[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/ic/ - Artwork/Critique


View post   

File: 386 KB, 1575x1200, huang-guangjian-20170817.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057302 No.7057302 [Reply] [Original]

Is there anybody today who can compete with Huang Guangjian in technical ability?

Did he surpass old masters?

>> No.7057303

>>7057302
prompt?

>> No.7057324

>>7057302
>Did he surpass old masters?
some of them, in some ways

There are some who can compete with him, sure. @elcoro36 came to mind because of the old homeless man there, but there are many more like him. Craig Mullins can paint like that.

>> No.7057329

>>7057302
>who compete with this random chinese dude making LOL splash arts
an AI thread died for this

>> No.7057334

Might as well ask this stupid question because it's related, how does one become as good as these chinese painters or mullins?
Is there a david finch roadmap equivalent? or is it just studying realism and doing days long still life studies?

>> No.7057358

>>7057334
>or is it just studying realism and doing days long still life studies?
Yeah. Mullins literally did thousands of gouache studies. He was mattepainter for film initially in the early 90s.
Chinese guys do extremely detailed studies, cast drawings etc. they are super competitive with it.

>> No.7057486
File: 103 KB, 437x800, lipking.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057486

>>7057302
>>7057334
>chinese painters
They are practicing methods derived from the French academic tradition, which are taught at ateliers throughout Europe and the United States. You can find thousands of painters in the US alone who match or exceed the "technical ability" of OP's image. Picrel is Jeremy Lipking.

>> No.7057488

>>7057334
thousands of hours of photo studies and having the right mentors. anyone asking this question will never be able to do it

>> No.7057494

>>7057486
You named one, name some more of the remaining "thousands"

>> No.7057497

>>7057302
No one will ever admit any living artist has surpassed the old masters even though many have.

>> No.7057500

>>7057302
this is not that great desu

>>7057329
>an AI thread died for this
lmao

>> No.7057501

>>7057486
In terms of technical skill, Lipking doesn't come close to HGJ but in terms of composition and storytelling, HGJ doesn't come close to Lipking.
Artists are not judged on a linear scale.

>> No.7057502

>>7057486
The artist in the OP studied at the Imperial Academy of Arts in Saint Petersburg, so he's been taught the Repin and Fechin ways of painting.
Very different from the academic French atelier methods.
Learn your shit.

>> No.7057519

>>7057302

Now do it in real paint and we’ll talk

>> No.7057523

>>7057519
>now do it in real paint
Should someone tell him?

>> No.7057526
File: 354 KB, 1000x1284, guangjian-huang-20170329154725.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057526

>>7057519
here you go

>> No.7057592 [DELETED] 

>>7057526
prebeg here and this is obviously outstanding (so I assume there's a valid reason), but I have a dumb question:
What's with the yellowish tint on his skin? Kinda makes it look to me like raw chicken meat that's starting to go bad.

>> No.7057596

>>7057526
prebeg here and this is obviously outstanding (so I assume there's a valid reason), but I have a dumb question:
What's with the yellowish/orangeish tint on his skin and particularly the shoulder? Kinda makes it look to me like raw chicken meat that's starting to go bad.

>> No.7057601

>>7057596
Same reason why anime artists draw eyes in certain ways; they think it looks good
A stylistic choice or whatever you want to call it

>> No.7057605

>>7057596
Seems like a saturated rim light to make it pop and give some vibrance contrast to the otherwise neutral colors of the figure
Russian schools fucking love neutrals

>> No.7057612

>>7057526
>anime dude in a void hiding hands and facial features
whoa such talent

>> No.7057614

>>7057612
Can't win with you twats lmao

>> No.7057625
File: 181 KB, 1280x720, ruanjia.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057625

>>7057302
>>7057526
that looks just like the soulless Ruan Jia concept art stuff
are you the guy who was constantly spamming this board with Ruan Jia years ago?
high effort run-ff-the-mill chink art

>> No.7057626

>>7057302
No two people on /ic/ can agree what technical ability is. Especially when you compare oil painting with digital

>> No.7057630
File: 416 KB, 1006x1600, ruan-jia-2018-06-15-2-36-44.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057630

>dead porcelain doll style and generic backgrounds
did Ruan Jia kys already?
i mean, AI can shit this stuff out in seconds now.

>> No.7057637
File: 1.73 MB, 1747x1610, 5e475b33gy1ftpfhytktij21cj18qqv5.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057637

>>7057625
>>7057630
>still seething over Ruan in current year
Rent free

>> No.7057640

>>7057637
diabetes-II-inducing kitsch yes :)

>> No.7057645

>>7057640
>throwing a diabetic induced fit over saturated pixels
Holy zygote moment

>> No.7057650

>>7057302
this is trying hard to be on some Rembrandt level. yet the values are a total mess. the background is an undefined haze, the reflection on the shoulder is a /beg/ tier mistake. shadows on the right side are way too muddy. who shills this guy?

>> No.7057655
File: 2.10 MB, 1600x1600, Rembrandt Self-Portrait, 1658 Frick Collection. New York (2).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057655

>>7057302
>Did he surpass old masters?

comparing pixels to oil on canvas. don't be silly

>> No.7057656

>>7057655
this
but form interviews hes told he studied trad painting, and its actually common for a lot of the chinese artists to be trained traditionally, so i wouldnt doubt if he could actually paint as well in oils even if he needed a few months practise to get used to it

>> No.7057661
File: 49 KB, 768x550, Helnwein-Gottfried-The-murmur-of-the-innocent-2020-768x550.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057661

>>7057302
>technical ability
hyperrealism is bland on itself. if you only know a handful or artists, of course you are stunned by OP pic.
Gottfried Helnwein, Chuck Close, Lucian Freud, Ron Mueck, Robert Longo
they all have strong concepts going in their works. i don't see that in HGJ or Ruan Jia or any of those tool-tier artists

>> No.7057663

>>7057656
>so i wouldnt doubt if he could actually paint as well
might be so, but OP pic overall image composition is stale and lacks dynamic. the garment is in one line with the shoulder. not that it's wrong, it's just boring as it is.

>> No.7057665

>>7057661
A monochromatic painting of a girl glancing off-screen, clearly relying heavily on a ref has a strong concept behind it?

>> No.7057667

>>7057601
>>7057605
Thank you.

>> No.7057671

>>7057665
go read about Helnwein. his art is about the horrors of abusing children. i see why /ic/ doesn't want to hear about that lol.

>old man staring at the ceiling
much better, right?

>> No.7057672
File: 2.26 MB, 1962x837, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057672

>>7057656
He does trad too yeah

>> No.7057673

>>7057302
32 gb ram

>> No.7057677
File: 1.23 MB, 640x488, hgj process.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057677

>>7057673
wdym?

>> No.7057678

>>7057671
>le abysmal painting with le deep backstory/message
Go tape a banana to a wall or something

>> No.7057690
File: 149 KB, 1050x800, comp_1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057690

>>7057677
dynamic sucks

>> No.7057695
File: 359 KB, 1881x1058, 1654825050067.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057695

>>7057690
I see. how about this one?

>> No.7057705

>>7057695
more dynamic obviously. but i generally don't get that vibe.
figure is in the dead center, halo around the head. some kind of mother mary meets fantasy shit? the crab pinchers to the left and the veil and cliffs on the right create a vignette that draws the eye even more to the center, which is already way too prominent. the shadows. feet are cut off and there is no horizon / just a very ambiguous conglomerat of cliffs and stone in the bg. the crab-hat is a bit of a joke.
95% technical showoff, 4% originality, 1% rediscovery value
I look at this for a minute and I'm bored. sugary, overthetop dramatic concept art, on par with "fullmoon ad howling wolf goth girl wallpaper"

>> No.7057714
File: 322 KB, 1024x683, Hercule2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057714

>>7057302
maybe in a thousand years

>> No.7057735

>>7057705
It's painfully obvious you're not an artist yourself, and only base your vapid analysis on the hours of pretentious art analysis videos you've watched on YouTube.
For every silly composition rule there are thousands of masterpieces that don't follow it.

