Trad/inspo general

[Anonymous No.3630610]

Post works of art in traditional mediums (but from any period, contemporary/less known preferred)

Starting with the big boys

[Anonymous No.3630612]

Chantal Joffe

[Anonymous No.3630613]

A Magritte piece from his lesser known "periode vache"

[Anonymous No.3630616]

Albert Oehlen

[Anonymous No.3630618]

Michael Börremans

[Anonymous No.3630620]

Sanya Kantarovsky

[Anonymous No.3630622]

Martin Kippenberger

[Anonymous No.3630624]

Neo Rauch

[Anonymous No.3630635]

>>3630610
Thanks op i now feel better about my art, these are shit very inspiring.

[Anonymous No.3630643]

Rene Daniels

[Anonymous No.3630645]

Walter Swennen

[Anonymous No.3630646]

Kai Althoff

[Anonymous No.3630648]

Marlene Dumas

[Anonymous No.3630649]

Koen van den Broek

[Anonymous No.3630650]

Joe Bradley

[Anonymous No.3630656]

>>3630643
>>3630646
>>3630650
>>3630649
Never heard of them, thanks anons!!

Another Albert Oehlen.
Just realized that >>3630616 already posted one
I like his later works that combine digital and print textures.

[Anonymous No.3630658]

not a fan myself, but Nicole Eisenman is being shilled these days.

[Anonymous No.3630666]

>>3630658
Where is she being shilled?

[Anonymous No.3630679]

>>3630666
major galleries
but to be fair, it's a few years ago that she was being hyped. two very good arguments that speak for hyping her stuff: she's a woman painter AND she is a dyke.

[Anonymous No.3630729]

Christopher Wool

[Anonymous No.3630735]

Lesley Vance

[Anonymous No.3630851]

>>3630735
very nice.
i'm guessing pure unmixed colors, bottom is green earth, middle might be naples yellow, lots of medium and/or oil. really great

[Anonymous No.3630878]

All ugly. Why post only work that offends the eyes and soul?

[Anonymous No.3630891]

>>3630878
back to your bowsette porn and fanart shit, incel.

[Anonymous No.3630921]

Henry Moore

[Anonymous No.3630922]

Does anyone know the name of the contemporary sculptor that uses 2d charcoal drawings in his sculptures? A part of the sculpture will be a drawing instead of a spatial form.

[Anonymous No.3630947]

>>3630616
>>3630643
>>3630650
>>3630656
>>3630729
>>3630735
Would anyone like to have a go at actually explaining what the point of these are, why they are any good as a painting? I just see a senseless application of paint to canvas with no thought, purpose or talent.
Can anyone genuinely explain why I'm wrong?

[Anonymous No.3630953]

>>3630891
You are so far from being accurate, it's alarming.

[Anonymous No.3630973]

>>3630947
Do you seriously not see any kind of visual appeal to any of them? Well, ok, I'll try to explain.

Abstract art, despite what you seem to think right now, is not devoid of skill/talent/thought. If a work of art is not concerned with depicting reality and the human figure, it does not mean it is devoid of any quality. Just like good figurative art, it greatly considers composition, color theory, space, form, texture etc.

Have you ever tried to create an abstract piece? The majority of the pieces in this thread are quite hard to pull off even in terms of brushwork, let alone anything else. Have you ever seen what paint applied to canvas with a brush without any thought looks like? It looks extremely dull, messy and boring. To achieve the effects displayed here, one needs to scrape, layer, drip and all sort of other shit which, if done without experience and purpose, always leads to a big mess.

Pic related is an example of bad abstract art and you can use it for comparison. It's a perfect example of what you'd find in a run of the mill 50$-a-piece local gallery run by a single mom. It's just lines, all of the same thickness, spread around and colored shapes in between. Primary and secondary colors, one layer. The composition is completely static and the work in general is completely dull despite the use of wild colors and curvy lines.

[Anonymous No.3630987]

>>3630947
>>3630973
But the works in this thread might be a bit harder appreciate if you have zero knowledge of painting, art history and abstract art and a strong bias against it. They aren't exactly baby's first abstract works, since some of them are deliberately simplistic, rough, stripped down or experimental. They are by contemporary artists, which are trying to create something new and interesting, which is, after a whole century of progress in abstract art, not the easiest thing to do. What I'm trying to say is, if one is engaging with so much of development and is trying to create something interesting, one has to get either very extreme, or very personal and poetic, both of which is displayed in these works.

