Saphiel (blood art)

[KaleNight]

A brief introduction:

Over a year ago I began to experiment with the use of blood as an artistic medium. I began using my own or that of willing donors but quickly found human blood to be impractical, as the quantity required for the work I do is more than what can be safely procured. After a length search I found a butcher shop willing to provide me with big blood and it has been a labour of love ever since.

When I first began I had no idea how difficult blood was to work with. It truly has a mind of its own, and exposure to oxygen for certain periods of time, even before it is placed on the canvas, alters its colour and thickness. It also requires a tremendous amount of patience, as the blood is required to dry on the canvas for different lengths of time in order to achieve different effects.

In order to make the process safer and longer lasting, the blood is combined with clear acrylics during its application, and coated with several layers once each piece is done. This seals in the blood, helping to both accent and preserve it, as well as giving it a more paint-like quality.

Here is my newest piece.

http://www.dead-muse-rising.org/saphiel.jpg

The gold accents are flecks of mica - something I have found to be far too much fun to work with. The painting is currently up for auction at gothauctions.com ("Saphiel" (http://www.gothauctions.com/auction/XcAPViewItem.asp?ID=254056)).

I am more than happy to work with the ideas of other people in creating my pieces. That said, if there is anything, and I do mean anything, you have in mind which you would like to see converted to blood painting format, I am more than willing to take commissions, and can be reached at kalenight@gmail.com.

Thank you for reading. Any comments/questions are deeply appreciated.

[Smitherines]

If you didnt mention that was blood, I wouldn't feel queezy looking at it. What type of surface did you paint this on? Also, did you try a more absorbant paper or surface, if you are working on canvas?

[KaleNight]

It's on canvas. 24 x 24. Probably should have mentioned that previously, sorry. I actually haven't done much in the way of experimenting with different surfaces, but now that you mention it I would like to see how something similar would look on some thick hot-pressed paper, or something of a similar persuasion.

[scorpion]

Why blood? I'm sure that's the biggest question. I've seen many works done with regular mediums that portrayed bleeding subjects or just blood and its more powerful than things painted with blood. I can see that it could be more of a spiritual experience since you actually used some of your own blood at first but now you don't even have that aspect of it so why do it?
After a while the idea of blood paintings gets really old for me and I just don't see the point. Shock value doesn't last and I don't think it could or should become a popular thing at all.
That's just my opinion :P .

[spudstudios]

Maybe you should try human poo next time. Same shock effect and technical skills needed. At least you have a comeback when people tell you it's a load of Sh*te.

Try painting with real paint. Actually takes dedication and skill.

Oh well what do I know. Probably see your work in the Saatchi gallery next year.
Get some therapy.

[KaleNight]

There are several factors that lead to its appeal, though you certainly did nail one of them. It was a spiritual experience in the beginning, but it was of a strictly personal nature. With the blood of something else (a pig, for example) that is no longer living, it can be taken as a tribute of sorts. Long after their bodies have been disposed of and their useful components utilised, one thing will remain as a testament to their existence.

Another reason I do it is the fact that I have always found blood to be particularly beautiful, and I find an interesting challenge in trying to get others to see the same. Whenever I get a comment saying something along the line of, "I have never thought blood to be a thing of beauty until now." I melt.

In terms of finances, blood is dirt cheap, so I do not have to utlise a lot of expensive materials in order to get the effect I'm after. The canvas is always the most expensive part.

Shock value is a small factor, but it's certainly not my primary motivation. I simply enjoy disturbing people; something these paintings tend to do quite effectively.

[spudstudios]

What absolute complete bollox.

[Kenny_Callicutt]

What absolute complete bollox.

bollox translates to bullshit right? then I agree..

[Mr. Pale]

This is why artists have a well deserved stereotype of being weirdos. If you wanted to disturb people, mission accomplished.

Sorry this reminds me of all the wacko people I went to colleage with who were only interested in arts "deap inner meaning" instead of say quality art. I don't really mean to be a jerk, but this bites.

Invest in some acrylics they are also dirt cheap. Then if people like your artwork you'll know they admire your skills and arn't just interested because you had a creapy idea.

[KaleNight]

It has deeper meaning to me, but thank you for your opinion.

[DSillustration]

i fail to see to a valid critism is spuds remarks.
we are here to help, not insult.

as for me,
i would love to see something a bit more representational.
i think the blood is a cool idea, but it should not be all that the piece has to offer.
a beautiful drawing of a bloody scene, done in blood...
is a little more significant to me.

[Scubasteve]

Uhhh. Looks kinda cool. I think painting in blood is a little morbid personally. Seems like a gimick to draw attention to your art, when it should be the art that draws the attention. This is just MHO though and is not ment to discourage.