>> No.7057738

>>7057735
>It's painfully obvious you're not an artist yourself
keep pondering the orb

tell me what's great about the composition then? I'm bored looking at this underwater fantasy madonna bullshit

>> No.7057740

>>7057735
he's right though

>> No.7057741
File: 378 KB, 1600x962, hirschl-charon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057741

>>7057735
digital concept fartists are trying so hard to emulate real painters

>> No.7057742

>>7057735
>For every silly composition rule there are thousands of masterpieces that don't follow it.
this doesn't refute any of these arguments >>7057705

>> No.7057751

reminder /ic/ went into a total meltdown after pewds btfo all the crabs
so take whatever you read here with a grain of salt and then laugh

>> No.7057756

>>7057751
Did not realize we were all one person.
Remember when ai firet started making not shit art and we were flooded with newfags and random anons who have never been here before?

>> No.7057759
File: 165 KB, 1333x750, shittier.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057759

>>7057695
>figure in dead center
>everything desperately pointing at figure
>light source pointing at figure
>perfectly round halo
>rocks are purely ornamental decoration
it's as though concept art is not and cannot achieve the same as trad art. who could have known?

>> No.7057761

>>7057756
lol you got offended

>> No.7057762

>>7057738
I'm not arguing whether it's good or not, that's for each individual viewer to decide on their own.
I'm saying your "points" are entirely moot since composition, like color or style in general is completely subjective.
I know you're not an artist so you think there are rules that when followed produces good art and when not followed results in bad art, but there's this thing called nuance and taste that varies wildly from person to person.

>> No.7057763

>>7057677
literally diarrhea colored

>> No.7057768

You're all jealous and the only reason you're attacking him is because you're racist.

>> No.7057771
File: 1.03 MB, 1600x962, 24_030.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057771

>>7057741
Wow, such an amazing and thought provoking composition, the mysterious backround of ambiguous rock cliffs really sell this ethereal mood and atmosphere of the man standing in a crowd of pointing figures.
I'm at a loss for words..

>> No.7057773
File: 3.15 MB, 1600x962, OK.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057773

>>7057771
OK.

>> No.7057774

>>7057762
>since composition, like color or style in general is completely subjective.
they aren't and i wonder where you got that idea. there's a difference between making movies with shots that are purposefully meant to look artificial like Wes Anderson does and using symmetry in concept art on an advertisement tier level / Mr Beast reaction face aesthetic.

what makes for an interesting image composition is a complex weight distribution of all the given elements. this underwater mother mary is a cheap trick in that respect and it gets stale very quickly.

>>7057771
>Wow, such an amazing and thought provoking composition, the mysterious backround of ambiguous rock cliffs really sell this ethereal mood and atmosphere of the man standing in a crowd of pointing figures.
>I'm at a loss for words..
my my, are we ever butthurt or what?

>> No.7057787

>>7057774
>composition isnt subjective
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

pewds btfo you stupid faggots, at this point all the noise you make is just yapping farts

>> No.7057791

>>7057773
Is he grabbing his crotch? And is his left arm too long? I love this pic but I want to join in this retarded crabfest

>> No.7057792
File: 556 KB, 1600x962, hirschl-charondyn.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057792

>>7057771
i'm not this anon, but i posted it here >>7057741

a few points about this painting
Adolf Hirémy-Hirschl, The Souls of Acheron, 1898

- the obvious well constructed gathering around Hermes
- Hermes looking to the left and down – usually any allover left leaning composition hints at regress, negativity, loss, death etc, fitting for this Acheron landscape
- The blue line is the ground or the platform where they are on and gives the viewer a point of orientation, grounding the scene
- the shrubbery and dry twigs (magenta) in the foreground add to the depth and create a whirling motion
- the rectangular lines featured on the very left of the painting create a stoppage and although this seems to be the darkest area in the painting, furthest away and seemingly flowing outwards outside the frame, it is also a focal point through Hermes' tilted head, staff and posture
all in all, the composition in this particular painting is extremely ambiguous and features a lot of sections that are each drawing attention while displaying several different siuations and scenes

>> No.7057793

>Is there anybody today who can compete with Huang Guangjian in technical ability?
Plenty of atelier render-machines.

>> No.7057797

>>7057787
who the hell told you composition was subjective? it's the biggest bs i'v read on here so far.

>> No.7057799

>>7057797
Eye tracking tests show it is a bit subjective

>> No.7057800

>>7057797
>composition isnt subjective
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
you read too many artbooks that teach formulas
study on psychology, optics and vision
educate yourself child

>> No.7057806

>>7057800
i dare you to walk in any old advertisement studio and tell them "hey guys! i got news for you! image composition is just subjective haha! stop making symmetrical, screamy faces to get peoples attention it doesn't work because i say so! it's all subjective"

>> No.7057809

>>7057806
>it doesn't work because i say so!
Actually it's just noise to me now, I don't see the faces anymore.

>> No.7057811

>>7057806
Are you saying the unnegotiable peak of composition is Mr beast tier thumbnails?
Regardless of the story you're trying to tell with a painting?

>> No.7057820

>>7057800
>you read too many artbooks that teach formulas
paint enough and you will understand and get a natural feeling for what makes a well-weighted composition in a picture. it's no coincidence that concept artists are using symmetry provocatively as bland as this >>7057759 - HGJ guy. they want easy gains for less effort. imagine you were asked to conceptualize something ambigous and complex like Hiromy-Hirschl >>7057792
instead, he practices painting an old man, badly cropped with muddy diarrhea colors, staring at the ceiling

>>7057809
>Actually it's just noise to me now, I don't see the faces anymore.
it's a primal instinct to look at faces with a shocked or excited reaction. we are heard animals and if someone is shocked, we immediately want to assess the situation and see if there is a threat around. this hightened attention makes us remember the situation better and hence this is used in ads so much. you may think it doesn't work, but it works every single time, you just don't realize it.

>>7057811
>Are you saying the unnegotiable peak of composition is Mr beast tier thumbnails?
you are aware that he probably pays 1000$ for the guy who makes these thumbnails alone, right? they have been changing thumbnails of videos that have already been uploaded, bc they didn't work so well. as disgusting as they may seem, yt-thumbnails are pretty interesting.

>> No.7057824

>>7057806
>>7057820
to feel no shame or embarrassment and to continue doubling down, just how do you do it

>> No.7057825

>>7057820
>you may think it doesn't work, but it works every single time, you just don't realize it.
If I saw my wife's face among the sea of faces, is my wife's a better composition than the rest because it drew my attention a million times more? Subjectivity mate...

>> No.7057828

>>7057820
>paint enough and you will understand and get a natural feeling for what makes a well-weighted composition in a picture. it's no coincidence that concept artists are using (...)
NTA. None of this or your other paragraphs addresses the question. Studies on eye movements show that the traditional claims about composition, i.e. placement of objects on thirds, golden sections and the like, as well as "leading the eye" are just folk science and heuristics, not rules. You cannot boil composition down to drawing specific lines and curves and lining the content of the picture up with them.

>> No.7057839

>>7057825
how often do concept artists paint your wife? you're not talking about composition, your talking about personal experience / preference. look up what image/picture composition means.

>>7057824
argue against it then.

>>7057828
you making it sound like there's a special recipe book for highclass image composition.
the statement i'm making is that this simplistic shit like mermaid-mothermary and her crab baby with the halfmoon cliffs and the dramatic veil is a bad painting-by-numbers-picture. it is exactly that, it tries hard to function by some kind of formulaic construction in comparison to someone like Hirsch, who by experience and practice learned to find his own way.

>> No.7057841
File: 27 KB, 1183x612, comp.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057841

>>7057820
>is this a decent composition if your intent is to show off the massive scale of the surrounding landscape?
Sure, it does its job.
>Is this a decent composition if your intent is to show the facial expression this character is making in awe of his surroundings?
No you fucking retard

>> No.7057844

>>7057839
>argue against indoctrinated retard that can only think in 'artist' theories
i rather call you a retard instead

>> No.7057845

>>7057841
and this is supposed to discount what exactly?

