I don't think the catalyst for family is "I WANNA BANG HER", I'm pretty sure the catalyst is "This woman is so lovely and we could make a good family together"
Observe the trend between the rise of casual sex and the decline of marriage and childbirth

>Outright lies https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/38/Rapes_per_1000_people_1973-2003.jpg

>1973-2003

Retard. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

[Anonymous No.3293343]

>>3293338
>women in the west have more rights now than ever.
Yeah and I'm sure that porn was responsible for that. The rest of your post is of no substance

[Anonymous No.3293361]

>>3293340
>Refer to >>3293186
Nobody referred to that post because it's retarded, you are not presenting any data or anything. Many porn artists actually quit or move onto something else after developing further their art, many other just draw porn as a "side-job". Hell your whole idea that porn artists make more money than professionals in the field is wrong and has absolutely no basis, it's just easier to make money with porn but that doesn't mean that it's the same as getting a full time job for a huge label as a concept artist, professional illustrations also sell for a couple thousands of bucks.

The whole "starving artist" thing is something way more common in the past than now, Joan Mirò's works were heavily influenced by the visions he has while starvating.

Also this is /ic/, I'm not interested in your autistic mumblings about degeneracy and the good ol' days you only nitpick the good aspects of while ignoring the pile of shit we overcame nowadays.

[Anonymous No.3293362]

Maybe instead of crying about it, you can be the ones to change it back to realism.

[Anonymous No.3293374]

>>3293361
>shit we overcame nowadays
such as what? it's worse than ever if we include contemporary artists and the trash they make public.

[Anonymous No.3293526]

>>3292696
patent art decline might have to do with the ideal of the cultivated gentleman fading away, I'm pretty sure letterwriting vanished in a similar way
or it's just legal reasons alongside the camera making that sort of skilled but practical illustration become unnecessary and undesired, so eventually that job fades away even though everyone's thirsting for someone to illustrate magic cards instead of newspaper articles and advertising

[Anonymous No.3293560]

>>3293060
>posts russian symbol painter
*tips kremlin*

[Anonymous No.3293601]

>>3293134
According to leonardo art admiration should be done by anyone, because it is a poor copy of nature and everyone has a say on nature admiration

[Anonymous No.3293639]

>>3293601
>admiration
is that what's happening here though? really?

[Anonymous No.3293641]

>>3292696

Art didn't get truly good until impressionism hit.

Fite me

[Anonymous No.3293645]

>>3293641
The first impressionists were good because they were trained with classical methods. It went downway from there.

[Anonymous No.3294442]

>>3293064
>/pol/ boogieman
>ad hominem
>repeated twice
>not an argument
How is he wrong though?