[Kenny_Callicutt]

what is the point in painting in a novelty medium that after youve reached its limitiation and the novelty factor of painting in it has worn off..

thats propably the reason painting in blood is not practiced often. It just seems like a tremendous amount of wasted effort to accomplish something pushed on you by an artistic society that always is looking for something new. were or are you a painting major? or did you just come upon this yourself, and do you consider yourself a full time proffessional painter,

although, If you could pull off a portrait painted in blood, Id be thouroghly impressed.

[one2hit]

I thought it was actually cooler when you said you used your own blood! The painting itself is pretty bland in my opinion, and the novelty of having a painting in blood just for the sake of it doesn't stretch far if the painting isn't very interesting...man, it might be pretty cool if you did it with your own blood (or another person's) and made something really structrued or at least more representational (as it was said before, like a portrait, or scene...)

-Right now it doesn't personally suit me, but I know there are a bunch of you guys up in alberta! the art scene up there is totally different!

[Mandryk]

not really concept art at all.

As far as fine art goes it's pretty boring and lame. ugh.

[ryanwh]

There's a difference between not getting modern art, and bad modern art. Some people hear need to take 5 minutes off their pedistal and learn the difference, maybe they'll suddenly see how something not killing another thing that doesnt have big knockers and obscenely irrelevent detail can still be beautiful.

[slik]

Here's the thing; working in blood is fine, but there has to be more to it than that. Other people have mentioned rendering actual subjects in your work (I suppose this is a conceptual website so that makes sense), but even if you didn't want to do that, making a piece that's abstract can work just fine. The only problem is, this still doesn't really work well as an abstract expression. The texture you've created with the ground is great but the figure is severely lacking, it looks like a cheezy tribal tattoo done in finger paint (I'm sorry, but I'm being honest). Try harder to find ways to express yourself with out having the medium be the only strong part of your work. If that was all it took for being a great artist, everyone could do it. I think you would also aviod people being so critical of it if you could technically back up your ideas. That just comes with learning and practice, you should research other people who have worked in similar mediums and see what they did. Use the blood as just one tool in your work instead of making it the entire set.

[KaleNight]

Thank you, Slik. Good advice.

[spudstudios]

So " GET SOME THERAPY" IS NOT CONSTRUCTIVE?

I fail to see how this sensationalist rubbish deserves any artistic comments, support or encouragement. It is dire attention seeking rubbish.
Show me the from and thought behind it and I may change my mind. It is my opinion and it is consrtuctive.

[corky13]

i wonder how a traditional ink-drawing with a filt-pen (sp) would look like if its done with blood instead of ink ... THAT would be something i would buy

...but your Picture is too abstract and dry blood isn`t a very "powerful" color...fresh of course but dry...no way...that just don`t fit so well if its painted over bigger areas...

[Phuzion]

Yeah, I agree that the blood thing feels very much like a ploy... partly because of the vampiresque manner of the description, but I think it could be more valid with a more interesting subject matter. I think if you look around on these forums, well... most are not fans of abstract art, as so many abstract artists seem to be doing it for lack of drawing/painting abilities. I'm not sure how far your skills extend, and there's no way to tell by the image you just posted. The most you will probably get is, "It looks nice". DSillustration was very right about the subject matter. I'm sure it makes us seem terribly shallow and all, but I for one am sick of seeing people oggling over someone that can't paint, and paying thousands of dollars for paintings that lack a sense of narative, apparent skill, etc. While brilliant drawers and painters struggle because their art isn't filled with gimics.

So, though the painting is abstract, and fairly uninteresting, maybe a description of what it's about would be nice. What does that tribal design represent? As I've seen that sort of thing on way too many white, platinum blond girls here in So Cal. You can say the blood is an homage to the pigs... okay. I'm kinda not buying it, but I'll give you that one. I've seen many people use gold and red, but cadmium and gold seemed to work fine for them. You use blood and fool's gold... interesting combo. So yeah, tell what you were thinking with the subject matter. Let us know that it wasn't just random marks that sort of turned into something, and that will help to validate what it is we're looking at.

And in the future... maybe try doing self portraits in blood and mica, or portraits of other people. Or a cityscape in blood... that could have some commentary on our times, yeah? Peace out!