>>7057844
ngmi

>> No.7057846

>>7057839
>how often do concept artists paint your wife?
Bro what? I'm not that anon. All I'm saying is preferences influence the way one experiences a composition. Therefore there is subjectivity in what "works"

>> No.7057848

>>7057844
does putting something in the dead-center of the image grab our attention? yes
does highlighting a figure with strong contrast catch our focus? yes, no exceptions
is there a universal rule that makes symmetrical horror movie posters work so well? yes there is.
is all of this subjective and are there people who downright ignore all of these primal attention grabbing strategies? it's fucking not subjective in the least

>> No.7057852

>>7057845
To discount the notion you have that there are objective rules to composition.
If you want to make the viewer uneasy with a piece the worst compositional choice you can make it to make it balanced and have it follow some arbitrary rules that instill calm and serenity in the viewer.
It depends on what you're trying to tell with your piece, so it's fucking subjective you no-good knuckle-sucking internet art critic

>> No.7057853

>>7057846
ofc there is subjectivity in that, but the most basic established rules are almost exclusively universal. this is turning into autistic nitpicking.

>> No.7057857

>>7057852
>some arbitrary rules
you are arguing in my favor you dimwit. this here is following arbitrary rules by the book like a fucking brainless machine >>7057759

>> No.7057858

>>7057853
>autistic nitpicking.
Well maybe don't push back on the idea there was subjectivity ?

>> No.7057860

>>7057848
you're retarded m8

>> No.7057862

>>7057853
You and that other guy were the ones who started word dumping composition critiques like you had a composition analysis homework due tomorrow lmao you started autisticly nitpicking the second you got here nigga

>> No.7057868

>>7057672
What's the story behind his love of old bearded white men

>> No.7057871

>>7057860
cool.

>>7057862
>don't write here, this is a board.
ok man

>>7057858
so why would you say composition = subjective like it was black and white

>>7057868
he needs a sugardaddy like all asian femboys

>> No.7057872

>>7057868
Big Bearded Caucasian

>> No.7057876
File: 184 KB, 690x508, 1691087525743925.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057876

>>7057868
Dunno

>> No.7057878

>>7057862
>the second you got here nigga
i got here bc some deranged teenager said a feminine chink with a Wacom has surpassed old masters

>> No.7057879

>>7057871
>so why would you say composition = subjective like it was black and white
I didn't, every post of mine says there is some subjectivity, I was careful not to make black and white statements. My comment about eye tracking got no yous though so maybe it went unnoticed.

>> No.7057883

>>7057879
-->

>>7057762
>I'm saying your "points" are entirely moot since composition, like color or style in general is completely subjective.
right right

>> No.7057884

>>7057883
>completely subjective.
not black and white at all

>> No.7057886
File: 7 KB, 728x142, 123.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7057886

>>7057883
>can't tell the difference between two people
It's over for you bro

>> No.7057888

>>7057886
>anonymous board
>can't tell anons apart
hmmm intredasting

>> No.7057889

>>7057886
Give me another chance.

>> No.7057890

>>7057883
Not me buddy

>> No.7057892

>>7057888
Nigga I'm not very bright and even I could tell you there are two of you making these vapid statements about composition, not looking good for you bro

>> No.7057893

>>7057888
Skill issue

>> No.7057895

>>7057890
cool, so why do you jump in a random thread and argue as though you were this guy >>7057762

>> No.7057901

>>7057892
so there are x anons arguing that composition is subjective and i argued against that.
can you say anything else except nigga hurr durr?MM8NR

>> No.7057917

>>7057901
How is anyone supposed to take anything you say seriously when you can't even differentiate between two clearly separate anons?
I Thought you'd atleast have some basic neural function with your grandstanding bollocks, but whoop-dee-doo what a surprise you're just as dull as all the pretentious art critics you watch on Youtube.
Go draw you no-good knuckle-sucking internet art critic!
Nigga, hurr durr.

>> No.7057926

>>7057917
now you are deflecting really hard because all of this last bit in the thread was all due to a shitforbrains anon who said "composition is completely subjective".
this same anon is butthurt bc i called him out on making bw statements. i'm done

>> No.7057929

completely, adverb
"to the whole amount or extent; fully: thoroughly; totally:"

not, "ok it is a little bit objective and has some universality to it, like this one anon says" ... he stated it's com-plete-ly subjective.

>> No.7057930

>>7057895
>cool, so why do you jump in a random thread
I was itt talking about artists names and study methods initially it wasn't just random
>and argue as though you were this guy
I don't think I did. We have similar points but I disagree with him on some. Whatever

>> No.7057933

>>7057926
You'll get em next time nigga

>> No.7057935

>>7057901
>x anons
One anon. The other you lumped in with him said "some subjectivity."

>> No.7058051

>>7057759
How a crab is born

>> No.7058072
File: 312 KB, 1580x1282, artworkdragon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7058072

>>7058051
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb3Lt18iQUw
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cetus#/media/File:Himmelsglob,_1602_-_Skoklosters_slott_-_102439.tif

>> No.7058087
File: 207 KB, 1200x900, whoopsiedoo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7058087

>>7058072
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Qv8ZfxLxvI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolpertinger

>> No.7058093

>>7057640
kitsch (adj) Art which upsets the viewer because it is good and other people like it.

>> No.7058321

>>7057672
based

>> No.7058327

I entered this thread and got a weird feeling where I am just sitting here with my anime drawings feeling like I really fucked up with this choice of focus
Unfortunately there is no way to remedy this
It's a weird feeling

>> No.7058482

>>7058327
Can't they just reattach it to your groin or something

>> No.7058546

>>7057302
>modern times tools
>"hue hue did he surpass the masters?"
Because of the old the new got the toys it got.

>> No.7058624

>>7058546
this.
plus this army of chink concept artists is drawing heavily from european traditional painters. literally all the dramatic poses, the lighting and sometimes they just plain out copy the religious symybolism (halo, garments, colors) without meaning to come across catholic. they go to russian academies, graduate and then proceed to get moments of grandeur, saying they have surpassed their masters?

there's literally no concept artist fag who made anything meaningful beyond "bitch in tight shiny armor in fantasy landscape"

they would be nowhere if they couldn't learn and shamelessly copy from Casper David Friedrich, Caravaggio, Rembrandt ...

>> No.7058657

>>7058624
>they would be nowhere if they couldn't learn and shamelessly copy from Casper David Friedrich, Caravaggio, Rembrandt ...
even those artist stood on the shoulders of giants. and half of art history is bitches in dresses doing nothing, it's not so special.

>> No.7058715

>>7058482
you don't pick anime
anime picks you

>> No.7058803
File: 92 KB, 1211x551, chinkartskool.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7058803

>>7057302
Haven't we seen this type of work before?
There are thousands if not millions of chinks who paint just like him because their art schools specialize in realism. Go look them up on baidu

>> No.7058805

>>7058803
Care to name a few?

>> No.7058806

>>7058803
>There are thousands if not millions
I would wager under 100 chinks who paint like him. And I bet anons can't even collectively name 50.

>> No.7058808

>>7057695
>the face on that babby
I know the angle is difficult but lmao

>> No.7058810

>>7058805
Fook Yuo
Wi Tu Lo
Bang Ding Ow
Ho Lee Fuk
Dong Ver Smar

>> No.7058819

reminder pewds btfo this retarded board

>> No.7058825

>>7058819
/ic/ will be in damage control mode forever. thanks pewds

>> No.7059041

>>7057497
In term of the result, new generations are better because they have a lot of art supplies, references, and knowledges, available.
In term of skill, no one know. Older artists had limit tools and still made masterpieces. Imagine when they have access to modern tools.
Kim Jung Gi surpassed old masters, including Da vinci at drawing without sketching

>> No.7059056

why the fuck are you all fighting when none of you will ever be as good as him or the artists you’re saying are on his level/above him etc

>> No.7059060

>>7059056
speak for yourself buddy.

>> No.7059133

>>7057637
ew

>> No.7059150

>>7059041
The tools used today aren't that advanced as before, Sargent was around a century ago and I don't see him getting better, he's already perfect. He might have just lived longer and made more art. Maybe Bouguereau might have benefited more from technological advances but I think the vast majority wouldn't have gotten any better than they already were.

Any modern masters better? That's a debate but I think there are many modern contemporary traditional painters that are at least comparable.

