Art

As an artist myself I have noticed that within the art community there are several detrimental thought processes that continuosly lower the bar so to speak.

One of which is that the idea of technical skill in a medium (such as acrylic paint, oil paint, sculpting, etc) doesnt truly matter in creating ''real art'' and that its the expression or raw emotion that matter more. Its how we end up with splashes of paint in a canvas, give it some BS meaning, and host it in galleries. We even end up having ''artists'' that show off literal feces and call it art.

There's also the tiptoeing around trying to not offend an artist otherwise you face the wrath of obnoxious SJW or 'fanbois' that lick the creators feet or something like that. Then there are artists that take personal offense to anything poorly said about their works and attack the critic as if they made the next generation Mona Lisa or something.

Then we have critics that think they know the ins and outs of art. They think they know absolutly everything about how to make good art and anything that doesnt fit that guideline in their head is not 'real' art

Worst of all though is the extremly self depreciating way I see young artists, proffesional or not, speak about themsleves and their own work. There is a lack of pride in both themselves and what they create. Not everyone is like that hopefully but the artists that I interacted with, most if not all of them talk poorly about themselves. Theres a lack of pride and happiness in creating art. Then when someone does act prideful you have people purposly trying to bring them down or call them haughty/cocky/bigot/etc.

Maybe its just the communities that I saw or were in and hopefully there are some that arent like that.

Basquiat painting fetches record $110.5 million at New York auction

I'm not an artist by any stretch of the imagination, but I think I could understand building the canvas yourself, rather than buying it processed from in a factory. Factory production is cold. It's just a bunch of people stood on a production line just moving a thing here and a thing there before it goes to the next worker, whereas making it yourself, then releasing your creative magic onto it, is quite like putting your Heart and Soul into it. You get to feel it from conception to birth. As you say, the smell of the wood. Then, if I'm not mistaken, art is never quite finished.

Most of what I think is called avant-garde, if not all of it, is empty and senseless. Making it yourself and then drawing/painting onto it I think is like falling in love with your own creation.

Art has become an illusion. Even I, who is not an artist, can realise that there is more to art than putting ink; crayon; paint; etc. onto a piece of paper. People have lost something or many things. They are ignorant and think what they have made is amazing. Art and imagination, etc., have been brought down to rubble.

there is a site that paint images of our Gods is called Astral Art Of The God

Artist Sergey Zagarovski

The Hidden Art of Islam
https://youtu.be/fhO7JoaM72c

Hi guys. I'm sorry for the necropost since the most recent reply in this thread's a month old, but I really wanted to share this drawing I made of Father Zeus! He's holding out his left hand to help humanity, and also because... Left Hand Path. Also, I had to draw this without Internet so some areas might look off... including the circles in the corners of His sigil... but oh well! I hope people like it! My 3rd eye isn't open enough to see Him clearly yet, so he might not actually look like how I drew Him...

P.s. this particular drawing is nowhere else on the internet because I specially made it to post it on just these forums...!

Digital Art is "ART". An artist is one at the soul. I think traditional art was to train the mind along with the spiritual practices in preparation for technological advancement. It would have been a transcendence where artistry would be a siddhi. I think with one's mind/brain fully functional, one can finish artworks in their mind and imprint them via technological means so they come out instantly. I read where Nicola Tesla could do this in his mind palace. I think It would be ridiculous to use traditional means with such advancements in existence, you would probably be the meme of the internet.
Time is of outmost value to us, one can use digital means to express their artistic souls as it is fast, while honing their trad skills for how long it will take to master them and at the end of the day, it would be a double win. If one has to wait until they master a skill before they showcase themselves, they will get little to nothing done. There are always mistakes even with digital artistry.

Andevili666 wrote:

Lol, Yagami and Fancy should learn to read. Towards the end of my previous post I said to do the two so it would be a double win.. lol. That's exactly what I'm doing, mastering the canvas secretly and also expressing my soul digitally. Don't place limitations on yourselves. In the future, you will see a lot of masterful trad arts from me done on canvas. As well as digital stuff. All I do is win. Question of the thread, if digital artworks were dollars how many would you do?... lol

I think one point which has not been raised yet is that of mass production. Each art piece is unique - rendering on GIMP or Photoshop is an exact, precise, perfectly-identical copy. All you have to do is go to Print and select a thousand copies of the same thing. Mass production of a once-imaginative industry, IMO, is Soulless.

Question of the thread, if digital artworks were dollars how many would you do?... lol

Rhetorical or not, I use neither the dollar nor the euro, and from what I have read, the dollar is not worth using to clean one's private lower back region with.

This is an opinion coming from someone who uses both digital and traditional medium for sketching and painting.

