Painters aren't famous.

Join 500,000+ Artists

Its' free and it takes less than 10 seconds!

Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 124
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    195
    Thanks
    39
    Thanked 135 Times in 58 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Painters aren't famous.

    For a while now I've been asking friends and other people to name a famous, living painter. Then I would ask them to name an average, living rapper. You can guess the results. People don't know any painters, but have no problem with naming moderately successful rappers.

    I realize part of the problem is the nature of both activities - songs are going to be played on the radio, tv, even as soundtrack in movies. Even if you tried to avoid a mainstream song you couldn't. Also rappers are viewed as celebrities and rock stars.

    How could an artist achieve that level of fame? How could paintings achieve the level of exposure that songs have?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 34 Times in 32 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    this is a weird topic... i rather u compare artist... i know that comic book artist with 1/10th the skill of concept "salary" job earners, are way more famous and richer

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    110
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Thomas Kincade. -yes he sucks... but rich and famous he is hmmmmm.

    Half of the failures in life come from pulling one's horse when he is leaping.
    Thomas Hood
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  5. #4
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    739
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 223 Times in 163 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Come back in a hundred years and see who's more famous, Lil' Jon or Picasso.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jack the R For This Useful Post:


  7. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    37
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 13 Times in 3 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    yeah painters aren't usually famous until after they die. Because when they die, Business are able to market and exploit them...

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  8. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Orlando, Florida
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    838
    Thanked 664 Times in 380 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Salvador Dali's actually pretty famous.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  9. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    808
    Thanks
    363
    Thanked 187 Times in 181 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I think the art world and the mainstream are separated by a thin line. When it comes to art, people think old-fashioned landscape painters and the Mona Lisa. I haven't once met someone in person who knew Jon Foster or Frazetta...

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  10. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    195
    Thanks
    39
    Thanked 135 Times in 58 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack the R View Post
    Come back in a hundred years and see who's more famous, Lil' Jon or Picasso.
    Quote Originally Posted by ninjacat11 View Post
    Salvador Dali's actually pretty famous.
    Good job reading the first sentence of my post.

    Thomas Kinkade has his paintings everywhere and might be rich, but not many people actually know his name.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  11. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Birth Place of the World, NYC
    Posts
    2,830
    Thanks
    2,629
    Thanked 1,044 Times in 681 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    It won't happen in the United States.

    You're more likely to find fame in a culture whose past is engrained with art as a normal part of life.

    Europe, Asia, etc., but not the U.S.

    "Everything must serve the idea. The means used to convey the idea should be the simplest and clear. Just what is required. No extra images. To me this is a universal principle of art. Saying as much as possible with a minimum of means."
    -John Huston, Director
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  12. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    195
    Thanks
    39
    Thanked 135 Times in 58 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by OmenSpirits View Post
    It won't happen in the United States.
    Why do you think that is?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  13. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Birth Place of the World, NYC
    Posts
    2,830
    Thanks
    2,629
    Thanked 1,044 Times in 681 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    We go through ages instead of incorporating each aspect of those ages into the core of society.

    The golden age of illustration, the golden age of jazz, etc. we place periods of time, and then move on without truly taking the aspects of those times, and passing it along to the next generation.

    If it's new, shiny, we partake of it, but for only so long as it is en vogue to do so.

    We are inherently a disposable society, but hardly ever retaining what was best of our past, leaving it to history books and those of us who find value.

    Last edited by OmenSpirits; January 23rd, 2010 at 12:23 AM.
    "Everything must serve the idea. The means used to convey the idea should be the simplest and clear. Just what is required. No extra images. To me this is a universal principle of art. Saying as much as possible with a minimum of means."
    -John Huston, Director
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  14. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to OmenSpirits For This Useful Post:


  15. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    Posts
    3,091
    Thanks
    1,795
    Thanked 1,555 Times in 607 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Makes nostalgia even better.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  16. #13
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    739
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 223 Times in 163 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by karmazon View Post
    Good job reading the first sentence of my post.
    No, I acknowledge that people are more likely to know bad rappers than good currently living artists, but if you step beyond the present it's not likely many rappers will be remembered at all.

    BTW there are plenty of people who know Giger. Not everyone knows his name, but they certainly have seen the Alien. In that sense I'd say he's bigger than any rapper. I doubt if my mother's heard anything by Snoop Doggy Dogg, but she knows the Alien.

    If you go by works there are plenty of visual artists who are bigger than rappers. The problem is that the movie studios don't choose to promote or acknowledge them the way record studios promote their artists. It's bizarre when you think about it. H.R. Giger is practically a franchise unto himself. Why the film industry never picked up on that is beyond me. They'll make a movie for 50 Cent, but they won't make a movie just for the art of H.R. Giger. Ridiculous.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  17. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    421
    Thanks
    20
    Thanked 191 Times in 102 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by OmenSpirits View Post
    It won't happen in the United States.