>> No.7059175

>>7059041
The old masters had limited tools but didn't have all the time-wasters of modern life, from the Internet to various errands, so they had a substantially bigger portion of the day dedicated to just being creative.
Additionally their lives tended to include a lot more hardship and character-building events from a very early age, so they didn't have a problem grinding and doing things the hard way, as opposed to us now being too used to the comforts of modern life and struggling to find the willpower to work without any dopaminergic rewards.

>> No.7059211

>>7059041
there's less access to art supplies now since most of the good stuff has either been lost to time or BANNED, such as lead paint

>> No.7060026

>>7059056
ngmi faggot

>> No.7060033

>>7059041
>Older artists had limit tools and still made masterpieces. Imagine when they have access to modern tools.
this. all the rest is complete bs, not even "controversial statement" tier.

>> No.7060098

The thread has predictably devolved into each anon trying to putting down every piece of work posted, many of them showing incredible skill, for the pettiest reasons. I hate every single one of you jaded cunts.

>> No.7060107

Can it even be compared and does it even matter? It looks like many ic users are too obsessed with assigning a quantifiable score to one's value as an artist but such a thing does not exist as cliche as it sounds. At some point after doing a shit ton of studies you'll reach a point where you can reproduce an image so faithfully that the human eye can effectively tell no difference. That's what happens with these chinese dudes. Not to even mention that the old masters would also probably be just some dudes if they lived in this day and age. They're significant because they had less to work with and had to more or less reach mastery on their own with scarce resources available but now no one has to do that so that's why there's more skilled artists now. Also there's more people on earth

>> No.7060123

>>7060098
>I hate every single one of you jaded cunts.
They're not jaded. They simply delight in the fact they can derail and mislead people easily. They will always win because you take their argument seriously, when they do not take you seriously.
This is the natural result of highly subjective and open-ended topics. If you can't stomach this, it's best to ignore this kind of thread altogether.

>> No.7060147

Reminder that these threads are made by well poisoning ((humanoids)) so people reject anime by hating their creators, the asians because anime is not owned by ((humanoids)) so they can't use it as a propaganda tool
Goys don't wants to watch anything but asian cartoons anymore

>> No.7060148

>>7060147
In English please?

>> No.7060151 [DELETED] 

>>7060148
Kikes are responsible for these threads to incite eastern illustrators against western in an attempt to sabotage cooperation and prying away media control from grubby kike hands

>> No.7060312

>>7060123
>They will always win because you take their argument seriously, when they do not take you seriously.
everyone's out to get you! BOO !!! gotcha

>> No.7060313

>>7060107
/ic/ is desperately looking for reasons to not try than face their own ineptitude. IT's the only reasoning I can see for the endless crabbing

>> No.7060391

those old niggas aint even that good

>> No.7061818
File: 273 KB, 1400x1034, fenghua-zhong-buddha-palm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7061818

>>7057302
it's been a few years since i followed their work, but back in the day i always thought fenghua zhong, ruan jia, and hgj were at the very top of the top in terms of technical skll

>> No.7061820

>>7061818
this pic has so many things wrong with it i don't even know where to begin. definitely a certain type of person is impressed by this for having a bunch of random details but not doing anything right. incorrect scale and perspective, bad anatomy, what is that hand rendering, tiny head, random muscle striations, what's the light source

>> No.7061826

>>7057614
truly. its why i hate this permabeg crab infested shithole board for the most part. its filled with top tier dunning-krugers who shit on anything good so you cant get an authentic opinion ever. id never ask for critique of my work on this board because its nothing but nodraw bitter shitters. you can literally give their s+ tier artists work and they nitpick it to death thinking they have superior taste or will ever produce anything even remotely close to the stuff they shit on

>> No.7061827

>>7061826
case in point>>7061820

>> No.7061829

>>7061818
it's not the peak technical skill if it's digital, retard

>> No.7061830

>>7061820
I know right? it's looks like babies first epic 200 hour digital painting. Tangents everywhere too. And what is with that small guys face? looks like a fucking monkey. tragic. take his tablet away.

>> No.7061833

>>7061829
hey brother, we don't have to sign our posts, we can use the name field.

>> No.7061834

>>7061818
this looks like ass bro even a beg shitter like me can tell the anatomy and foreshortening is all fucked.
look at his tiny ass head and the crooked long ass arms lmao

>> No.7061885

>>7057486
>wow i have all this technical skill
>what shall I do with it?
>I know!
>I'll paint a guy sitting on a chair!
>Yeah!
I fucking hate atelierfags

>> No.7061891

>>7061827
it's a clusterfuck of an image. it's not a great piece

>> No.7061894

>>7061885
what would yuu paint given his skills?

>> No.7061912

>>7061894
futa

>> No.7062068

>>7061826
>who shit on anything good
anything as overrendered as Juan Jia, HGJ and other kitsch artists is pretty much begging to be taken apart. especially if it's riddled with mistakes like this pic >>7061818
those are the instant soups of digital art. it's all constructed using stereotypical elements, rules for composition, getting depth by making object in the distant blueish with your run off the mill photoshop tutorials, ornamental masturbation to impress people with no taste in art ...

you folks are sour because these painting-by-numbers artists that you love so much and look up to. who sit in front of their screens for hours, like you, and have no social skills, also like you, are making obvious and ugly mistakes in their work

>> No.7062070

>>7061885
>I fucking hate atelierfags
>why don't they paint fantasy castles in the sky with big fat tiddy shiny armor chicks and swords and dragons flying behind clouds and mermaids with babies and a halo and a funny crab for a head with big badonkadonks?
>why don't atelierfags paint Transformers and robots fighting in midair with explosions and ridiculous light sources for dramatic effect?
>why don't they paint ...
fuck off

>> No.7062071

>>7062070
>I fucking hate digitalfags
>why can't they paint ...
fuck off

>> No.7062074

>>7062071
sour babyboy :)

>> No.7062075

Then there's HGJ who can do both trad and digital; grounded realistic paintings and gamey fantasy concept art. He sees the beauty in both

>> No.7062081

>>7062068
post your your superior taste images from living artists.

>> No.7062092
File: 556 KB, 1807x2048, NOBLE-1996.0001-Pauls-Palace-copy-1-1807x2048.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062092

>>7062075
I don't think that you can do both. Either one is always crippled by the other.
the digital art, say 90% of what /ic/ anons want to be able to draw and get good at, has absolutely nothing to do with the themes in trad art and contemporary painting / drawing.

digital art and concept art typically tries to tell a linear story and feature a relatively clear narrative than can be understood without any ambiguity. this is why most of the time the art is constructed out of established, stereotypical elements - big tiddy shiny armor bitch, buff bigger-than-life muscle superhero, dramatic poses and colorful lighting, dragons, trolls, vendigo and so on.
you look at Juan Jia, HGJ and whatever their names are and if you have any experience and knowledge in the field, it's like a word cloud of these fantasy topics and digital drawing skillsets smashed together in one picture.

you could say that abstraction, ambiguity and metaphoric symbolism is undesirable in digital concept art, like most of /ic/ aspires to do

>pic related
Paul Noble (Turner Prize). established trad artist who draws a lot from computergame aesthetics and makes these huge, elaborate isometric drawings. I'm using him as an example because he a) basically almost overrenders his art and b) is thematically bordering on stuff you guys might like, games.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ac/f8/40/acf840d7a5befefdfe2cf88a0e5910ae.jpg

trad (contemporary) art that wants to have a place in the art world and actually earn some respect can only feature the same elements you see in digital concept art when it's used IRONICALLY. bc this kind of linear, stereotypical stuff is deemed childish and naive – kitsch. there are plenty of established artists who use anime ironically and use it as a reference to pop art.

TL;DR
digital concept art and trad art are pretty much two opposites on a spectrum with minor overlapping fields.

>> No.7062096

>>7062092
Your perspective is perplexing. Frank Frazzeta is not a trad artist to you?

