each to their own - you must see something in these pictures that i don't and must think there is a lot more to producing them than there is - i'm not convinced but if you are, that all that matters - and there's no question at all that that mexican gallery has been opened by somebody with even less talent coz if he appreciates those paintings, he's viewing from a very low skilled perspective
Art is not produced, it is created.
A good draughtsman produces work, an artist expresses their imagination. It reminds me of a conversation I had in a pub in Wembley, probably about 25 years ago. There was a two piece band playing, guitarist/vocalist and a drummer. They were pretty good technically and were knocking our mainly Dire Straits stuff. One of the guys I was with said to me that he couldn’t understand why these guys were earning maybe a ton on a Friday night in a pub, while Knopfler was a multi-million selling superstar. I replied ‘Knopfler created it, these guys are just copying it’. He just nodded in acceptance!
Let’s see photos of your ‘original thought’ - maybe you are a star to be discovered!
i'd be genuinely interested in hearing what original thought you see in the paintings above and why you think it's so good
Harrington paints like a modern master, go stand infront of his Greenwich mural, if you can paint like that I can get you hi end 5 figure sums for a few days work.
will do - at the moment i'm starting to think that portraits are a true test of an artist - if the true test is being able to exactly replicate something - the other sides to art are a lot more subjective i guess
The ability to exactly replicate something with a paint brush is an incredible skill, but for me that is the skill of a technician, a draughtsman. Portraits - looking like a photograph is draughting, Picasso or van Gogh revealed so much more than their ability to recreate reality. That's not to decry the technicians skills, but for me art has to reveal more than that.
Let's take a subject dear to all true Charlton fan's hearts - trains!
There's this an an example of draughtsmanship:
Technically brilliant but, for me, lacks the exposure of the artist's imagination.
Then there's this masterpiece:
For me the first is to admire, the second is to look in wonder and awe.
But as you say - art appreciation is one of the most subjective of topics.
Not sure how you can really compare the two, even as an exercise, as they are so remote from each other?
This Picasso quote sums it up perfectly and was a natural genius.
'It took me four years to paint like Raphael, but a lifetime to paint like a child'
'not got the brains he was born with' might be another - only joking, i'm sure picasso must have had something - not something i've ever wanted, mind you
You are a piece of work: come on then, let's see some of yours.
I’ve never really ‘got’ art. The only thing I’ve seen that has really grabbed me was “That Which I Should Have Done I Did Not Do (The Door)” by Ivan Albright.
I saw it in a museum in Chicago. I usually spend about 30 seconds in front of any painting......but I must had stood transfixed by this for about 10 minutes.
Still haven’t been able to find a decent image of this online.
I’ve never really ‘got’ art. The only thing I’ve seen that has really grabbed me was “That Which I Should Have Done I Did Not Do (The Door)” by Ivan Albright.
I saw it in a museum in Chicago. I usually spend about 30 seconds in front of any painting......but I must had stood transfixed by this for about 10 minutes.
Still haven’t been able to find a decent image of this online.
I’ve never really ‘got’ art. The only thing I’ve seen that has really grabbed me was “That Which I Should Have Done I Did Not Do (The Door)” by Ivan Albright.
I saw it in a museum in Chicago. I usually spend about 30 seconds in front of any painting......but I must had stood transfixed by this for about 10 minutes.
Still haven’t been able to find a decent image of this online.
About the best you'll get.
Stunning artist.
Now that's one that I don't "get". What's so good about it?
I’ve never really ‘got’ art. The only thing I’ve seen that has really grabbed me was “That Which I Should Have Done I Did Not Do (The Door)” by Ivan Albright.
I saw it in a museum in Chicago. I usually spend about 30 seconds in front of any painting......but I must had stood transfixed by this for about 10 minutes.
Still haven’t been able to find a decent image of this online.
About the best you'll get.
Stunning artist.
Now that's one that I don't "get". What's so good about it?
Probably one you have to stand in front of (it's 8 ft high) to get the full effect - that's not a great image.
Here's a detail which shows the intricacy of the work.
I’ve never really ‘got’ art. The only thing I’ve seen that has really grabbed me was “That Which I Should Have Done I Did Not Do (The Door)” by Ivan Albright.