    You're more likely to find fame in a culture whose past is engrained with art as a normal part of life.
    You see... that is the problem right there. Art is actually a huge normal part of life for the US (and other developed countries).

    But, it isn't in the form of a painting anymore. That isn't how people consume art anymore. I don't have a single painting on the wall (which is typical)... but I do have a TV and several computers. Why pay an artist to draw you a single pretty picture to look at when you can turn on a TV and be exposed to all kinds of modern variations of art?

    The "need" for an oil painting is not here in modern day. There are so many works of art and they are thrown at us constantly through our modern changing screens.

    BUT, the foundations of painting and making pictures like that is still very much needed (and appreciated, just look how people have responded to avatars art direction).

    The reason that the general population does not know artists name is simply a case of marketing. When a great picture is thrown at the public, it is done so under the "name" of whatever they are trying to sell. Game illustrations (like the lovely guildwars paintings), movie posters, matte paintings....all are done FOR someTHING else (instead of being presented to the public with the name of the artist).

    Basically, companies want to put all the work of marketing into something they OWN (which is whatever brand they are pushing). They don't own an artist and aren't trying to build up the artists fame (it doesn't really serve them), so they just leave that part out (or just stuff it in the credits somewhere).

    I think that is really the greater shame, that graphic artists are being lumped into a pool of nameless interchangeable workers....only recognized for what they do by other artists...

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ivory_Oasis For This Useful Post:


  19. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,531
    Thanks
    104
    Thanked 1,848 Times in 598 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    You'd need to become your own brand, like Damien Hurst or Banksy, and create your fame from controversy. Even then your fame is limited and localised. People mention the likes of Kinkaid but I doubt one in 100 non-artists worldwide has heard of him, and fewer still would recognise his art. I've never met a non-artist who's heard of Frazetta, even those who've shown an interest in the subject.

    Face it, there's no fame and comparatively little money in it for the genuine artist. No artist living or dead has achieved the notoriety of Beckham, and that includes Picasso, and none will achieve his level of earnings either (what is it now, £1m+ a week?). Which is fine because it shows that we're in it for the right reasons.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Baron Impossible For This Useful Post:


  21. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    105
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 12 Times in 12 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    In order for an artist most probably like me to bridge the gap between the art world and the mainstream society, part of your art must become a franchise.

    There are many reasonable ways of doing that. There's no need to be blatantly controversial. I don't find Damien Hurst all that shocking and its more an issue with how vanilla people are and how most normal people in into quite strange things which creates confusion in a marketplace driven by finding a target audience and manipulating them and even eventually discarding them for a larger more and safer audience in return for more money.
    An level headed artists doesn't really need fame or money, not if they're really good anyway. They're most happy just creating, so they usually don't see fame and money as the only way to live a happy life.

    It take a rare individual to really have enough want of fame and love of art to be "successful"

    oh the fame oh the fame
    oh the guilt oh the guilt!

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  22. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    696
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 93 Times in 88 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    why would a painter be famous, and a carpenter not?
    maybe we're just overestimating ourselves.
    obviously the world is more interested in soccer and music. and why would they all be wrong? it looks like soccer and music can offer the people something they wont find in art.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  23. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Belgrade, Serbia
    Posts
    2,156
    Thanks
    2,921
    Thanked 2,804 Times in 942 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Well it is because you are asking 12 year old boy who is not interested in art and painting. But i don't wanna insult your friend, it is actually what interest certain individual have. In today's world of television, internet, banners, bilboards, etc. there is allot of things going on.
    About you said he knows rappers and don't know any painter is because he watches those rappers from age 5-6 on tv, concerts, internet, but you don't see any painter so commercialy exploited, so he can even get chance to be noticed

    M

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  24. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lakselv, Norway
    Posts
    2,119
    Thanks
    591
    Thanked 1,014 Times in 376 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ajvenema View Post
    why would a painter be famous, and a carpenter not?
    Because, in terms of fame, Jesus is a tough act to follow?

    Oh, and

    name a famous, living philosopher.

    In the future, everyone will have 15 minutes of privacy.

    Portfolio
    Sketchblog
    Facebook art page
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  25. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    696
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 93 Times in 88 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by squidmonk3j View Post
    Because, in terms of fame, Jesus is a tough act to follow?

    Oh, and

    name a famous, living philosopher.
    hehe, you're sharp

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  26. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,528
    Thanks
    6,808
    Thanked 348 Times in 275 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Thumbs up

    People nowadays are way more interested in photography than drawing or painting. Go to any interesting place and you'll see tons of people holding all kinds of cameras shooting like mad, but not a single one is holding a pencil or brush.