>> No.7062097

>>7062092
>TL;DR
>digital concept art and trad art are pretty much two opposites on a spectrum with minor overlapping fields.
cont.
digital artfags -> demands ginding high technical skills, "alternative art styles" largely undesirable, low abstraction, no ambiguity, linear storytelling, stereotypical elements to make identification easier

contemporary trad art -> high ambiguity, a lot of symbolism, abstraction, deconstruction, more often than not referential (art history, sociology, sadly also trendy and gender-related garbage to get big sales), stylistically open, high technical skills optional / used when conceptually needed (e.g. hyperrealism)

>>7062075
so, in response to that post: these two fields do not mix well. HGJ is technically skilled in trad art, but his themes are abolutely /beg/ and unappealing, mere excersises (if regarded as CONTEMPORARY PAINTING).

>> No.7062099

>>7062097
>if regarded as CONTEMPORARY PAINTING
what in tarnation are you on about? bordering on schizo. In what world would you regard his work as contemporary painting?

>> No.7062101
File: 1.12 MB, 2373x3200, 2012_CKS_05710_0339_000(raymond_pettibon_untitled).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062101

>>7062096
I don't think you undertood what I mean. Fran Frazzeta is also a concept / comic artist. He is not borering to contemporary graphics or painting.

One artist who is successful between comic art and contemporary art is Raymond Pettibond

>> No.7062106

>>7062099
contemporary painting is what the name implies. it is painting that is made NOW and is also relevant in the here and now. HGJ's art, if measured by how relevant it is in the context of traditional art and painting that is made today, is unappealing (because it merely repeats old techniques) and irrelevant (because it has literally no thematical depth).

It's relevant and hightier as a technical skillset for a digital artist / concept artist though. So any anon here saying "he beats all the trad artists today" ... there is absolutely no comparison.

>> No.7062110
File: 350 KB, 1600x1065, sydmead.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062110

Another artist who is successfully rooted in both concept art and respected in the art world is Syd Mead.

for anyone who doesn't know him, he inspired a lot of science fiction movies and concept art. Blade runner, The Matrix etc.
He made most of his important works in traditional media, fairly small scale for such elaborate details and he was highly skilled.

So it kind of contradicts the statement here >>7062092
that digital concept art and contemporary trad art don't mix as he had both high technical skill, high realism, high amount of fantasy+science fiction in his work, yet he is well respected in fine art circles and his original works are on display worldwide.

>> No.7062113

>>7062106
>it is painting that is made NOW and is also relevant in the here and now.
not relevant to me or my peers, who is it relevant to? (((gallery owners)))?

>is unappealing (because it merely repeats old techniques)
all your contemporary artists do the same. nothing particularly new in 50 years.

>> No.7062116

>>7062101
Try typing it in your native language and use bing copilot to translate it to English.

>> No.7062122

>>7062113
>all your contemporary artists do the same. nothing particularly new in 50 years.
right right.
Peter Doig, Wilhelm Sasnal, Daniel Richter, Robert Longo, Martin Kippenberger, Andro Wekua ...

>>7062113
>not relevant to me or my peers
oof. who are you again?

>> No.7062123

>>7062116
go anything else to say except "typos!"? yes, english is not my first language.

>> No.7062127

>>7062123
it's not the typos. you said I didn't understand what you mean, and I didn't understand because your phrasing is strange.
just give it a shot, maybe sum up your position natively and then post the translation.

>> No.7062130

>>7061818
The buddha in this painting looks like a shriveled Nutsack

>> No.7062134

>>7062127
:S yeah welp, some might be lost in translation. but this art specific stuff doesn't auto-translate well either

>> No.7062135

>>7062122
And who are you?
Mr. Art critic?
You seem to have a lot to say

>> No.7062136

>>7062122
>Peter Doig, Wilhelm Sasnal, Daniel Richter, Robert Longo, Martin Kippenberger, Andro Wekua ..
I stand by what I said, seen it all before even 100 years ago.
>oof. who are you again?
just a dude, why would it a bunch of rich folk wank be relevant to me?

>> No.7062137
File: 22 KB, 500x492, pyw.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062137

>>7062135
I'm a /trad/ and know a thing or two about galleries, contemporary art and painting professionally as I make money with that.

>pyw
pic related

>> No.7062138

>>7062135
Maybe he has an (((education)) in the arts, which means he like the contemporary artists he is told to like, and why to like them.

>> No.7062139

>>7062136
>I stand by what I said, seen it all before even 100 years ago.
sure you have. and you know what else i have seen a thousand times? big tiddy bitch in shiny armon with dragons and floating castles in the sky.

>>7062136
>why would it a bunch of rich folk wank be relevant to me?
actually admitting that. good boy
not to rich people per se. contemporary artists aren't rich either and they are each others harshest critics. keep in mind there are way more talented trad artists out there that are actually good, but don't earn a shitload like Jeff Koons and other shilled tricksters.

>> No.7062141

>>7062138
>and why to like them.
I hate plenty of contemporary art and I admit that around 80% of what's out there right now is absolutely utter garbage that is being driven by political campagning, gender-themes, pushing minorities, feminism and other agenda bullshit. It's really fucking hard to find good art in everything that's being shit out and put on display these days, especially concerning new painting, but it's there.

>> No.7062142

>>7062137
I'm a professional concept artist myself and make 3400 dollars a month, are you just jealous concept art is more profitable than relying on obnoxious pretentious art galleries only to make just enough to scrape by?
Go to therapy, unironically

>> No.7062144

>>7062142
i'm not jealous, fren. it works pretty well for me actually. i regularly apply for art prizes, grants, residencies and live a pretty good life. got a 1K grant last week and didn't even have to give away original art. if you're good, you'll find a way.

>> No.7062145

>>7062142
glad to hear it works out for you. i'm not hating on concept art, just saying it's pretty wild suggesting that people like hgj "have surpassed" old masterst or are in any way better than contemporary painting.

>> No.7062146

>>7062139
>contemporary artists aren't rich either
you just listed a bunch of millionaires a second ago.
I do like some pics they make btw, but again, nothing particularly new. if you have a pic in mind that you think shows real new interesting techniques, I'd love to see it.
also would be great if you can explain why you elevate that image in "relevance" (who is it relevant to?) over say, a digital painting by @jeffsimpsonkh (not to say his technique is "new", just came to mind because it's conceptart, but not your average tiddy/knight)

>> No.7062151

>>7062146
>you just listed a bunch of millionaires a second ago.
like I said, there are artists out there who are also great, but don't have the advantage of being shilled by important gallerists (yet) and merely make <20K each year. even if you are famous or semi-famous, the galleries take at least 50% or you've admitted to an even shittier deal, because you were desperate and needed the money before your stuff went viral.
I understand all of this isn't relevant to /ic/ anons at all, it's a completely different field.

>> No.7062152

>>7062146
>I'd love to see it.
i have to go, but Ill look up some stuff and post it.

>> No.7062154
File: 39 KB, 640x640, jeffsimpsonkhjeffsimpsonkh.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062154

>>7062146
>@jeffsimpsonkh
love it, great artist. better than Beksinski for sure.

>> No.7062156

>>7062151
sounds like contemporary art is only relevant to people with money who see art as investment...
(and the artists, who are comparatively a much smaller group)

>> No.7062383

>>7062156
sadly, that's kinda true. a large part of the crowd is actually artists from other artistic and creative fields: writers, musicians, performing arts, filmmakers, philosophers. it's always been a nieche thing and all attempts to generate more interest and reach out to the public come at the price of ridiculing or dumbing down the art.
like audio-guides in museums, that tell you what to think of what the art, augmented reality shit for exhibitions, plastering QR codes everywhere, museum apps and all that bs.

>>7062146
>nothing particularly new. if you have a pic in mind that you think shows real new interesting techniques
that comes down to what you define as "new". most stuff on closer inspection is also a rip-off of something that already existed. Like the third season of twin peaks.

>> No.7062399

>>7062092
Most of the post checks out but there's one thing that confuses me and that is the conflation of genre (for a lack of a better term) and artistic medium. Digital art is a medium not a genre. It is a fact that digital is the primary medium used for industry work which is why most of it primarily has commercial value and its artistic value is debatable. Comparing e.g. video games concept art with "high art" pieces is kind of pointless. They aren't even trying to achieve the same thing.

Image linked in the op is just a study albeit an impressive one, which is an entirely other category of art. The likely idea of this thread was to discuss technical skills and a grasp on fundamentals of contemporary artists versus the so called old masters. Discussion of contemporary high art and commercial art is a whole another can of worms.