Traditional medium is hard. Its difficult. There are less ways to fix mistakes. Therefore people learn and train skills to make less mistakes while learning how to create pieces.

Digital art has many tools. Its cheaper. Its easier to learn. Mistakes can be hidden or easily fixed depending on what options the program used offers.

For me the tools are just a means to create a piece. The whole debate about digital pieces not being valid pieces of art is strange in of itself. Being able to create and portray ideas onto a canvas regardless of the tools is an artist. The great masters from before weren't just painters but also sculptors and even inventors. If the great masters were alive today and used digital programs to make painting their work would stand out from the rest because they have the skills necessary to do so. Ones personal skill is what decides whether they are an artist or not. The tools matter but to a lesser extent.

What about salvador dali

Thanks to HPS Lydia posting her thread Art: Fighting Degeneracy, Venerating BeautyFull site ↗, I was inspired to search for more of these.

Untitled (Yellow and Blue) by Mark Rothko - $46.5mn

Onement by Barnett Newman - $43.8mn

Black Fire 1 by Barnett Newman - $84.2mn

Orange, Red, Yellow by Mark Rothko - $86.9mn

Blood Red Mirror by Gerhard Richter - $1.1mn

Concetto spaziale, Attese by Lucio Fontano - $1.5mn

Untitled (1961) by Mark Rothko - $28mn

Green White by Ellsworth Kelly - $1.6mn

Untitled (Stoffbid) by Blinky Palermo - $1.7mn

White Fire 1 by Barnett Newman - $3.8mn

Untitled (1970) by Cy Twombly - $69.6mn

The above pictures are from elitereaders.com

Here are some more by Cy Twombly. Firstly, another part, or a different view, of this same one. These below are from nytimes.com.

Untitled

Bacchus

Untitled

Untitled? I'll give it a title - "Boils and Blotches on the Simpsons' Skin"

School of Athens

With a name like that, Cy Twombly, no wonder the "art" is just... mess. His hands must have been twomblying when twying to make art, and twomblying toow much so he can't write out his fuw name Cyril (I presume). Reawl name - Edwin Parker "Cy" Twombly Jr.

These pieces of rubbish, which are nowhere remotely near art by the widest of margins nor any stretch of the imagination, going for millions takes the piss, as do the "artists". Did you have a fattening meal yesterday? Did those Children in Africa who are starving to death? Did these "artists"?

It is a mockery. While I might not be very well-versed in art, I can still tell when shit is shit. It is a direct mockery and attack against beauty and depth and Spirit/Soul.

idiocy smasher wrote:View source

What about salvador dali

My guess is that it was just a stepping stone, to degenerate Art into "art" slowly over time. If it were done too quickly, then it wouldn't work, so it has to be eased-in slowly, taking time to sink-in, for people to accept it, for it to be normalised.

FancyMancy wrote:

if not selling it to an illiterate christian as holy material...

holey*! (Sorry!)

Italian Artist Sells Invisible Sculpture for Real Money

1 June 2021
Salvatore Garau has sold his latest invisible sculpture. The work, titled "I Am", doesn't exist except in the artist's imagination. The buyer gets a stamped certificate in exchange for $18,000.

STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:

Good morning. I'm Steve Inskeep. Move over nonfungible tokens. An Italian artist, Salvatore Garau, recently sold his latest invisible sculpture, a work titled "I Am". It isn't. The art does not exist except in the imagination of the artist. Garau says the sculpture may be displayed in any light since it's not there. The buyer gets a stamped certificate in exchange for payment of $18,000, assuming they can't just imagine they paid. It's MORNING EDITION.
https://archive.is/xaPOmExternal ↗
Archived by someone else.

FancyMancy wrote:View source

Italian Artist Sells Invisible Sculpture for Real Money

1 June 2021
Salvatore Garau has sold his latest invisible sculpture. The work, titled "I Am", doesn't exist except in the artist's imagination. The buyer gets a stamped certificate in exchange for $18,000.

STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:

Good morning. I'm Steve Inskeep. Move over nonfungible tokens. An Italian artist, Salvatore Garau, recently sold his latest invisible sculpture, a work titled "I Am". It isn't. The art does not exist except in the imagination of the artist. Garau says the sculpture may be displayed in any light since it's not there. The buyer gets a stamped certificate in exchange for payment of $18,000, assuming they can't just imagine they paid. It's MORNING EDITION.
https://archive.is/xaPOmExternal ↗
Archived by someone else.

He can sell himself to only girl costumers, it will work.

Not a crime scene, but a hospital hallway

The picture link contains "0MG". 0MG, just teach Children that mess is artistic, why don't you...