If you want to check out some more approachable abstract painters, I recommend Arshille Gorky, Wassily Kandinsky and Georgia O'Keefe. They are more on the "pretty" side of things, although of course this is a pretty vague term.

But the history of abstract art begins before things went completely abstract, so I'd recommend you read up on impressionism, cubism, the fauves, expressionism and surrealism.

[Anonymous No.3631005]

LOL. This shit reeks of insincerity. At least
most Bowsette fanart has some merit like good color composition or sex appeal. Look at this shit here: >>3630620 , not a fucking clue what the artist was thinking, lol. The most striking of laziness I've ever seen. I could forgive all this crappy if at least these guys could paint something minimally correct in terms of anatomy. But no, they just say some bullshit about expressing feeling or what not.
You guys are delusional.

[Anonymous No.3631021]

>>3631005
They can paint anything correct in terms of anatomy. They went to art schools and were probably drawing better than you when they were 9 years old. Being able to do something in art does not imply you must shove it in everyone's face in every work you do. Also, the painting you highlighted is using a minimalistic cartoonish style, it's not like it's failing in anatomy, it just doesn't use it (although the bodies do have a sense of space despite being painted flat, I'd like to see you do something like this). Also, the color composition is really damn good as well.

[Anonymous No.3631031]

>>3631021
lol. I call bullshit. Are you trolling me? I looked this artist other stuff. It's all the same flat thing. Hard to believe he knows his anatomy if it doesn't show in his work. And about doing something like this, I can do better, just wait

[Anonymous No.3631053]

>>3631031
Why would he need to show it in his work? Do you think painting is some big "who can illustrate anatomy" competition or what? Kantarovsky is doing work in the vein of artists like Gauguin, Matisse, Diebenkorn while incorporating influences from cartoons.
Also, what's your problem with flatness? Are you unable to understand that one can paint the human figure without using shading and still create something interesting and lively, perhaps even more so? Also, the fact that he is simplifying and stylizing doesn't mean he doesn't know anatomy, actually quite the contrary would be true - you can only properly deform and simplify what you thoroughly know and understand if you want it to look good.

[Anonymous No.3631074]

>>3631031
>>3631005
>>3630947

Here's a good example that I like to use when explaining modern painting. These works are in chronological order, by the same artist, 1 being the earliest, 4 the latest.
I'm using this to overthrow the common retarded argument that "modern artists don't have skill".
>inb4 it's a jewish conspiracy / money laundering
Nope. De Kooning (as well as the majority of modern artists) rose to fame and was able to earn a living only a few years after he started doing the things on the right. The dude was academically trained and piss poor, the decisions he's made towards abstraction were made autonomously and out of his interest in new ways of painting.

I'm not saying you have to like it, but gtfo with your retarded hillbilly complaints and arguments. If you aren't learning art history and trying new and interesting things you will never be an artist.

[Anonymous No.3631103]

>>3631053
>>3631074
lol. This guy. Dude. If De Kooning got lazy and decided he didn't want to get better, that's his problem. This doesn't change the fact that these "modern" ""artist"" are/were light years away from the old masters in terms of technique and appeal.
The way I see, these guys didn't want to dedicate their entire lives to master the craft, they were primarily dilettantes that cared more about shocking than any kind of "pure" art experimentation.

[Anonymous No.3631115]

And another thing. Pic related shows what a good flat painting is. Not the unfinished crap people posted in this thread. When you think about it, it's really comical. You guys praise this unfinished crap saying it is "style", but when an autistic weeaboo posts his own anime abortion here and defends himself against criticism saying he was just drawing in his own style, you guys rip him a new asshole.
Consistency of opinion guys, that's what lacks in your minds.

[Anonymous No.3631138]

>>3631103
You are aware that these people were painting constantly and daily? Lazy dilettantes who care about shocking don't work 24/7 on their art despite harsh financial conditions. You're thinking of someone like Damien Hirst, not fucking Willem de Kooning.

And no one cares about how you see it. Your view is in the minority and your arguments are trivial. "but muh old masters" is not an argument, it is the cry of a child who cannot keep a dialogue and shits out uneducated opinions.

>>3631115
It is indeed a good painting. But it's not really flat, the shadows are just stylized and not blended. Also, no, I'm not praising it as style (style =/= stylized). Having a style and doing everything inside of this style without thinking is considered bad for a reason, high brow art and anime alike.

+ you are strawmanning real hard my dude. Do you think /ic/ is one person? What do you mean with "you guys"? You brought in something completely unrelated and haven't replied to any of my arguments with your own. You rely on buzzwords, logical fallacies and unknowledgeable delusions.