>> No.7062443

>>7062399
>They aren't even trying to achieve the same thing.
>Discussion of contemporary high art and commercial art is a whole another can of worms.
my point exactly, but then of course you get threads like this one where some anons say "contemporary art sucks and concept artists are way better" and "surpassed the old master" bla bla. or this guy, who makes these threads periodically >>7052974 , shitting on de Kooning, Rauschenberg, Pollock, Rothko, Malewitsch. that's why i'm making the case that you can't compare or mix these two worlds and expect any meaningful conclusions.

>> No.7062446
File: 185 KB, 800x1131, ad8b23528033dbcd65f2ac397808b2a9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062446

>>7062146
>if you have a pic in mind that you think shows real new interesting techniques
not exactly real, new or interesting, but Michael Borremans might be the most "concept arty" fine art guy to showcase for contemporary /trad/ art. he started out drawing comics, making LP covers for indie bands and doing photography until he came to painting.

>> No.7062469

>>7062446
This looks like the work of someone who initially wanted to pursue academical painting but after realizing there's no market for it decided to inject "deep" themes often seen in pretentious contemporary art.
Also nothing about that is concept arty lmao, check out the work of Yoshitaka Amano or Yoji Shinkawa if you want a good example of concept arty fine art.

>> No.7062488
File: 1.12 MB, 4096x2060, F_IQpXHb0AARxEc.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062488

I can't believe I used to love Ruan jia when I was a teenage. Now it's just soulless trash. There's virtually no storytelling, designs are generic and boring.
picrel actually looks like a human did it. most digital art sucks, but I still believe one can make it SOVL

>> No.7062490
File: 616 KB, 2048x1646, 0259dea135b561a3a86359ab64e71318.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062490

>>7062469
>inject "deep" themes often seen in pretentious contemporary art.
maybe look at more than one picture?
I saw a show in London, David Zwirner, with rooms full of his art and it's quite an immersive experience. trad art obviously isn't made for computer screens and mobile phones

>> No.7062503

>>7062490
>two black youths in white plaster masks, trading food, obviously referring to how they need to hide their skin color to survive in this racist society of ours
Holy pretentious, and obnoxiously vapid

>> No.7062511

>>7062503
It has a message it expresses. The artist has talent.

>> No.7062515

>>7062503
that is your take on that. you might not be wrong, but it's a bit shortsighted i think.

>> No.7062519

>>7062488
source?

>> No.7062520

>>7062503
>>two black youths in white plaster masks, trading food, obviously referring to how they need to hide their skin color to survive in this racist society of ours
>Holy pretentious, and obnoxiously vapid
that's cute. let me try:

>>7057302
>old man checks if the light bulb is still flickering. bad values, shit composition, /beg/tier highlights, diarrhea colored.

>> No.7062521

>>7062519
@mossacanibalis

>> No.7062522
File: 204 KB, 1080x854, abc.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062522

>>7062511
>>7062515

>> No.7062526

>>7062520
Lmao funny you went straight to shitting on his execution

>> No.7062528

>>7062522
ilIts expressive and unique, so it's is a good piece of art. The artist has a talent for conveying their intent through art.

>> No.7062537

>>7062526
>Lmao funny you went straight to shitting on his execution
oh no, did i miss the fantastic, stunning theme of OP pic?

>>7062522
>banana to wall meme
that's the cheap way out. let me guess, your trad horizon ends with Van Gogh, Picasso and Da Vinci?

>> No.7062540

>>7062537
Art is about the message. If you can express your message, you show talent. Technical details aren't important

>> No.7062777

>>7062068
I'm the annon you replied to and will reply in good faith (i think)

>getting depth by making object in the distant blueish with your run off the mill photoshop tutorials
i'm sure you artists portray depth using different methods than just glazing a blue low opacity hue over objects, but considering this piece specifically takes place in a blue sky, I'm not clever enough to see what would've been better in this specific case
>ornamental masturbation
i'm guessing that's what you're calling pieces that use a lot of impressive looking detail that are super rendered out instead of using neat little tricks for the impression of detail? I suppose that's fair if you don't care for that sort of approach. I do also appreciate that sort of thing as well, but yeah I also admired stuff like hgj and the like
>rules for composition
meh, i don't care whether an artist uses typical composition rules or not, as long as it looks nice. i don't need to mentally masturbate over finding a piece that doesnt follow typical composition rules and being educated enough to notice
>who sit in front of their screens for hours, like you, and have no social skills
you definitely got me there, but i'm not sure what sitting in front of the screen/canvas and having good social sklls have anything to do with being a good artist. in fact, i would expect the best artists to be extremely obsessive about the craft and have sacrificed social skills to attain that level of skill. funny enough, i remember feng zhu (another person i imagine you think is bad) specifically mentioning that if you want to become pro level, you'll need to sacrifice having much of a social life for time practicing

>> No.7062787

>>7062777
shadows getting more and more of a light blueish hue in the distance on a sunny day is used in /trad/ as well, but the digital tutorial style teaching seems a bit like a cheap trick to me. it's overused and sometimes out of place.

by ornamental masturbation, i mean that structure in the back >>7061818 as well as the helmet, the overrendered muscles etc., but usually, it comes from digital artists picking up random historic books on armors, traitional garments, hats and mixing random ethnic imagery into an abysmal non-specific fantasyburger.

Some composition feel overcalculated and more often than not, concept art uses the same, in-your-face approach like you can find in ads: full-frontal symmetric portraits or poses, rocks and other ambient stuff pointing directly at the main character from all sides, artifical nonsensical lighting situations.

artists per se have reduced social skills, as their introvert nature is needed to immerse themselves fully in what they are creating. but even trad artists know how to network or learn to do so, because they have to. i feel like digital artists can even cut this necessity off, because you can be a wealthy digi-fag artist and spend your entire day in front of the screen, answering emails and not having to speak to anybody irl for days and weeks. this is really the perfect time for hikikomori and hermit artists.

>> No.7062806

>>7062446
Thanks for the reply, shame other anons just jump in and play the game of shitting on things instead of discussing them. This work looks a bit like Silent hill concept art. Masahiro Ito would probably thrive in the contemporary art scene if he wished to. I was hoping to see something a bit more out there and different though, contemporary techniques? I don't know exactly what specific techniques are considered new, what have contemporary artists been up to lately that you found pretty neat?

>> No.7062816

>>7062787
>ornamental masturbation
Given the stories(journey to the west) Buddhist orientation, and the artist being Chinese, these symbols are probably carefully considered. have you seen their temples? Their statues? Masterbation? It's more like he was trying to do the story justice.

>> No.7062817

>>7062806
>a bit like Silent hill concept art
Some of Borremans' works seem to display rituals of sorts that aren't exactly defined and have something uncanny and/or comical about them.

It's hard to think of any artist who is both figurative (which is what I suspect you want to see), not too abstract and is supposedly doing a "new technique".

>picrel
Winston Chmielinski

>> No.7062820
File: 211 KB, 802x963, Winston-Chmielinski-Painting.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062820

>>7062817
>picrel
Winston Chmielinski

>> No.7062824
File: 246 KB, 1233x1920, marcinmarcievski.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062824

>>7062816
>these symbols are probably carefully considered
but be so in this particular case, but typically, concept artists use references and smoosh them together like nobody even cares.

