Posted on 12/28/2013 8:06:08 AM PST by Sir Napsalot
We are “told” that it isn’t “art” because it was created for commerical reasons.
Andy Warhol produced over 400,000 works.
In the summer of 1959, I had the pleasure of living directly across the street from Norman Rockwell in Lee, MA (close to his favorite Stockbridge). He was living with a landlady at the time. On numerous occasions during that summer, he asked me to accompany him to the Berkshire Museum in nearby Pittsfield, MA. I was a student at the time at the Tanglewood/Berkshire Music Center. I got to know him quite well, certainly well enough to know that he was not homosexual. Being a musician, I knew and had known some males of that persuasion and could easily distinguish them from normal males. He was a genuine man who was adored by many for his love of America and his portrayal of American life in art.
A gay guy I knew thought that most all guys were secretly gay and I mentioned that we didn’t have any in our family and he replied repeatedly “that you know of”. He just couldn’t imagine that all guys weren’t running around feeling like he did.
Then the non artist who looks at their work and marvels at their drawing ability, when in fact the non artists could do the same thing.
A number of years ago I signed up for a weekly water color class. I had never used watercolor and thought it would give me an insight into whether it was something I wanted to pursue.
The instructor said ‘all right class, let's begin”.
The whole class jumped up and went into a small room with their photos. That is where the projector was kept.
Needless to say, I did not go back.
David Hockney wrote an entire book about this subject. He had pretty compelling evidence that Vermeer and other artists used the camera obscura to project images on to their canvases. Thomas Eakins is alleged to have relied heavily on photographs for his works. It’s interesting how people act as if using this tool somehow invalidates what the artists accomplished. If you compare the photos with the paintings in posts 14 and 15 the paintings are not slavish copies of the photos and the paintings are far more compelling. You can’t simply project a photo onto a canvas and come up with something remotely comparable to Rockwell’s and others’ achievements.
The art begins with the conceptual idea. The figures’ positioning, the choice of lighting, everything else.
Neither Magritte nor Rockwell nor many others were merely taking random snapshots on the street and making paintings from them (as the “big name” sports artists ARE doing).
I'm in total agreement with you on this. My argument is with those who say "oh, he projected it! It's just a trick." and thereby try to discredit some fantastic artists.
I'm not certain which sports artists you were referring to, but if they are just making copies of photos their work will not survive the test of time.
Aaaaaiiiiieeeee! My eyes!
What total nonsense.
A friend of mine sends her canvas to a printer to get the photo printed on the canvas, then she paints over it.
I NEVER do that. All my canvases are hand drawn, then painted, then adjustments made when the first layer is dry.
they tried to say the same thing about Hemingway... the last Hemingway Society was all about the homosexual themes of his work....
Here is one example from the 2012 Conference:
3.1 Hemingway’s Transgressive Sexuality (I) [Voorhies Auditorium]
Moderator: Douglas Sheldon (Kent State University)
1)
“’By the caress that was in his fingers, he expressed himself’: Homosocial Spaces, Homosexual Touches in Anderson’s ‘Hands’ and Hemingway’s ‘A Simple Enquiry,’” Debra Moddelmog (Ohio State University)
2)
“The Lure of Similarity: Incestuous Desire in the Stories of Nick Adams,” Eri Tamura (Chiba Institute of Technology)
3)
“The Lost Garden: Hemingway and ‘Up in Michigan,’” Tateo Imamura (Tokyo Woman’s Christian University)
This is an agenda that is being carried out deliberately...
The Prez was a Honolulu rent-boy who went around permitting himself to be fellated by older richer white homoz in return for feebase cocaine:
They’re gaying up the past in order to normalize our present, the details of which are shortly due to come into much sharper focus for average people.
This cultural attack makes sense within that context.
They did the same thing for Bubba at the height of the Monica Mess.
well I must admit I did take SOME artistic...license with that image,,
I think you perfectly captured her true, inner beauty.
I do mine the same way that you do. Sometimes I draw with pencil, charcoal or use a brush with a thin oil wash.
I use photos because most of my work is of animals, dogs, cats, cows donkeys etc. and animals just won’t sit still long enough to paint them from life. :)
But I never project the photo and trace it, I do not own a protector.
I don’t care who does, I just don’t like to see students do it and make big bucks selling their paintings to unsuspecting people.
What's the evidence for the Rent-boy story?
Watercolor is a demanding medium. If you are painting in transparent watercolor (no white paint or gouache) you can’t “correct” mistakes except by lifting color from the paper with a wet brush. This means the artist pretty much has to compose the entire painting (perspective, highlights, layout, values) in his head before touching brush to palette. It creates real focus and hones the abiity to “edit” a picture before reproducing it.
The mark of an amateur is heavy use of resist, as well as a projector.
She looks like a MisterSogynist......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.