I saw it in a museum in Chicago. I usually spend about 30 seconds in front of any painting......but I must had stood transfixed by this for about 10 minutes.
Still haven’t been able to find a decent image of this online.
About the best you'll get.
Stunning artist.
Now that's one that I don't "get". What's so good about it?
Probably one you have to stand in front of (it's 8 ft high) to get the full effect - that's not a great image.
Here's a detail which shows the intricacy of the work.
Thanks Bob.
Like I said in the original post.......I know little about art.
I just walk past paintings in galleries with barely a glance.
This painting was different. I couldn’t take my eyes off it - and I couldn’t (and still can’t) explain why.
I think it took him 10 years or something to complete.
I’ve never really ‘got’ art. The only thing I’ve seen that has really grabbed me was “That Which I Should Have Done I Did Not Do (The Door)” by Ivan Albright.
I saw it in a museum in Chicago. I usually spend about 30 seconds in front of any painting......but I must had stood transfixed by this for about 10 minutes.
Still haven’t been able to find a decent image of this online.
About the best you'll get.
Stunning artist.
Now that's one that I don't "get". What's so good about it?
Probably one you have to stand in front of (it's 8 ft high) to get the full effect - that's not a great image.
Here's a detail which shows the intricacy of the work.
Thanks Bob.
Like I said in the original post.......I know little about art.
I just walk past paintings in galleries with barely a glance.
This painting was different. I couldn’t take my eyes off it - and I couldn’t (and still can’t) explain why.
I think it took him 10 years or something to complete.
I know probably less about art - I've never studied it and think that most art critics talk bollocks.
But I see it as about imagery rather than the image - good art (good in my mind, it may be bad art in another's mind and that's absolutely fine) engages more than your eyes - and it is clear that Albright's 'Door' engaged your senses beyond just the image - you couldn't leave it, it drew you back and in. That's the power.
each to their own - you must see something in these pictures that i don't and must think there is a lot more to producing them than there is - i'm not convinced but if you are, that all that matters - and there's no question at all that that mexican gallery has been opened by somebody with even less talent coz if he appreciates those paintings, he's viewing from a very low skilled perspective
Art is not produced, it is created.
A good draughtsman produces work, an artist expresses their imagination. It reminds me of a conversation I had in a pub in Wembley, probably about 25 years ago. There was a two piece band playing, guitarist/vocalist and a drummer. They were pretty good technically and were knocking our mainly Dire Straits stuff. One of the guys I was with said to me that he couldn’t understand why these guys were earning maybe a ton on a Friday night in a pub, while Knopfler was a multi-million selling superstar. I replied ‘Knopfler created it, these guys are just copying it’. He just nodded in acceptance!
Let’s see photos of your ‘original thought’ - maybe you are a star to be discovered!
i'd be genuinely interested in hearing what original thought you see in the paintings above and why you think it's so good
Harrington paints like a modern master, go stand infront of his Greenwich mural, if you can paint like that I can get you hi end 5 figure sums for a few days work.
will do - at the moment i'm starting to think that portraits are a true test of an artist - if the true test is being able to exactly replicate something - the other sides to art are a lot more subjective i guess
The ability to exactly replicate something with a paint brush is an incredible skill, but for me that is the skill of a technician, a draughtsman. Portraits - looking like a photograph is draughting, Picasso or van Gogh revealed so much more than their ability to recreate reality. That's not to decry the technicians skills, but for me art has to reveal more than that.
Let's take a subject dear to all true Charlton fan's hearts - trains!
There's this an an example of draughtsmanship:
Technically brilliant but, for me, lacks the exposure of the artist's imagination.
Then there's this masterpiece:
For me the first is to admire, the second is to look in wonder and awe.
But as you say - art appreciation is one of the most subjective of topics.
Not sure how you can really compare the two, even as an exercise, as they are so remote from each other?
I wasn't comparing, I was contrasting!
One and the same?
Not at all. Comparing looks for similarities. Contrasting looks for differences.
agreed - i can appreciate the skill in the train picture but see very little no talent in the bottom picture
Yes - JMW Turner was a charlatan of the highest order!
There's a lot of 'Emperor's new clothes' in the artworld - 'I have to like it because I'm supposed to like it' - but if you like something it's because you get something from it, not because you are expected to. Nothing to do with being up your own arsey.