>Marcin Maciejowski

>> No.7062835

>>7062817
I don't necessarily want to see figurative, It's hard to tell what this pic is going for, its like those artists who like to make "glitches" in trad, or scribbling over a failed work and passing it off as contemporary art ;) . What about the image makes it noteworthy to you? (Not saying it isn't, I just don't know)

>> No.7062859
File: 336 KB, 905x905, winstonchmielnski_35534354_large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062859

>>7062835
>why do you like something that you like?
i'm not sure how to answer that.

if you want to call it "glitch art", sure. it might look easy and some /beg/ anons might even give it the old "my diaper shitting niece can do that", but you go ahead and try. besides, anyone who works with glitches, if you will, has their own mechanism of making choices and way to paint.

i'm not particularly in love with his works, but i think they are decent and the use of stark colors works pretty well in his style

>> No.7062870

>>7062824
i can't fucking stand le paint over a digital photograph taken with flash. absolute trash genre that is another retard magnet

>> No.7062872
File: 71 KB, 900x766, cf599f662e14bc7edc7d7b957ff9bae9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062872

>>7062870
he doesn't paint over photos, these are often 70x100m. but yeah, i understand if you don't like his works.
i know you guys will laugh at this, but these aren't meant to be looked on a screen at all. that's why there is paint. Winston Chmielinsky's works have several layers and change depending on your angle. but painting in general is something you have to look at live. a bit like seeing a good band live compared to watching an underexposed, distorted youtube video

>> No.7062874

>>7062872
>i know you guys will laugh at this, but these aren't meant to be looked on a screen at all.
I'm very much on your side on this. I saw Renoir live and it blew my mind. Did not care for his work at all on a screen(still don't)

>> No.7062876

>>7062872
he obviously uses a projector to transfer or some way of tracing. his lack of drawing skills is apparent with how inconsistent the level of rendering is across the picture. some details are very tight and realistic and other parts are incredibly amateurish, not impressionistic, like any of the materials/folds. it feels very kitsch and unappealing to me in general, i've seen it in trad and digital. felt like a ton of eastern euros all did that, or like the digital camera night vision mode. it's completely void of meaning

>> No.7062878

>>7062876
>i've seen it in trad and digital.
When I first saw it I thought it was a random beg digital painting

>> No.7062882

>>7062878
That's exactly how they look and feel

>> No.7062894
File: 682 KB, 1500x992, 01_2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062894

>>7062876
>his lack of drawing skills is apparent with how inconsistent the level of rendering is across the picture.
he reduction is kinda the whole point here, lol.

Marcin Maciejowski is part of the "gruppa ladni", a group of Polish painters. Wilhelm Sasnal is also a member.

>>7062878
>When I first saw it I thought it was a random beg digital painting
>>7062882
>That's exactly how they look and feel
I saw a big show in Munich many years back and looking at them on the screen here really has nothing to do with how they look and interact in an exhibition space.
keep in mind, an exhibition is curated, features a series of paintings that are meant to be seen together and is often arranged to form a certain dynamic and tension between each painting. unlike pressing the arrowbutton right and left.

Marcin M. has an entire series on young people walking through art exhibitions, kinda Inception-style. it's pretty annoying in a way and it kinda makes you angry, but i think that's the whole point. a caricature of young bobo hipsters who like to go on a date seeing an art show and then eating some 20€ hipster burger with strictly local produce.

I personally enjoy the works by
>Andro Wekua.
I have an art book and I've been to a major exhibition of his paintings and installations and it is like you are walking into a totally fucked up dream. that is what i want to feel, when i look at art. I want to be taken away and forget about myself. now i'm pretty sure that this is something that hardly anyone here will find an interest in.

>> No.7062898

>it's supposed to be bad
i sleep

>> No.7062900

>>7062894
>keep in mind, an exhibition is curated, features a series of paintings that are meant to be seen together and is often arranged to form a certain dynamic and tension between each painting
Ah, but Huang Guangjian's paintings are meant to be seen on a 100% color correct 50inch monitor at 8k(or what he painted), or seen in large print. he uploads low resolution for filesize restriction/print theft reduction reasons. You've never seen his work, not really.

>> No.7062901

>>7062898
Marcin Maciejowski was merely pretending to be retarded. How Polish of him.

>> No.7062913

>>7062900
nope, that's the downside of digital. there is no "original" and there never will be. some artists are doing this "i delete the .psd file and only one fine art print exists, i swear!", but there's no way of proving that. there being no "unique original" is also why digital painting artists are so furious about AI. this is nothing that the /trad/ world has to fear.
plus digital art is basically infinite possibilities with ctrl+z and editing. if you fuck up a painting in two or three places, you throw it away and start from scratch. there is no endless rendering like in digital.

>>7062900
>100% color correct 50inch monitor at 8k
well then let HGJ exhibit his 10K monitor and we look at his stuff together. nobody can expect people to buy equipment like that. on the other hand, if you want to look at original paintings, almost all the galleries with the big names are admission-free for the public.

>> No.7062921

>>7062898
>>7062901
:) exactly what I meant by saying that there is a huge gap between trad and concept art. your expectations don't match up with what contemporary painting offers.
I'm bored looking at shallow fantasy crap that is overrendered, a mashup of copied costumes from historic materials and huge tits and piles of muscles. well, i do like huge tits, but who doesn't.
you in turn seem to find Maciejowski boring. i won't try to talk you into liking any of this, that's pretty much impossible. at least in terms of storytelling, i much prefer a Polish painter who paints from photos to an overrendered giant who chokes a wizard in some cloud castle setting.

>> No.7062932
File: 1.14 MB, 1920x1080, huang-guangjian-5005cacc5cb54a42b962a3216e612bd0-6-2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7062932

>>7062913
>plus digital art is basically infinite possibilities with ctrl+z and editing. if you fuck up a painting in two or three places, you throw it away and start from scratch. there is no endless rendering like in digital.
you are limited by your skill and time, your corrections are using your skill, to even know what to edit(assume you mean transform tools?) With oil you can thin the paint and wipe it away infinite times(or just paint over it, many such cases we see via x-ray). oil pastel too, easy to wipe off, pencil, just erase, electric erasers are pretty good at that. plus projections and grids lower the "skill barrier" in trad too. I don't understand why you want to make this an us vs them thing, most digital artists work traditionally too, and trad will be impacted by AI once an opensource robot arm and a decent physical painting algorithm is made, with tele-operation training, anything is possible.

>almost all the galleries with the big names are admission-free for the public.
I have to pay $1000 for flights and then hotels/transport... not so free when you live on an island...

>well then let HGJ exhibit his 10K monitor and we look at his stuff together.
it was kind of a joke, but don't you think seeing a giant painting would be more "impressive"? seeing the dance of colors and shapes that are truly abstract up close in person, not just zoomed in?

>> No.7063215

>>7062932
>With oil you can thin the paint and wipe it away infinite times
you have no idea what you are talking about
the more layers you put on oil, the fattier it gets and the color won't stick anymore. oil layers stick together solidly up to the primer. even if you paint with additives that slow the drying process, the more mistakes you make, the muddier the colors become.
>pencil. just erase. oil pastels too
dude, just try all these things out that you claim here. it's ridiculous.

>trad will be impacted by AI once an opensource robot arm and
ot anytime soon. and if you know anything about art history, you know that the person behind the paintings and their biography have a huge, if not the biggest impact on the reception. why do you think Van Gogh became famous worldwide? he was a poor fuck.

>not so free when you live on an island...
maybe not everyone lives on an island? in most cases the big cities around you have a national museum and those are internationally trading paintings back and forth to put on display. so even people who hate to travel will easily get to see their Francis Bacon, Monet, Picasso at some point. IF you aren't living on an island.

>but don't you think seeing a giant painting would be more "impressive"?
Digital painting is inherently only digital and it only makes sense to view it digitally. To me it's an unnecessary "upcycling" attempt to print it on fine art paper or expensive prints on canvas. the result is always perfectly flat. not so in paintings. every layer is like a membrane, much like skin. there is light scattered in those layers, reflections, flat and glossy parts in the color. this is what gave classic master paintings it's depth, especially when it came to painting skin.

I like that HGJ picture you posted though.

>> No.7063226

>>7063215
>dude, just try all these things out that you claim here. it's ridiculous.
I was speaking from experience, but more just alla prima, wiping off and scraping off paint with a palette knife was easy. with surfaces like clairefontaine pastelmat, you can wipe off the pastel and start fresh. (I accidental said oil pastel because I was just talking about oil painting, I mean soft pastels)

>you know that the person behind the paintings and their biography have a huge, if not the biggest impact on the reception
yeah, shame about that. I was thinking it would impact the relatively unknown artists the most, how many scammers will use AI/robotics to rise up in the trad world before people start to question the authenticity of everything, like we are seeing in digital?

>maybe not everyone lives on an island?
no man is an island

>Digital painting is inherently only digital
If you want it to be. 3d printing has come a long way.
>not so in paintings.
I very much enjoy ink/watercolor painting and that's as flat as can be.