-Daniel

[Damian Geisser]

First, hello everybody. Second, I guess part of this cultural expression we call art relays on the breakthrough of the parameters stablished in the society. Maybe drawing with blood had its time, when no other medium was known, discovered or invented. Now you have plenty of other materials to paint with, including the digital way, that can duplicate pretty well a lot of mediums, even unreal ones; I don´t see a real need for real blood. I´d like to see some other works of yours, where your talent exceeds your medium.
When you can demostrate that you really got the talent, then and only then, I could see the use of blood as an evolution of your work. Until that happens, I´m sorry but thats only a stained canvas. When you can dominate the techniques, then dedicate to the spiritual part, you won´t fly till you learn to walk.
My technique needs a lot of training, but i love to see the talented people´s work (lots of it in this forum), and I try to learn from it. I sugest you to do the same, until you got something to transmit to the blood (or any other medium) you are using and create real art.
It´s like a desease, im from Argentina (thats why my english is that bad), and a lot of artists around here thinks that "art" means any crap that the artist can say it has a meaning, even a lot of formless latex on the wall, or a clay brick with nails on it (this was really exposed here!!!). On the other hand you see a lot of artist, that had a great formation and create awesome pieces (fortunatelly this happens in Argetina too), that has no place to expose.
Well, i think i over extended myself.
Don´t take it bad, practice a lot and then use the blood. Giger and Von Hagens did a long, hard road before they could shock the world with their art.
And I think the blood in the canvas will rot eventually, better get an air refresher...

[Erik]

Ryanwh -- post some of your own work for a change instead of crapping all over the forum with your bullshit. OK?

As for this art:

I dont care what the medium is, as long as the image is interesting. This image has a nice pattern, but it only attracts attention because of the medium. So next time, a guy paints something with his own brain cells on the canvas and you will be forgotten... So stop all the 'modern art' discussions. This is a nice one time experiment, and that;s it. Now go and find some other trick to mesmerise the ignorant masses with. ;)

On a side note: Did you consider printing shirts with blood as ink?? (I would not consider using your own tho for obvious reasons...) -- This would really be a big seller in some subcultures probably :D :D :D :donk:

[Smitherines]

For those of you angry towards modern art, check out artrenewal.org, they hate modern artists with a passion. I don't agree fully with their views, but they do make some interesting points.

[Gregory Wohlwend]

Yeah, I agree that the blood thing feels very much like a ploy... partly because of the vampiresque manner of the description, but I think it could be more valid with a more interesting subject matter.
-Daniel


I totally agree, that being said, that doesn't mean he/she can't be helped so here are some suggestions...

The first thing i thought of when you said it was blood was the texture, then i immediately thought about how the painting would smell, or ::barf:: taste... What if you put a solid coat of blood down and used your toungue as the brush, i know it's pretty masochistic, but it may be more interesting that way, as this sort of abstract work lends more to process than result.

Apart from that wild suggestion, the smell i think would definately be the best part, so think about the media itself, what does blood suggest? does it suggest life? death?

what is it about the cattle's blood that makes it a worthwhile medium other than its red pigment and willingness to stick to paper? perhaps you could incorporate the slaughterhouse into your design idea, or the 'soul of the cow' if you want to get super artsy.

What are you using to make the strokes, is it your finger? should the process be entirely organic and primal, or if you are using a manmade utensil what about the dichotomy between the utensil and the organics of the medium can you suggest through the strokes and subject matter of the painting?

Why did you choose to make a tribal design, were you looking for a aestetic within the somewhat boring red background, or does it suggest something more primal about the medium itself. (that's a stretch, and to be honest i doubt you thought about that when making the design, but if you did, it's still obvious that you didn't push it or excentuate that idea in any way).

Why did you spatter the blood to create a field of blood and canvas? what about the texture of the dried blood is interesting, what is it saying?

You mentioned the blood changes consistency based on its time spent in open air, however you didn't make any sort of attempt to display this wonderful dynamic of the media itself. rather than looking it as a problem, use it to your advantage to create more interesting shapes and textures.

My worry is not in your skills as an artist, yet my worry is a much more serious one in that you barely thought about WHY you were using blood and instead came to use it out of novelty rather than message...

Also, the image represents somewhat of a wing, perhaps an angel's wing, and while terribly cliche, i suppose you could push the whole VERY OVERDONE 'fallen angel' concept. But honestly, the whole goth thing, just contributes to the weakness of this piece in that you had no real original thought or viewpoint about what it is to paint in blood.

To be an true artist you first have to give up your ego, and while you may have been thinking "wow this incredibly original" simply because you were painting in blood, is one of the worst plagues of us artists. You should be your own biggest critic, and once you figure that out, you won't need a forum like this other than to improve your technical skills.

I would see this piece and the replies within it not as a negative, but as a challenge to create much better pieces, and while this piece may be finished, your work with blood, as a medium, (i hope) is not.

[1-thought]

what about some heavy watercolor paper? the cloth-like stuff could be interesting.