[Anonymous No.3631141]

>>3631074
>>3630973
dude, for your own good, stop feeding that troll. wasted time trying to beat some sense into a die-hard philistine ...

[Anonymous No.3631147]

>>3631115
Some faggot posting anime here is the equivalent of a five year old trying to play Mozart on a Fischer price piano in Carnegie hall. There's a difference between a developed style over many years and a moron who saw something on TV and wants to be an artist all of a sudden. Ngmi

[Anonymous No.3631163]

>>3631141
I don't like most of Daniel Richter's work but these last paintings of his are quite good

[Anonymous No.3631164]

>>3631163
*I selected the wrong file, I wanted to share more Richter's paintings.

[Anonymous No.3631165]

>>3631163
Same. It's like Francis Bacon on speed.
Post more please

[Anonymous No.3631167]

[Anonymous No.3631169]

[Anonymous No.3631170]

[Anonymous No.3631171]

[Anonymous No.3631177]

What are you guys' top 10 favourite painters (preferably working today)?

[Anonymous No.3631181]

>>3631138
They were painting constantly, so what? The art is still puke. But your commentary about how they were so poor was eye opening. The only thing I can think about is how most of these artists probably had some kind of mental disease. If you said to me they were painting some kind of outsider art, I could let it all pass.

And no one likes this kind of art. The academia and art galleries are not representative of the greater population. People like shit like manga, comics, disney stuff and even old master shit. Just because some (((nose))) subsidize crap art and put it everywhere doesn't mean people like it.

[Anonymous No.3631200]

>>3631164
>>3631167
>>3631169
>>3631170
Look at this garbage. Anyone could paint like this. Why praise this trash when you can look at something that took effort like this >>3631171 ?
You know, my problem with this kind of art is not that it is stylized or strange. My problem is with laziness. Look at what Rousseau did. The guy didn't know how to paint,his anatomy was atrocious, but he didn't let his lack of training get in the way of his craftsmanship. The guy took painting seriously and made something beautiful.

[Anonymous No.3631204]

>>3631200

[Anonymous No.3631207]

>>3631200

[Anonymous No.3631211]

>>3631200

[Anonymous No.3631248]

>>3631200

[Anonymous No.3631279]

>>3631115
>to finish a painting means to be through with it, to kill it, to rid it of its soul, to give it its final blow. the coup de grace for the painter as well as for the picture.
picasso

[Anonymous No.3631288]

[Anonymous No.3631290]

[Anonymous No.3631292]

[Anonymous No.3631815]

Posting some early Guston

[Anonymous No.3631816]

[Anonymous No.3631817]

[Anonymous No.3631819]

[Anonymous No.3631820]

[Anonymous No.3631833]

>>3631163
i saw a show of his most recent ones. >>3631141 >>3631164 >>3631167
he said that he looked at random porn images from the corner of his eye, using just so much vision that he could barely see limbs stretched this and that way. i wasn't a fan of his early work, where he was more into the whole punk scene thing, but he is going in a very fresh direction with these latest ones and i appreciate that he is still developing. not a lot of artists are ready to do that.

[Anonymous No.3631838]

>>3631200
>effort
here we have our typical primate, who's only measure is "how long did it take you?" and "how well rendered is this compared to this? i want muh REALISM!"

[Anonymous No.3631977]

Posting a landscape by morandi because they are very underrated compared to his still lifes

[Anonymous No.3631978]

>>3631977

[Anonymous No.3631979]

>>3631978

[Anonymous No.3631984]

>>3631977
>>3631978
>>3631979
it looks to me like Morandi was the starting point for Luc Tuymans color palette

thanks for reminding me, i was going to get that one huge Morandi catalogue.

[Anonymous No.3632044]

>>3631984
Which one huge Morandi catalogue? I'm interested.

[Anonymous No.3632133]

>>3632044
go on amazon europe and search "morandi". one of them is unavailable, used copies sell for 1.000 pound. i managed to buy one that they are going to restock soon.

[Anonymous No.3632188]

>>3632133
>amazon
>used copies sell for 1.000 pound.
if there is nothing available the algo freaks out and puts the listing price up on 1000's of dollars.

[Anonymous No.3632366]

Eva Hesse

[Anonymous No.3632382]

>>3631115
I WANNA KNOW DEFEAT

[Anonymous No.3632417]

>>3631838
You sound like the pretentious rich people who say a crumpled piece of paper is artwork to signal how high minded they are.

