Post some art that you would buy if you could afford it
Pic related, Lucien smith. Pretty gud
the supremacy of pure artistic feeling over form construction or method
is the most /fa/
My mother got this for her birthday. She loves it. It's 6' tall and I don't understand it at all. We have a few artists in our family so a lot of our paintings come from them. I think I'd rather inherit art than pay for most of it but we'll see
What is this 1700? Who draws people?
Contemporary art is about expressing the human feels not capturing images. We have photography for that. And it captures life a lot better if the photographer is talented.
Abstraction and contemporary art forms do a better job at getting a reaction/feel
Kandinsky or bust
art is the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
and the various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance.
he's just saying loomis isn't contemporary, loomis isn't effay
Max Ernst, Duchamp and Jean-Philippe delhomme currently occupy the list of my top three fave artists. Basquiat is a strong contender, but folks have oversaturated the digital space with his work.
Pic related - delhomme's frequently illustrates the style guy section for American GQ
>posting Jewish art
This is a Christian website, retards.
I'd buy Guernica if I could afford it, plus a big enough house, to have a big enough wall for it.
Sculptures and installations are where it's at.
Dude's basically a superstar at this point, but Anish Kapoor is the mayne
>Contemporary art is about expressing the human feels not capturing images
No it isn't. Romantic art and Expressionism were about expressing human feels. Contemporary art is about manifesting and manipulating the limitations of each format and the conditions of artistic production.
I usually don't like this stuff (lots of repetition, not that well drawn) but I like his stuff. reminds me of Escher in a good way, plus I feel like the same way. (get a motorcycle or a bike)
I agree with this, to an extent. The 'human element' (whatever the fuck that is) can be conveyed maybe more directly if you abandon realism.
however, I think people are making the assumption that artists don't do realism because they lack the technical skill, which I feel like they do, sometimes. I think you have to be able to do realism before you can find out which elements you don't need.
paradoxically Loomis actually starts out with caricatures and then makes them realistic, so he's starting human first, in a sense.
And I'm using Reviewbrah's rating scale.