View Full Version : This is art!!!?
What on EARTH is thhis meant to be? I dont understand....i hate art.
Am i really thick or something....
It does nothing for me. Where did you see it?
on same crappy cd someone gave me, from some art musium in the us. he doesnt like computers so wanted me to print it....
Macca371
28-09-2004, 21:54
I went to the Lowry in Salford not long ago and in one of the exhibitions someone had smashed a glass cola bottle, reassembled it with glue and called it art. :erm:
i should mention i changed the file and its size to get it on here, but its the same thing
I went to the Lowry in Salford not long ago and in one of the exhibitions someone had smashed a glass cola bottle, reassembled it with glue and called it art. :erm:
At the Tate in Liverpool about 10 years ago, I saw a piece of old tapestry about 7ft high, on which someone had crudely daubed a cartoonish sort of person. They had given him a panicked sort of face by gluing bits of meccano to his head. He looked like he was running away from something. This 'masterpiece' was called 'Fire, fire'. Utter rubbish.
EDIT
Well, lookee here, I found a picture of it. :rofl:
http://www.tate.org.uk/collection/T/T01/T01777_9.jpg
:rolleyes:
Macca371
28-09-2004, 21:58
:rolleyes: totally
i reakon theres some sort of prank being played by artists on avaerage joe where they make crap and see who pretends to understand and love it and those who dont who can be called idouts
Macca371
28-09-2004, 22:09
lol the thing that annoys me with 'modern art' is when the artwork does nothing for you and thus you are accused of being narrow minded and incapable of understanding symbolism.
erm, i quite like that 2nd one. I suppose, Art is what you make of it
Now i'm certainly no art critic or even remotely clued up on it, but i like those red twirly prints :shrug: each to their own. I was driving in London a week or so back, think it was around the Notting Hill area on a Sunday, I think ?
There they were, line after line of paintings of all shapes sizes and subjects, some of them I would gladly have hanging on my wall, espeacially the earthen coloured ones :tu:
i think art is like poetry, you either understand it or you dont :shrug:
dilli-theclaw
28-09-2004, 22:11
Sometimes I really DO think my 3.5yr old can do better than some of the crap I see about these days....
I always think it's just that I'm not broadminded enough tho.
Macca371
28-09-2004, 22:14
Don't get me wrong I love conventional art, just none of that abstract stuff :no: Who knows I might be narrow minded but I can't help just thinking it's a pile of poo sometimes
I Could do better than those two
I Could do better than those two
then do it :D
I Could do better than those two
Go for it, :tu: knock something up, post it, and we'll try and give you our constructive critisism :)
Macca371
28-09-2004, 22:37
La Giocondo! Did you know that Leonardo spent 10 years painting the lower mouth to give that impression 'is she smiling, is she not?'.
I have a picture of Jesus in my house and if you stare at it long enough the eyes appear as though they open and close shortly after, the artist spent months getting them right. It scared the c*** out of me when I was younger and when my gran had it, but now it's pretty amazing. It still freaks me out walking past it at night...
Now that is art that I do appreciate.
EDIT: The picture of Jesus is called 'St. Veronica's Handkerchief'
da vinci code stuff here....
Macca371
28-09-2004, 22:43
da vinci code stuff here....
You've read it then?
That's my favourite book of all time!
greencreeper
28-09-2004, 22:49
Interesting. The first one clearly has a face but is sort of splattered. Hmmmm. He just didn't see the train coming til it was too late :no: And the second looks like a rose at first glance but there's interesting use of shadow. Sort of nurturing.
What on EARTH is thhis meant to be? I dont understand....i hate art.
Am i really thick or something....
I actually think the second one is particularly intriguing.
It is simple, yes, but has a lot to it.
Nice blend of colours. I like it.
MovedGoalPosts
29-09-2004, 00:20
Interesting. The first one clearly has a face but is sort of splattered. Hmmmm. He just didn't see the train coming til it was too late :no: And the second looks like a rose at first glance but there's interesting use of shadow. Sort of nurturing.
You need help if that's really what your eyes are telling your brain :PP:
The first one has to be a symbolism for the big bang theory, the redness being the aftermath of the explosion, the black dots being the embryonic expansion of new life. As for the second, its simply someone stirring milk into coffee, viewed overhead, viewed via infrared camera in three colours.
Or maybe I've had a few too many :beer: :blush:
This 'masterpiece' was called 'Fire, fire'. Utter rubbish.
At least it makes me laugh, which makes it much better than the rubbish normally on display.
Actually, it is so funny, it is starting to grow on me. I think i'll print it out and keep it in my drawer. Get it out whenever i'm feeling down or upset. :)
Reminds me of my first attempts at cyber art using Adobe PhotoDelux. ;)
I can do better these days though. :D
As for art being subjective why not take a peek at Incognitas Corner (http://incognitas.i-webhosted.co.uk/)
Incog.Art Teacher. :tu:
At least it makes me laugh, which makes it much better than the rubbish normally on display.
Actually, it is so funny, it is starting to grow on me. I think i'll print it out and keep it in my drawer. Get it out whenever i'm feeling down or upset. :)
Me and a mate came across it during a day out in Liverpool. We laughed so hard that we paid a second visit to the Tate at the end of the day just to have another look. :D
I still think its good. The second one is great.