[Anonymous No.3632449]

>>3631816
>>3631815
>>3631817

Good thing he changed his style, looks like he just copied max beckmann triptychs, the composition, style even.

But that's just my opinion.

[Anonymous No.3632560]

>>3632449
Nah, it isn't just an opinion. He was greatly inspired by Beckmann's approach, but Guston's paintings seem to have a more refined approach. There's more volume and space and mystery while on the other hand he completely abstracts certain things, further than Beckmann did. There's more emphasis on atmosphere and light.

But yeah, very Beckmann-like, but such influences are normal for a young painter.

[Anonymous No.3632573]

>>3632417

[Anonymous No.3633578]

[Anonymous No.3633580]

elizabeth peyton

[Anonymous No.3633582]

charline von heyl

[Anonymous No.3633584]

alex katz

[Anonymous No.3633800]

Thomas Houseago

[Anonymous No.3633803]

pablo

[Anonymous No.3633815]

>>3633803
Damn, this is really good.

[Anonymous No.3633942]

>>3630851
I can see that. Cool.

[Anonymous No.3634266]

[Anonymous No.3634438]

>>3634266
honestly, this is cramped with bland symbolism. and the tower of Pisa straigtened by the tilted frame ... come on.
ugh.

[Anonymous No.3634749]

>>3634438
I agree 100% (I posted it), but it's still interesting in some ways

[Anonymous No.3634919]

>>3634749
You might enjoy the work of Gertrude Abercrombie (or maybe you are already familiar with her work)

[Anonymous No.3634921]

>>3634919

[Anonymous No.3634974]

>>3634919
>>3634921
I was familiar with her from somewhere, but didn't know the name. Thanks

[Anonymous No.3635734]

[Anonymous No.3635840]

most painters in this thread is american, aren't they

[Anonymous No.3635941]

>>3635840
Most are early modern eurofags. Later American work moved away from this.

[Anonymous No.3636093]

>>3635840
Not really. Why?

[Anonymous No.3636355]

[Anonymous No.3637759]

I'm really drunk, but ive seen great artists being posted here, rene daniels, robert ryman, eva hesse, guston, morandi, kasimir, albeetr oehlen and lot's of others, I just don't want this thread to die so I'm bumping this shit. shit i'm fucking depressed.
Posting a Picabia, fuck picasso and fuck duchamp. Picabia is the real shit, he's the real dadaist, the real surrealist and the real proto-post-modernist, he was ahead of them all.

[Anonymous No.3638597]

>>3637759
my man

Also posting more Guston

[Anonymous No.3639616]

just been getting into more abstract stuff and art history, quality thread. the level of willful ignorance and retardation by the majority of /ic/ on anything moderately abstract is insufferable

[Anonymous No.3639622]

>>3639616
everything on mainstream media is expected to talk down to the lowest level of intelligence and awareness. these tards just never learn anything and assume their narrowminded world is the one true reality.

[Anonymous No.3639675]

>>3637759
yeah you must be a little mixed up
no one was better than picasso

[Anonymous No.3639806]

>>3639675
Picasso was a great craftsmanship, not a great thinker, so it's pretty much a matter of taste

[Anonymous No.3640600]

>>3639675
Pshh.

[Anonymous No.3640603]

>>3640600

[Anonymous No.3640604]

>>3640603

[Anonymous No.3640609]

>>3640604

[Anonymous No.3640638]

>>3640600
plato was a 'great thinker' and he was against art, know what i mean

[Anonymous No.3640650]

>>3640609

wow this speaks right to my soul, incredible

[Anonymous No.3640657]

>>3639806
plato was a great thinker and he was against art, know what i mean

[Anonymous No.3640701]

>>3640657
He wasn't against art. What he says about art in The Republic should be interpreted more as entertainment while he calls actual art poetry and is definitely not against it, especially if you read his entire works.

[Anonymous No.3640709]

>>3640701
plato was against poetry

[Anonymous No.3640718]

>>3640709
Only in the most surface-level way and if you take all of his words directly. Then also take into account the fact that what was taken as art back then cannot compare to what art is today or even 200 or 400 years ago.

[Anonymous No.3640723]

>>3640718
he was against it in quite a big way. it's a known thing.

>Then also take into account the fact that what was taken as art back then cannot compare to what art is today or even 200 or 400 years ago.
course you can, there's no past or future in art.

[Anonymous No.3642342]

[Anonymous No.3642503]

[Anonymous No.3642517]

Spilliaert

[Anonymous No.3642525]