Why is art now adays so fucking shit, why cant it be nice like pic related
Why is art now adays so fucking shit, why cant it be nice like pic related
Joshua Jackson
Eli Watson
because of post modernism
Benjamin Roberts
Art mimics life.
Things are shit, user.
Adrian Brown
Because back then you had to have an amount of skills for it to be considered art but these days "anyone can make art because art is subjective". It isn't. What you posted is art. It is objectively good.
Ryan Thomas
Art kind of hit the wall after post modernism but it all goes full circle my friend
Thomas Edwards
Jow Forumsing picture of dragon getting cucked for the sake of a sculpture of a dude sucking his own dick
Jeremiah Harris
Here you go mein freund
oregnao
Asher Kelly
God I fucking hate this
Thanks user
David Edwards
The invention of the camera basically wrecked art. No matter how hard they try it will never be more realistic then a camera. So they have to find some other goal than realism just to justify their existence.
Christopher Robinson
because people no longer devote their entire lives to the study of fine art from the time they are children
besides, there are indeed some great fine and figurative artists out there currently. the main difference is the lack of large scale works
not this
>le post modern monster
only some of this. be careful not to over simplify modern and postmodern art as there are a lot of beautiful works that have been birthed by them. i would only agree that these movements took light away from the more classical ones, and not that the art following these lines of thought are bad.
though a lot of art is based on realism, the thought that the camera has destroyed art is nonsense because of how so much of art is based on idealism. most painters in the past choose to change the subjects of there works (especially in portraits) to either make the subject more flattering or to flatter the subject (literally as to make sure that a king wouldnt kill them for painting them ugly)
Owen Perry
>be me
>go to this "performance art" thingy.
>there is a woman, sitting on a chair and there's some covered object inbetween her legs.
>suddenly she stands up, starts doing circles around the chair, clearly out of her mind.
>she grabs the object and unveils it: it us a fetus in a jar. she says its her aborted baby.
>bitch gets naked, puts the jar on the floor and starts pissing on it.
>another woman comes in, also naked and with bright blue hair, and joins her in on the pissing action.
>the mum takes the fetus out of the jar, filling the room with the smell of formaldehyde, and comes closer to show it to the audience.
>she goes back to the stage, puts it on the floor and starts crushing it with her naked foot.
>I'm like "yo what the FUCK".
>everyone stares at me, some even point their cameras at me for a second.
>the women start masturbating while dismembering the little fetus.
>the blue-haired one is menstruating, her blood oozing out, and she even tastes it.
>finally, they put the pieces of the fetus back in the jar, and the mom says "that's it".
>nobody applauds.
>"thank you for coming" she says.
>everybody leaves, confused and disgusted.
>I go back home in a state of shock, not exactly sure of what i had just witnessed.
>one thing's for sure: it was thoroughly avant-garde.
Parker Gonzalez
There are some amazing artists from the modern age that blow the old painters out of the fucking water. You just never hear of them because stuff like that really doesn't matter the way it once did. The old painters look like amateurs compared to some of the modern prodigies.
Aiden Brown
One more from Belichenko
Lincoln Barnes
the babys hat was the only thing that made my eyes think this wasnt a real photo
impressive
Kayden Cox
i hope this isnt what you were talking about when you were talking about prodigies making old painters look bad
also, if by old painters you mean pre renaissance then come on man
Cameron Evans
Those are both oil paintings. Not photographs.
Ryder Myers
.. yea obviously
what is your point?
Carson Murphy
Nothing impressive about copying a photo.
Landon James
post your idea of good technique and accuracy from the baroque era or whatever your favorite classic era is.
Cameron Powell
by your standards OP's painting is not impressive because the artist copied a living person, something that already existed
Dominic Bennett
Literal plebs.
Henry Diaz
>accuracy
as I've said in one of my previous posts, accuracy isnt the ultimate goal in art. both of those paintings can be made to have a stronger composition by adding a contrast in saturation with accordance to value
heres one that i've always liked though it lack in quantity of subject matter its fitting of the purpose of the painting
David Reed
feel free to post your reasoning or any art you like
Benjamin Williams
That style has been done to death
Arts have to do gimmicky shit, like shitting paint onto the canvas, in order to gain any attention
Jackson Adams
If the edges seem to be less sharp, just remember that these paintings are closer to life size than most done today and were meant to be viewed from a comfortable distance