Styleforum › Forums › General › Entertainment and Culture › Paintings that look like real-life!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Paintings that look like real-life! - Page 2

post #16 of 30
7/9/10 at 7:55pm
I think the goal of photorealism is inconsistent with the goal of most art.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 30
7/9/10 at 7:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by why View Post
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. I think Dadaism was the tip-off, but I'm not sure.

Well it seems no mean coincidence that Van Gogh and the Impressionists occured right when photography was taking off as an art form-- almost as if the existance of photography relieved painting of its duty to capture life realistically.

Quote:
Michael Angelo's forms are full of gusto. They every where obtrude the sense of power upon the eye. His limbs convey an idea of muscular strength, of moral grandeur, and even of intellectual dignity: they are firm, commanding, broad, and massy, capable of executing with ease the determined purposes of the will. His faces have no other expression than his figures, conscious power and capacity . They appear only to think what they shall do, and to know that they can do it. This is what is meant by saying that his style is hard and masculine. It is the reverse of Correggio's, which is effeminate. That is, the gusto of Michael Angelo consists in expressing energy of will without proportionable sensibility, Correggio's in expressing exquisite sensibility without energy of will. In Correggio's faces as well as figures we see neither bones nor muscles, but then what a soul is there, full of sweetness and of grace -- pure, playful, soft, angelical! There is sentiment enough in a hand painted by Correggio to set up a school of history painters. Whenever we look at the hands of Correggio's woman or of Raphael's we always wish to touch them.[/i]

The statue of David is one of the most recognizable works of Western art, and I've sometimes wondered, where exactly does the artistry lie? On the face of it, it would seem to be a triumph of technicalism every bit as much as photorealistic painting. But then you compare it to a million lowly cast-bronze commission works where the figures carry absolutely no weight, and you see the artistry is subtle but real, even if not immediately apparent to an art pleb like myself.
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 30
7/9/10 at 8:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by XenoX101 View Post
I think the goal of photorealism is inconsistent with the goal of most art.

It's all about the "message" now - that's why pretty much anything can be passed off as art nowadays. That's how Marcel Duchamp took a picture of a fucking urinal and it was named one of the most important pieces of art in the 20th century.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 30
7/9/10 at 8:35pm
Repins work is fairly lifelike: Ilya Yefimovich himself:
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 30
7/9/10 at 8:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tagutcow View Post
Well it seems no mean coincidence that Van Gogh and the Impressionists occured right when photography was taking off as an art form-- almost as if the existance of photography relieved painting of its duty to capture life realistically.

Yes, but I wouldn't ascribe Impressionism solely to photography. The Pre-Raphaelites continued to produce photorealistic paintings, and the lack of color in photography maintained the preference for brushstroke portraits.

Aside from that, most aesthetic criticism written before photography's inception eschewed photorealism anyway. Not that any similitude to reality was denouned, but it just wasn't a primary goal for most artists outside of work commissioned specifically as a portrait. John Ruskin writes regarding the changing art world during the Industrial Revolution in Modern Painters and The Stones of Venice.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 30
7/10/10 at 12:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by kelvinsense View Post





Yigal Ozeri is very nice but was out of my price range. I went to a gallery opening of his about a year ago.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 30
7/10/10 at 10:38am
That one guys who draws and the western shit and indians and such. His stuff is super realistic, but doesn't appeal to me in the least. Can't think of his name
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 30
7/10/10 at 12:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stylish Pilot View Post
That one guys who draws and the western shit and indians and such. His stuff is super realistic, but doesn't appeal to me in the least. Can't think of his name

You must be thinking of Tom of Finland. Google it.
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 30
7/10/10 at 12:34pm
chuck close. i like abstraction though.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 30
7/10/10 at 3:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magician View Post
You must be thinking of Tom of Finland. Google it.



I was thinking Norman Rockwell.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 30
7/13/10 at 11:07am
Nothing new about hyper-realism in art, nor the yawns from critics. Trends in art are like trends in fashion: ever changing, ever repeating. Joseph Wright of Derby, for example, wowed 'em then bored 'em a quarter millennium ago.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0706/fig1.jpg

What should make this genre fresh today are things that interest us: nostalgia, sex, solipsism and the unexamined life.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 30
7/13/10 at 11:22am
I always thought this painting was cool. Las Meninas by Velazquez. Shows the point of view of the king and queen posing for a portrait.
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 30
7/13/10 at 11:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magician View Post
You must be thinking of Tom of Finland. Google it.


Haha. close
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 30
7/13/10 at 1:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by runner-guy View Post
I always thought this painting was cool. Las Meninas by Velazquez. Shows the point of view of the king and queen posing for a portrait.


The influence/importance of Velazquez cannot be overstated.

Of the Spanish, I'm more drawn to Goya. I once owned a middling pressing of one of these aquatints from his Caprices, most of which are quite affordable:

http://special.lib.gla.ac.uk/images/...46_plate65.jpg
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 30
7/13/10 at 1:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cimabue View Post
The influence/importance of Velazquez cannot be overstated.

Of the Spanish, I'm more drawn to Goya. I once owned a middling pressing of one of these aquatints from his Caprices, most of which are quite affordable:

http://special.lib.gla.ac.uk/images/...46_plate65.jpg

yea, if you're talking about "realistic portrayals", goya had that covered, which is one of the things i really love about his work.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Entertainment and Culture
Styleforum › Forums › General › Entertainment and Culture › Paintings that look like real-life!