I love this as a portrait:
Most of his other work that he is famous for leaves me cold.
imagination is something i' don't believe i have ever lacked, maybe that is why i don't appreciate it as much - sounds a bit up your own arsey but so be it - similarly, i prefer to read factual or analytical type books rather than fiction as i just think that anybody could make a story up and its not that difficult - boring even - who knows, who cares even - each to their own is probably about right.
You must realise that if you make the effort, you could be the first to win both the Turner and Booker prizes.
This Picasso quote sums it up perfectly and was a natural genius.
'It took me four years to paint like Raphael, but a lifetime to paint like a child'
'not got the brains he was born with' might be another - only joking, i'm sure picasso must have had something - not something i've ever wanted, mind you
You are a piece of work: come on then, let's see some of yours.
thankyou - said i will upload my first 5 paintings once i've finished my 5th - it's not finished yet
I’ve never really ‘got’ art. The only thing I’ve seen that has really grabbed me was “That Which I Should Have Done I Did Not Do (The Door)” by Ivan Albright.
I saw it in a museum in Chicago. I usually spend about 30 seconds in front of any painting......but I must had stood transfixed by this for about 10 minutes.
Still haven’t been able to find a decent image of this online.
About the best you'll get.
Stunning artist.
Now that's one that I don't "get". What's so good about it?
Probably one you have to stand in front of (it's 8 ft high) to get the full effect - that's not a great image.
Here's a detail which shows the intricacy of the work.
not great - look at the blurring on top of the thumb - lazy
each to their own - you must see something in these pictures that i don't and must think there is a lot more to producing them than there is - i'm not convinced but if you are, that all that matters - and there's no question at all that that mexican gallery has been opened by somebody with even less talent coz if he appreciates those paintings, he's viewing from a very low skilled perspective
Art is not produced, it is created.
A good draughtsman produces work, an artist expresses their imagination. It reminds me of a conversation I had in a pub in Wembley, probably about 25 years ago. There was a two piece band playing, guitarist/vocalist and a drummer. They were pretty good technically and were knocking our mainly Dire Straits stuff. One of the guys I was with said to me that he couldn’t understand why these guys were earning maybe a ton on a Friday night in a pub, while Knopfler was a multi-million selling superstar. I replied ‘Knopfler created it, these guys are just copying it’. He just nodded in acceptance!
Let’s see photos of your ‘original thought’ - maybe you are a star to be discovered!
i'd be genuinely interested in hearing what original thought you see in the paintings above and why you think it's so good
Harrington paints like a modern master, go stand infront of his Greenwich mural, if you can paint like that I can get you hi end 5 figure sums for a few days work.
will do - at the moment i'm starting to think that portraits are a true test of an artist - if the true test is being able to exactly replicate something - the other sides to art are a lot more subjective i guess
The ability to exactly replicate something with a paint brush is an incredible skill, but for me that is the skill of a technician, a draughtsman. Portraits - looking like a photograph is draughting, Picasso or van Gogh revealed so much more than their ability to recreate reality. That's not to decry the technicians skills, but for me art has to reveal more than that.
Let's take a subject dear to all true Charlton fan's hearts - trains!
There's this an an example of draughtsmanship:
Technically brilliant but, for me, lacks the exposure of the artist's imagination.
Then there's this masterpiece:
For me the first is to admire, the second is to look in wonder and awe.
But as you say - art appreciation is one of the most subjective of topics.
Not sure how you can really compare the two, even as an exercise, as they are so remote from each other?
I wasn't comparing, I was contrasting!
One and the same?
Not at all. Comparing looks for similarities. Contrasting looks for differences.
It's still comparing, isn't it, not trying to be contrary.
Yeah he did, he also painted this, he's a full blown professional Artist and has made work for the nations favourite Bristol Born graffiti Artist... whether you believe that or not is completely up to you though.
Yeah he did, he also painted this, he's a full blown professional Artist and has made work for the nations favourite Bristol Born graffiti Artist... whether you believe that or not is completely up to you though.
if both the above are painted then i applaud his talent
Comments
This was painted by a guy I know
`Sisters Of Mercy' by Peter Howson
Not sure what Doucher will make of that??
`The Heavy Metal Hero' by Rodney Matthews