<snip>
I hope you don't mind me linking Ingog, but I really like this one :)
http://incognitas.i-webhosted.co.uk/good%204%20copy.jpg
This took 2 minutes in Photoshop. :rolleyes:
Another 2 minutes with the liquify tool. :)
Another 2 minutes with the liquify tool. :)
OOOOHHHhhh I like that one how much is it ???? wait a minute, good ole right click and save as..... :p: seriously, I like that kind of formless 'art ' don't know why, I may not know art, but i know what i like, now where have i heard that before :shrug:
OOOOHHHhhh I like that one how much is it ???? wait a minute, good ole right click and save as..... :p: seriously, I like that kind of formless 'art ' don't know why, I may not know art, but i know what i like, now where have i heard that before :shrug:
Yes but you can make up your own in any decent graphics package except paint.It's about time M$ improved that which hasn't changed or been updated in 10 years.But I digress.
Go on have a go and see if any of you can do as well or better. :tu:
I hope you don't mind me linking Ingog, but I really like this one :)
Actually that's an example of mixed errrr....media,as it's a drawn picture amalgamated with a photograph which is then passed through a filter.I did a lot more hard graft for that than in the two examples of 'ART' in the first posting.
I'll never get 50p for it let alone £500+. Art today is generally about having the gift of the gab crossed with the ability to kiss a*se and knowing the right people.
'Art' costs more each passing year but is becoming cheapened in the process. :(
thats the best i can do.....
It's as good as if not better than the original examples in post 1. :)
thats the best i can do.....
KIN 'ell mate, now that is good, I like the 'star' in the middle with the arms coming out, how did you create that effect, what graphics software are you useing, I have adobe but have never even looked at it.
deadite66
30-09-2004, 06:52
try looking here for interesting art, one is not for those with a weak stomach.
http://www.jamesrobertford.com/selected_works.htm
try looking here for interesting art, one is not for those with a weak stomach.
http://www.jamesrobertford.com/selected_works.htm
I like that site.It has a nice feel of extracting the urine. ;)
homealone
30-09-2004, 16:02
I noticed this earlier
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/3700734.stm
now I like Monet's work, in general, but does anyone else think that is a very murky looking painting?? - I havn't seen it 'live' however & appreciate it will be very different in decent light. :)
I noticed this earlier
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/arts/3700734.stm
now I like Monet's work, in general, but does anyone else think that is a very murky looking painting?? - I havn't seen it 'live' however & appreciate it will be very different in decent light. :)
That is how it is supposed to look.It set in an old fashioned London pea souper of a fog/smog.Now a thing of the past thanks to less coalfires and the introduction of the smokeless fuels act.I know the emissions from cars is an issue these days but frankly in comparison those smogs were much more disgusting but allowed Monet to show the Houses of Parliament in a romantic light.
Incog. :)
homealone
30-09-2004, 16:57
That is how it is supposed to look.It set in an old fashioned London pea souper of a fog/smog.Now a thing of the past thanks to less coalfires and the introduction of the smokeless fuels act.I know the emissions from cars is an issue these days but frankly in comparison those smogs were much more disgusting but allowed Monet to show the Houses of Parliament in a romantic light.
Incog. :)
thanks Incog, it's just that compared with the vibrancy of some of his other stuff - like the poppies, this seems erm, dull. That's impressionism for you I guess ;)
I have had a few conversations about this sort of thing. My sister studied Art at school (up to A Level), and, although she doesn't like Modern Art, now she has been "trained" she can understand it. Having said that, she does like some of the more abstract picassos.
Interestingy, she doesn't consider any form of computer software to be art, even though I think some of the programs I have seen could be considered Art (specifically coding "Demos" that just exist to show off a particular person or group's coding skill).
Regarding the two images. Do I consider them Art? Well, not in the classical sense. Do I like them? I probably wouldn't have them hanging in my house, but do find them oddly interesting to look at.
Edit: Some of you may find The Louvre (http://www.louvre.fr/louvrea.htm) site interesting.
thanks Incog, it's just that compared with the vibrancy of some of his other stuff - like the poppies, this seems erm, dull. That's impressionism for you I guess ;)
It's all about light with Monet's work.He would paint the same scene over and over to show how light changes with the time of day and with the weather.
Whoever masters light in their work is a Master artist.
scastle,as for the assertion that computer art isn't art I wonder if your sister regards photography as art.There was a time when it was denied space in any art gallery for the same reason.Any new technology is treated the same way.
Anyway for anyone who doesn't think computer art is art go and look at the galleries here (http://www.renderosity.com/index.ez?Form.sess_id=20091486&Form.sess_key=1096567174) .
It beats any shark in formaldahyde any day. ;)
Incog. :)
here is another bizzare story of a 4 year olds paintings managing to raise over £20,000 .
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/3701484.stm
here is another bizzare story of a 4 year olds paintings managing to raise over £20,000 .
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/3701484.stm
Been discussing this over at H2G2.People seem to be worried that her parents are exploiting her.Good luck to them.Hopefully they will get enough together for her future education.
She does appear to have an eye for abstracts.Most four year olds work is far more slapdash than this child's work so far.Yes it is daubs but rather better daubs than many 4 year olds produce.Time will tell whether her talent will develop all the way.Anyway her work surpasses the original work displayed in posting #1 of this thread. :D
Incog's thoughts having donned her art teacher's hat.
Another controversial piece to critique over.
Apparently, in the Saatchi Gallery, there is a giant ball of dead rats. Over 17,500 if memory serves.
http://www.snappyprof.com/londonweb/Pages/Image58.html
I'm puzzled as to how taxidermy became 'Art'. :erm:
Dave Stones
06-10-2004, 11:11
well, it's in the saatchi gallery. everyone knows what crazy things he has bought in the past.... :erm:
personally i only like surreal art like dali etc really, though i seem to have an obsession with fractals at the moment.... i can stare at them for hours :)
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.