[light]

I didnt get to read everything so I dont know if it was already said, but I dont understand why you would do this. While only somebody with great talent could imitate the art on the site, anybody could copy this. It doesnt take skill, it just takes... Well I dont know what it takes, but im sure its something. Somebody could do this same thing, and you couldnt tell the diffrence. Why not take your skills and make something truly unique, and complex that will make a name for you?

[ryanwh]

While only somebody with great talent could imitate the art on the site, anybody could copy this.
That's what people said about Van Goghe. And most modern art. People measure the level of art by different things, how is this less of a gimmick than a female warrior who has a completely unpractical chestplate for the sake of sex appeal?
erik-shhh, go make another unfeasable design instead of sour graping other people's art thread.

[poise]

iT's funny because I was really interested in looking at this 'Blood Art" thread and was kinda fascinated, and I'm sure everyone else who responded was too, or else they wouldn't have responded. So you can say it did it's job as a gimmic, shock value or disturbing people.
But like a lot of people have been saying and I'm just going to say it in a different way; the best art I think is when you have more then one read, or reaction.
I would say do something so people will admire your skill, or your symbolism; if you want it to be more abstract.
Truethfully I think the idea is intrigueing and maybe a little creepy. Tie the idea of blood in with a cool idea and great technique then you might have something. :teeth:
I give props for trying something new. ;)
I am editing this because things keep on coming up, lol
anyway, I don't know how you would do this and be safe, but collect your blood, maybe save just little bits at a time untill you have enough, and do a portrait of yourself, that would be something to see.
But please if you think this is a cool idea too don't hurt yourself trying I don't want you dying. oy! that would be no good, :\

[Bammer]

Wow. So very little content has sparked so much response. Sad that, you know, good drawings can't get this much feedback. But I guess it's easy for people like me to chime in on this thread because the topic is so incredibly dumb.

Anyway...
In highschool, the teeni-goths would all cut themselves and make lil' sketchbooks of blood art, then fake reluctance as they shoved it in the faces of their less gothy friends. One unpopular kid would always respond with something like "Really. Blood. I am shock-ed. That has truely made me think. You should sell your art. You could make a lot of money."

But then we all turned 15, and putting blood on paper became just a little less brilliant than twirling an inverted lensflare in photoshop.

Everyone knows that matters of taste cannot be debated, and somewhere somebody could find the most random crap overflowing with sublime beauty. But as a whole, the world probably find more "art" just closing their damn eyes instead of looking at this pretentious shit.

[lochnarus]

While it certainly isn't the best thing in the world IMO, it is valid art. Sure, some of you guys and your massive purist egos have to shoot things down that arent along your path, you should realize that not everything falls withing your criteria of what's good but shouldn't be dismissed as rubbish. It should viewed differently, yes, but not with disgust...that's cruel of you to put yourself so highly as if you're the ones who decide what (good) art is. I remember reading that this forum was for constructive critisicm, not trying to judge a person's personality or motives for posting a picture.

[crazy3dman]

I think this piece definitely is a valid piece of art, but I really don't think it falls within the definition of concept art as defined on this site. It's pretty much the gotten the reception I would have expected. This site just isn't oriented to fine art criticism. Posting it here is like poking at your kid brother just to get a reaction out of him.

[Blue Severin]

Well, you've got the purists telling you to get better, and Gregory Wohlwend thinks it's valid art, but is still telling you to do things differently. Yeah, blood can be valid art, but this is a pretty weak piece. Someone said you should do representational art with blood. The best example I could think of was when Android did one of his self portraits in blood. Maybe he'll comment and point you in the right direction.

[Chuck,mate.]

i`m all for it buddy.
use blood.
use YOUR blood.
maybe that way the stupidy will finally END.
drain yourself to oblivion dude.
yupe.
go,go,go.

[CaptainInsano]

Wow, using blood to paint... that's cool... So what does the painting look like?... Oh, it's abstract... okay... well, you know... that's cool... using blood though, that's a neat idea... Is it your own blood? That would bea lot more personal and have more of an emotional impact... oh.. it's just animal blood... okay, well you know... that's cool too.. yeah, yeah, I'm feelin' ya'... sort of... well... the whole blood aspect got old pretty quick... oh, but since you don't really want to do anything representational, you're going to stick with the abstract painting and use blood to give it some shock value?... I see... well, you know... that's neat... that's neat...

[ArtbyWard]

My problem with it is that it looks thick and disgusting. If you would put blood in a felt tip or on a pencil then maybe you could create some nice effects. But I think blood loses it's nice red color when it dries, so it propably is'nt a good idea anyway.

[Dead Bunny]

Blood's done. Posing corpses is in.

[Mr. Pale]

Hey, just curious, but my allergies are going crazy and I just blew my nose. A lot of stringy mucas came out. Do you guys think I should use it to paint with. I mean it is a lovely shade of green and all.