>I like that HGJ picture you posted though.
I figured you might. the journey to the west painting another anon posted is probably 10 years old by now.

>> No.7063230

>>7063226
>the journey to the west painting
*oh and not even painted by HGJ
all rook same...

>> No.7063233

>>7063226
*and you can sand down a dry painting
never tried it, what's the worst that could happen...

>> No.7063312

>>7063226
>I very much enjoy ink/watercolor painting and that's as flat as can be.
it really isn't. Just make the best copy that you can of a watercolor painting. The watercolors contain a chrystaline media called gum arabic and this causes light refractions. no printer colors can ever be like the pigments used in trad colors, it's impossible at the moment.
of course there are people who don't care about details, like there are people who can hear the difference between a shitty MP3 compared to a FLAC within seconds.

again, you cannot indefinitely scrape off oil color and start fresh with paintings. don't make false assumptions if you haven't worked with those media like that. I've made dozens of paintings with oil and I work for months on some of them, or months go by and I make small changed. Read into the physical aspect of materials like oil paints, they dry up, the oil component oxidizes. too many layers and nothing will stick to it anymore. that's the whole point of that comparison. you can have +100 of layers saved in a PSD and go back to a layer anytime you like. I can't believe I'm arguing the difference between digital and trad colors with you. it's really not that hard to understand.

oil pastell colors are a mess, wipe off easily on the wrong surfaces and you have to use tons of fixative. if you "wipe away" oil pastells, because you feel like you made a mess, things just get worse. of all the example, they are THE LEAST forgiving colors when it comes to making mistakes. don't talk bs.

>If you want it to be. 3d printing has come a long way.
that's a crutch in my opinion. it only tries to emmulate what traditional color can do. i'd be interested if it went further than that and became it's own thing.

>>7063233
>*and you can sand down a dry painting
>never tried it, what's the worst that could happen...
it absolutely does not work, you can barely control what you are scraping off. Have you touched a canvas? The surface is flexible.

>> No.7063334

>>7063312
>again, you cannot indefinitely scrape off oil color and start fresh with paintings. don't make false assumptions
it was an exaggeration, not a false assumption, like you are doing now with my painting experience.
>I can't believe I'm arguing the difference between digital and trad colors with you. it's really not that hard to understand.
You shouldn't be, you seem to be pushing back against a strawman of some kind.

My position:
you saying trad is less forgiving than digital, I agree with this.
Me saying trad is still forgiving, you seem push back and yak on a bout how hard it is to make changes. I didn't say it's the same as digital, just that they are not completely different. practically speaking, you will stop working on a painting when you are done with it either way. (a painting is never finished, only abandoned.)

>don't talk bs
I didn't. I corrected myself and said soft pastels.

>The surface is flexible.
so is a piece of sandpaper. you never sanded a gessoed surface?

>> No.7063341

>>7062932
>With oil you can thin the paint and wipe it away INFINITE TIMES (or just paint over it, many such cases we see via x-ray). oil pastel too, easy to wipe off, pencil, just erase, electric erasers are pretty good at that.

a few moments later ...

>>7063334
>I didn't say it's the same as digital
but you did completely exaggerate and make it sound like a canvas is pretty much a palimpsest.

>>7063334
>so is a piece of sandpaper. you never sanded a gessoed surface?
please go ahead and try it out. i can tell you from experience, you better throw it away right then and there. I've sanded down a layer in a painting and tried covering it. The texture is fucked, the colors underneath are coming through, you have to make surgical changes to blend it with the surrounding areas .... it is a complete fuckup. you better throw it away and start fresh. even if you overpaint an area successfully, it shows. it's like in old cartoons where you can tell that some element in the background is going to be animated, because it's stylized differently.

gessoed canvas and a gessoed rigid surface like wood or metal are obviously completely different, but the same applies: you maybe can pull off changing a messy area once (!), and after that, you're scrapping into the raw surface, destroying the canvas / wood / metal.
so yeah "infinite possible changes" my ass.

>> No.7063345

>>7062932
>With oil you can thin the paint and wipe it away infinite times
i challenge you to do that and show the results. it's not a real scenario. you start to paint layers, move to different areas and in the meantime, the oil color will settle into the gesso. wipe it of with spirits and there's guaranteed to be a a rest sucked into the primer. do that multiple times and you will have a dent in your canvas.

>> No.7063350

>>7063341
>so yeah "infinite possible changes" my ass.
I mean in the moment of painting. not after it dries.
And of course infinite is an exaggeration (przesada). You can't make infinite changes to anything, you will die of old age!

>> No.7063354

>>7063350
nothing is stopping you from infinite changes in .psd files. the pixels don't dry up. the layers don't stick together.

>> No.7063364

>>7063345
for canvases, I agree, it will mess them up much sooner.

>>7063354
>nothing is stopping you from infinite changes in .psd files.
my time and interest is. desu when I paint digital I pretty much use one layer, a habit from my trad side maybe.

>> No.7063365

>>7062488
>coomer garbage
kill yourself nigger

>> No.7063391
File: 97 KB, 615x680, imagem_2024-02-17_121432423.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7063391

>>7063365
>portrayal of naked females
>COOMER GARBAGE!
bro never walked into any art museum ever lol

>> No.7063393

>>7063391
>bro never walked across Bouguereau's cum encrusted workshop floor
missing out on the fun man

>> No.7063423

>>7063354
Majority of digital painters tend to paint with two layers most of the time, you make a new layer if you're about to change something and then you merge it down and repeat when you need to make changes.
Obviously not like traditional but to say digital painters over abuse ctrl z and layers is disingenuous.

>> No.7063445

>>7063391
Naked women are not really found as often in museums as you imagine. Landcape is a lot more common irl but looking at /ic/ you would think landscapes were a niche topic because everyone here wants to do character illustration. nta but you're just a deluded coomer.

>> No.7063489

>>7057759
>>7057771
>>7057773
>>7057792
>all these random lines
What is it? /biz/?

>> No.7063492

>>7063489
>/biz/?
the ascending triangle after the literal head and shoulders is making me very bullish on Hirschl

>> No.7063713

>>7063445
>Naked women are not really found as often in museums
stopped reading, jump off a bridge nigger.

>> No.7063719

>>7062522
Am I the only one that thinks the taped banana is actually a really cool idea and hilarious?
Why are you guys upset about this
I kinda like it and it far eclipses "human" shit like thoughtless grafitti vandalism tagging

>> No.7063727

>>7063719
>a really cool idea and hilarious?
You are not the only one. The upset part comes from the amount of money involved I imagine. Why is a banana taped to a wall worth more than the entirety of [insert x favorite artists]'s output? (((we know why)))

>> No.7063730

>>7057792
art student out there while the guy that made it probably just sketched it in a thumbnail out of 50 possible thumbnails (each done in less then 30 seconds) and was like
>Yea this guy looking down and people grabbing up to him, maybe give him a stern but forlorn expressing
>lmao wouldn't it be funny if everyone looks like they are at the peak of their ejaculation climax haha
>oh this blue kinda works

>> No.7063740

>>7063727
Yea but thats also asking why 0.1% of the human population owns 99.9% of the wealth (and the difference is increasing) so you know I tend to ignore anything involving money in the artistic process since it turns a discussion into something robotic and stale and could be seen as a non argument "Yeah but money tho" kinda kills any conversation, like talking about how good the weather is today and someone chimes in "Yeah but global warming tho" or how you are enjoying a good steak and someone goes "Yeah but the animals though"

>> No.7063745

>>7063713
Post examples of these museums full of naked women. Neck yourself for being a tourist if you even think of mentioning frenchfags and primitive sculpture

>> No.7063818

>>7063740
> so you know I tend to ignore anything involving money in the artistic process since it turns a discussion into something robotic and stale and could be seen as a non argument
ok sure, I think the banana on the wall is quite charming, and might tape some bananas on my wall for convenience, saves table space, quite convenient to have as a snack next to my drawing table.

>> No.7065076
File: 525 KB, 1472x1442, Loomis_detail.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7065076

>>7062876
>some details are very tight and realistic and other parts are incredibly amateurish, not impressionistic, like any of the materials/folds.
you mean, like this suit in this painting by god Loomis? So when a polish guy does that, it's not cool?