Are you a better artist than Hitler?

[Anonymous No.4116019]

Let's be real here.

[Anonymous No.4116025]

Probably not, but I'm not on meth so bonus points for me

[Anonymous No.4116026]

I heard that he didn't get into his art school because he was only good at perspective, and not figure drawing

[Anonymous No.4116027]

>>4116026
I remember reading that a contemporary was disturbed by his work because it showed an utter lack of care about people since he never drew them, and when he did there was a weird stiffness.

[Anonymous No.4116028]

>>4116019
Yes, in most cases. The image you posted I'm certain was copied from a photograph - Hitler was making a living coloring in prints from photographs during the time he was preparing to apply for the academy.
This is a more accurate example of his work. I'm no master artist, but yes, I can paint better than he could.

[Anonymous No.4116032]

>>4116027
That sounds like a story made up after WWII

[Anonymous No.4116033]

>>4116032
Possibly, but he didn't do hardly any figure work. The one portrait I've seen is awful. He just wasn't a good artist, the academy correctly turned him down. You CAN be a successful artist only painting landscapes, but he truly sucked at it.

[Anonymous No.4116034]

>>4116027
Hitler was pretty good, but I think with the high amount of applicants for that academy and the lack of spots available, his work just didn't stand out. It's like applying for a position at a studio today, if he had just kept applying he probably would've gotten in at some point. (but he ran out of money)

[Anonymous No.4116039]

>>4116027
translation: he sucked at figure painting because he focused on landscapes which weren't very impressive either

[Anonymous No.4116040]

>if Hitler had Loomis, WW2 wouldn't have happened

[Anonymous No.4116054]

>>4116019
Who cares.

[Anonymous No.4117361]

>>4116019
Yes, I'd like to think so.

[Anonymous No.4117414]

>>4116028
This is fugly, boring and completely forgettable. No wonder he became an embittered adult.

[Anonymous No.4117420]

>>4116040
You've been smoking way too much.

[Anonymous No.4117422]

Is Hitler the ultimate ngmi?

[Anonymous No.4117539]

>>4116019
He's got me beat on lighting, but I've got him beat on perspective.

[Anonymous No.4117542]

he was good, but had no style. most politicians or people who take up painting after another profession or career have this same cookie cut style.

[Anonymous No.4117554]

>>4117539
>lighting
Top kike

I’m sure you have better values than him as well

[Anonymous No.4117617]

>>4116026
>only good at perspective

[Anonymous No.4117641]

>>4117617
Holy kek

[Anonymous No.4117723]

>>4117617
KEK

[Anonymous No.4117807]

>>4116019
everyone in this thread can trace over a photo and fill in with paint no problem like OP pic. It's hard to make watercolors ugly, but somehow he found a way.

[Anonymous No.4117809]

>>4116019
Souless

[Anonymous No.4117819]

>>4116027
Imagine attaching some weird and gay psychological analysis to some dumb faggot that just neglected his fundies.

[Anonymous No.4118061]

>>4116026
What I heard was that he was horrible at perspective.

[Anonymous No.4118088]

>>4116027
That sounds like a gay retroactive story made up after he did a bunch of mean things

[Anonymous No.4118217]

>>4118088
He was shit though.

[Anonymous No.4118223]

>>4116019
Wonder if he ever did doodles in office desu

[Anonymous No.4118238]

>>4116040

[Anonymous No.4118253]

>>4118217
That's not too bad for someone who's shit at portraits.