Wait a second!!! My mucas is forming amazing shapes representing man's inhumanity to man. What sublime inner meaning. Guys! I think without even realizing it I have created a masterpeice of abstract art. Yeah me!.....achooooo!

[spudstudios]

For my next project I shall shite on my canvas. I will then drag my bum hair across it with all of the misplaced insercurity and anger I can muster.
As it is my Shite, it will reflect my true inner self. I would use cow poo but it tends to be too dry and not stick to the canvas that well. I am sure with my hair I can create a real tribal design. If I am lucky I will pass wind " Mid-Motion" and have an unexpected revelation!

They say your greatest achivements come from the accidents you have during the creative process.

Now that's art!

[Mr. Pale]

How dare you try to one up me!!!

Oh yeah, well I will take my canvas, wrap it around my naughty bits and throw myself into a Turkish prison for a week. The resulting "art" provided anyone dares touch it I'm sure will convey all my angst and/or suffering. It will be full of deep inner meaning.

One must suffer for ones art. Sure I may walk funny for many days, but it's for art damnit.


Wait on second thought, that sounds like a terrible idea, you win. I'll stick to acrylics.

[broken lizard]

you.....scare.....me............

[Mr. Pale]

Come on, lighten up. This threads pretty funny if you think about it.

[silverslash]

That's what people still say about Van Goghe. And most modern art. People measure the level of art by different things, how is this less of a gimmick than a female warrior who has a completely unpractical chestplate for the sake of sex appeal?
erik-shhh, go make another unfeasable design instead of sour graping other people's art thread.

fixed your comment.

-jose

[IanE]

That's badass, man.

I wonder if soon people will start doing sculpture or figure drawing by using real skin and muscles on mannikins.....

Yeaa... cool stuff, ridiculously creepy though. Keep rockin.

Ian

[StrangeAlchemist]

Numerous artists have used blood in their pieces. I've used my own blood on a few occasions. Using biological material can be thought provoking and insightful at times, especially given the proper context.

I think the problem here is that your execution isn't quite up to snuff. The piece is aesthetically weak, and you haven't provided a moving explanation of why you use the material. The overall execution appears to be fairly pedestrian. Ignoring for a moment the fact that it's done in blood, I don't find the work, in and of itself, that intriguing.

Without a certain perceptible level of thought and skill the use of blood comes off as a cheap gimmick. If you truly consider your work a sort of tribute to the afflicted blood giver, then put more thought into how you're composing your stuff. You say it has meaning to you, but so far you haven't provided more than a very broad and generic explanation of what that meaning is. It seems your own words contradict the notion of it being any sort of meaningful tribute:

-"if there is anything, and I do mean anything, you have in mind which you would like to see converted to blood painting format, I am more than willing to take commissions"

To me, a tribute involves a certain degree of depth, reverence even, and the piece you're showing, combined with your entrepreneurial attitude about using the blood, makes me suspicious of it being anything more than a "hey, that would be kinda cool" type of idea. I could be mistaken, but I don't perceive an aura of serious dedication or craft around this piece.

When you come back and show some work that knocks everyone's socks off before they even realize it's executed in blood, I'm sure the general reaction will be much different. Until then perhaps you should focus on sharpening your technical skills and less on shock value alone. Learn to successfully combine the two and you're golden.

[Ian Mack]

i fail to see to a valid critism is spuds remarks.
we are here to help, not insult.

as for me,
i would love to see something a bit more representational.
i think the blood is a cool idea, but it should not be all that the piece has to offer.
a beautiful drawing of a bloody scene, done in blood...
is a little more significant to me.



How many posts in and this was the 1st useful post? C'mon guys...open your minds a little, he's not asking you to open your veins.

As a painting though...it's not good. Be more representational or at least take the abstract to a new level. I mean, you only have two elements...the bg and the lines which don't look like especially inspired lines.

Take a look at some of MC Escher's stuff? He didn't work in blood but some of his etching techniques may be of some use to you.

[CreationEdge]

What an odd discussion... You keep going on about how blood is a gimmick and whatnot, but you wouldn't care if he hadn't told you. A medium is a medium.

Being abstract, I've nothing positive to say about the piece itself, but what's with the focus on the blood? Maybe if you were talking about how you wouldn't know it's actually blood unless you were told rather than "blood is lame", this might have been worthwhile.

Ugh. I really don't see the point of the picture, though. Needs a lot of work. This looks like something I would do to test out some paint that I have no idea how to use(which would be all paint, ;) ).

Someone mentioned a blood pen? Interesting idea, but I think it'd clot up. Defeinitely wouldn't work in a ballpoint, and quill tip is iffy. Marker wouldn't work either, blood dries too fast.

[Ilaekae]

Alright, KaleKnight...you've shocked the "adults" and thrown the schoolyard into a tizzy. I hope it's all you hoped for...and it does beat slippin' a rubber snake down Tammy's front, doesn't it?

Allow me to introduce myself...in a manner of speaking. If I use words that are too big, just stick your hand in the air and I'll backtrack. Okay?

First off, unlike 99.9% of the extremely talented, hardworking, (usually) well-educated, and tolerant (and mostly young, or at least younger than me) ladies and gentlemen here, I'm not a concept artist. And I'm certainly NOT a fuckin' gentleman.

I AM an assemblage sculpture, painter (Influences: DuChamp, Weiner, Klee, Pollack, Arp, Johns, Picasso, the Hispanic muralists and works by native American, inuitt, African and polynesian and australian artists), print maker, retired Conceptual Designer and Illustrator with 40+ years experience, and former conceptual arts teacher (15+ years). I'm also a newbie here, have nothing to lose if I'm thrown out for these comments (except some tentative new friendships), and have a big fuckin' mouth powered by a short-fused temper when I'm faced with someone wasting people's time.

You wanna crit? Here it is...

"Shock value is a small factor, but it's certainly not my primary motivation. I simply enjoy disturbing people; something these paintings tend to do quite effectively."

Thank you for at least being honest. This will help you down the line when you've matured enough to understand the difference between communication and poking someone in the eye with an ice pick. Your comment leaves me with the positive knowledge that you have no rational practical, emotional, or communicative reason for the execution of the piece you posted here. Allow me to quote another, more genteel, member for additional support of my view....

"I could be mistaken, but I don't perceive an aura of serious dedication or craft around this piece." (StrangeAlchemist)

As for your piece...

Graphically, it's a failure. It has no visual or aesthetic impact or appeal either as a surface or as a color field work. From a design standpoint, it's badly conceived, has no focus, and lacks a viewer "hook." The color is weak, the drawing (what there is of it) adds nothing to the work, and to the contrary, actually detracts from it. It begs the question, "What did you do with the rest of the painting when you cut it off at the left?" Do you even have any idea what the terms "focal point," "balance," or "content" mean?

From the standpoint of an example of your craft, you get a D+ (the + is for discovering blood is cheaper than student-grade paint). Blood, though, is fugitive, degrades or decays with disastrous effects to your support, and makes a better binder than pigment, something discovered approximately 50,000 years ago (which indicates to me that you haven't been hitting your books either...shame on you!).

Summing up...you've gotten a lot of people upset and arguing with each other, you now have something to brag about with your other "Hi! I'm-old-enough-to-drink-wanna-fuck-me?" friends, and in general, set back the serious study of art as a creative process about...maybe 4 minutes and 15 seconds.

I can go on for another three days like this, but I won't. I have to much respect for the limited time the others have to read rants like this. I'm retired, but they do have to work for a living.

Have a nice day... :)

[Mr. Pale]

Ilaekae, I'm going to frame that.


Best "no bullshit" critique I've ever heard.

[Scubasteve]

Ilaekae <-- Summin it up.

I saw on the boob toob the other day an "artist" who's art consists of pouring different colored dyes in a toilet bowl, flushing and taking a photograph of the swirling colors. People are actually paying big money for these photos. He has had art shows of nothing but these photos. At least this guy can smear alittle tribal mark, but I wouldn't buy either. JMHO....LOL.

[klinesmoker]

You know, I would figure that since every artist has his own style then we could all agree to look beyond shit like mediums and move straight to the art. You're not killing anyone for the blood, so I don't feel insulted that you use it. However, this does not move beyond the simple fact that the piece itself looks uninspired. There is no real contrast, no real flow. I don't mean to be rude, I'm only trying to help, but a piece with feel requires more than just half-assing it. If you are indeed doing what you can, good for you, but it's time to start moving on to some more complicated pieces, and begin to really push your style to new levels. I'm sorry man, but I just don't feel much from this piece.
As for this freaking out about the blood, who cares? A medium is a medium, and it's not like it harms you to look at it. Come on people, I know for a fact you are more open than this. We are here to help anyone improve, and I hope you remember that. :^^;:

[egerie]

But then we all turned 15, and putting blood on paper became just a little less brilliant than twirling an inverted lensflare in photoshop.
Water all over the keyboard. Thanks :)

Now besides all the hate and bullshit that was posted, I just have a quick question : Doesn't all this attract fleas / rot / illnesses of all kinds ? I know that a lot of blood art has been done before but what would happend if you soak a canvas in blood ?
Just wonderin'.

[Tobin]

It is art, surely, but comes so close to the line that it needs something more to validate it.

It reminds me of andy warhol getting children to urinate on canvas... to me that crosses the line and is simply pretentious ego-driven artists who aren't focused on form, colour and texture. Giving the process more value than the piece is egotistical and self deluding.

These pieces would be improved if ideas from blood where used to create composition and intellectual value. For instance the cells, white blood cells.. that side of things. Or you could swing in favor of the metaphorical route of family ties and the womb and such things.


Hope I've helped and not just criticized.

[Ilaekae]

Tobin, there's no way your statement can be read as a criticism. You simply pointed out the obvious that everyone else was afraid to say. I was surprised by the amount of animosity toward this piece initially, until I realized that the people here are generally too knowledgeable and intelligent to react that way just because a piece was "non-figurative." We were all reacting to the fact that the piece meant nothing, and since the artist himself stated as much, it's worth dropped to less than nothing.

Many of us have an extremely high tolerance for all forms of "art," or at least the attempting of something that "might be art," because we at least subconsciously recognize that cutting ourselves off from "different" can be dangerous as far as our info base is concerned. Having a private gross joke jammed in our face is a different matter.

[light]

That's what people said about Van Goghe. And most modern art. People measure the level of art by different things, how is this less of a gimmick than a female warrior who has a completely unpractical chestplate for the sake of sex appeal?
The diffrence is, not everyone can draw a female warrior in an unpractical chestplate and make her look sexy. This is merely lines in no particular composition or flow.

[mellowsmoothe]

i read some of the posts here and here is what i think. personally im not a fan of "modern art" or "abstract art". the reason for this is that "artists" like Basquiat seem to see dollar signs before the final product. he had a famous quote that i can't remember that proves this point. in my opinion, art is a struggle with your self and your improving talent. art for me is about skill and mastery. so for those who believe in the "process" i agree, but if you are not constantly struggling to get better than it ceases to be art for me. so if you go from glueing 3 tin cans to a tire to another "piece" 2 years later made of a light bulb with wires hanging out of it strapped to the crotch of a mannequin, then you havent made art. you have not improved and you have not gained new ground. two years later if you made a great sketch of a landscape or a detailed scuplture of a creature, then you have improved, and you have made art. the process should be for yourself and the product should be for everyone.

so that all being said, i like your art. not for the medium but for the design. you have created something that appeals to my senses design wise. it is interesting and reminds me of a wing. i dont really care what medium you use, it is what you do with it. i hope that you use your medium or any other for that matter to create things that at some point supersede this one, so that for yourself, you are more accomplished as an artist. art is something that anyone from any walk of life should be able to look at and see some level of skill and accomplishment.

[madster]

I think it sad that to validate yourself you have to look to "disturbing people" with your art. That's even sadder than the art you create to disturb people with, because you can't even accomplish that without the use of a gimmick, like blood...

There are a couple of folks here who create some truly beautiful, yet disturbing art. A couple of pieces I couldn't hit the back button fast enough, but still appreciated the beauty of their line, shape, and coloring (as I was mentally going, "ugh!"). Your work is not disturbing through anything you have done, it is only for the innate disgust value of your chosen medium, which you have displayed so little skill with, shite would be just as effective, even without the "too much fun to work with " mica flecks...

I've seen some truly beautiful drawings done in blood. The shading differences for thick and thin lines gave a level of depth to shading that is almost unbelievable. You do know that blood works, even once varnished are extremely light sensitive, don't you? The works I saw were in a museum in Berlin, in a very low light level room...

If you continue to pursue art, it will be interesting when you reflect on this period many years from now. I wonder what you will have learned.

[fixx]

I've seen slabs of meat hanging in a room as a metaphor for Guernica, goldfish in a blender and a sign to "Please Turn On", and of course Damien Hirst's various sliced up and pickled things.

You need to get more under your belt than a few Anne Rice novels to be able to shock me.

[Carnifex]

if you picked a better subject this would perhaps be more interesting.
check into austrian artist nitsch (http://www.nitsch.org/) (under "malerei") he also uses blood quite often but splats it more on the canvas.he also does some photographic installations with crucified women and animal intestines...

[J. W. Cornelius]

Ugh. This is what I get for surfing the web @ lunchtime. *barf!*

Most of everything that should be said is said. But, I might suggest thinking about who your audience will be. Is it merely your circle of friends, or maybe beyond? There's a community of "shock me with morbidity" people out there, but they will only support you so far. How about editors, agents, will this interest anyone outside the mosh pit?

Just 2 cents.
JW "the sell-out"

[ElvisMcVegas]

In my computer science class, I pricked my finger on a peice of sugar and wrote my name in blood really big on a sheet of printer paper and hung it up, my computer science teacher still has it too. Maybe I should sell that :wink:

[dns2k]

blood as a medium.... hmmm i think it might piss off the vampiric community because blood is meant for drinking not wasting on canvas. not to mention i think its been done. oh and egerie had to go and be all heath conscious and bring up a good point.... will it attract ants,flys and maggots cause those crawling over your canvas would be kool... living art. that would entice those previously pissed off vampiric types to sit and look at your now living painting.

i swear i am usually constructive and not like this but really after all is said and done, why? why should we care? cause right now your work is as kool as that artist who wears the bullet belts (you know who i am talking about the marky mark of the art world).

-dns

[asoir]

It is dire attention seeking rubbish.
It seems to have got some too ;)

-----------

A labour of love? That's pretty sad/sick.
And it really isn't concept art so this should be removed.

[Noodle!]

I think he's gotten a bit to harsh a serving here. He has been friendly and calm with his answers, just said why he did it etc, and many of the answers have been extremely angry.
The comments have not been constructive in the slightest, only crude "go get therapy" etc. Instead maybe say that "Ok, painting in blood for the sole reason of painting in blood doesn't really roll well with me, or most people here, since this is mainly an illustration and conceptual forum"

So, just try to not look at it as something of shock value or just as a call for attention.

That said, I think there's been some valid serious crits and I can't say it any better than they.

[Twisted Nail]

Noodle said what I couldn't explain.

[/Anders]

*not constructive enough, sorry about that.*

[AngryScientist]

:404sign:

But it seems I'm really not missing anything.. Carry on..

[light]

Noodle, people are just angry. Its art like this, with shock value, that is one of the main reasons that artists that work their ass off get paid less, and are less appreciated.

[asoir]

Noodle, people are just angry. Its art like this, with shock value, that is one of the main reasons that artists that work their ass off get paid less, and are less appreciated.
That is absolutely true. Ever seen, I think it's called, "The bed"? It's a messy bed with crap everywhere. Modern art. Famous.
I hate stuff like this.

Just heard on the news, a monkey's paintings selling for 12k. Amazing, really.

[Dusty]

I'm just getting a red X now. Dammit, now I wanna see what all the fuss is about. :p

-D

[Beastie]

Hmmm, I dont really think its a great piece of artwork but in most circles its still art. I don't know why this piece is making people so mad. Do you consider the art of the fluxus movement to not be art? I don't personally like anything from the fluxus movement but im sure someone got something out of it.... I think its lame but its still art i guess. As far as this piece, I was interested enough to open the thread and look at it, Im not angry. I open alot of threads and see crap, even when they are trying to be good but I dont yell at them and say this is shit. He even came right out and said it was just to evoke an emotion. Sometimes thats all art is. I dont know.... I guess relax alittle? But yea, if you are going to continue in the medium I would suggest alittle more thought. But i mean.....its just a piece right? His next one could be better? Who knows.

[strych9ine]

I created a work of art made entirely of boogers, but I lost the kleenex it was on. I could have gone places.

[CoNTRoL]

people who take extreme means to represent small ideas lower the idea of art and their art. often today art is created with shock as the only aesthetic tool to represent ideas that generally suck.

one lesser art form, that a teacher of mine practiced, involved the hanging of animal entrails in an empty room. what this accomplishes or benefits i dont know. its a whole lot of superficial crap. a vain search for meaning in outrageous ideas that are unclever and unintelligent. if anyone applied themselves anyone could think up this stuff.

one woman who spoke to my group at art-allstate showed us a film of her balancing on a platform 10 feet into the air while slapping and removing red clay from a wall. seriously. alot of people find this stuff artistically stimulating. I, on the other hand, find it a good time to open a beer and laugh my ass off.

[dns2k]

lets just let this thread die... even our wonderful critisizing banter is not worth this much attention...

-dns

[bizarre]

Not Found
The requested URL /saphiel.jpg was not found on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

took it down, did ya? all this criticism knock some common sense into ya?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v177/Demianmoon/you_are_fired.jpg

^here's a valentine i made a few years ago for a sweetheart girl i met at school. with some nice photoshopping, i personalised it for you. go home and listen to your death metal black metal emo metal gothic metal metallica.

[dfacto]

Bottom line is that the art is unimpressive, and below the standard of this board in both concept and execution.

The fact that is was in blood is pretty irrelevant. Personally if you hadn't said so, I wouldn't have known, and after knowing, I don't care. Why? Because the art isn't interesting to begin with. I'll only care about the media if I think the piece is good enough to warrant further questions.

And as further notice, don't bring this kinda stuff here again unless you want to get more replies like the ones in this thread. CA's welcome wagon was stolen, stripped, and converted into an artistic death machine. And thats the way we like it.