    Why draw or paint, when a camera can take an exact shot of the subject in all it's glory? Throw in Photoshop and you start wondering if there's even a need for artists.
    (though there's some things a camera can never do, such as capturing the imaginative)

    Verdict?

    Artists become legends. Only after they die.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  27. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    645
    Thanks
    24
    Thanked 54 Times in 51 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    To respond to your first quiz-itation.


    FRANK FRAZETTA- still living (and imho one of the most copied and influential artist that ever walked the planet)

    Now, artists reaching rock star ( or rap star) status. One in a ca-zillion! Most any artist wanting to become famous 1; have to be unique, 2; have to acquire an ability to focus interest on themselves and 3; have to have stamina.

    The list could go on and on because there’s no formula to achieve this. Some of it may be contributed to pot luck, and hard work of course.

    Ok, that does not mean that someone can not gain success and fame in the art world. Every member here has been influenced by an artist, or several. If someone enjoys art enough to want to make a career out of it they shouldn’t be looking to be on a show like “America’s got Talent”, or “ The World’s got Talent”. Best just to work, make a lot of money and be happy. Oh, and be able to walk down the street without being mobbed by fans.

    Bruce

    Last edited by Bruce Pluto; January 23rd, 2010 at 10:25 AM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  28. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mölndal, Sweden
    Posts
    2,778
    Thanks
    2,379
    Thanked 1,911 Times in 832 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I think it's because music is a lot easier to mass market. A musician can record an album, send it to the stores and all his fans will buy it. They'll tell their friends and so on. Then they'll all come to his concert and pay him even more money and bring him even more fame.

    An artist on the other hand usually gets hired by some guy to help develop or market his ideas for a rather limited audience. And said audience might be more interested in the product itself rather than the art that comes with it. In many art fields, such as concept art, the art is not even a part of the finished product, but rather a part of its process.

    Before LPs and Cinema actors and musicians were just as unknown as most artists are today.

    Both music and movies gets more exposure than art as well. You look at a picture a few seconds, then you're done. A cd you listen to for almost an hour and a movie you watch for several.

    I guess the only thing in art that can e compared to that is comics, and I think most comic book fans know the names of their favorite artists and perhaps some that are not as good, but comics aren't as universal as music.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xeon_OND View Post
    People nowadays are way more interested in photography than drawing or painting. Go to any interesting place and you'll see tons of people holding all kinds of cameras shooting like mad, but not a single one is holding a pencil or brush.
    I think that mostly has to do with it being a lot easier tho. Anyone can buy an expensive camera, throw some photoshop filters on the picture and appear very professional. Most people are too lazy to pick up a brush and learn all the things they need in order to become an artist. Which is fine. Because everyone can't be an artist...

    "I've got ham, but I'm not a hamster"

    Sketchy Link

    Portfolio
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to tobbA For This Useful Post:


  30. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    6,802
    Thanks
    2,278
    Thanked 4,259 Times in 2,074 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    People remember a rapper or musician because usually when the song is played over the air, at some point or another the radio station tells you the name of the song and artist who performed it. With current artwork, artists are generally detached from the work unless they're a studio. People make paintings for Disney, comics, movies, etc... but because of the work for hire situation, your name is generally detached.

    The only reason I was able to start finding the names of artists was that I was interested in who did the work and had to do the research on my own.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  31. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    6,802
    Thanks
    2,278
    Thanked 4,259 Times in 2,074 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Xeon_OND View Post
    People nowadays are way more interested in photography than drawing or painting. Go to any interesting place and you'll see tons of people holding all kinds of cameras shooting like mad, but not a single one is holding a pencil or brush.
    That's not necessarily photography. It's people taking snapshots for memories.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  32. The Following User Says Thank You to Arshes Nei For This Useful Post:


  33. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    171
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked 25 Times in 23 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    if you are looking for fame then i think there are defiantly easier ways to get it rather than being an artist. Fame can harm the legitimacy of your work so i would concentrate on art and forget everything else.

    comparing being a painter to being a rapper is like comparing a football player to a brick layer. x

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  34. #27
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    3,180
    Thanks
    752
    Thanked 2,356 Times in 1,211 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Truthfully, I can name more artists than rappers. If my life depended on naming a mid-list rapper I'd be dead meat.

    So clearly the problem is that you hang out with the wrong people.

    But yeah, Arshes Nei is right. There's a lot of really famous images, and if they all came with the artist's names emblazoned on them like musicians have on albums and authors have on book covers, artists would be famous. But they don't, so you might easily be familiar with an image and have no idea who actually made it.

    *** Sketchbook * Landscapes * Portfolio * Store***

    "There are two kinds of students: the self-taught and the hopeless."
    - Dr. Piotr Rudnicki
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  35. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Birth Place of the World, NYC
    Posts
    2,830
    Thanks
    2,629
    Thanked 1,044 Times in 681 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivory_Oasis View Post
    You see... that is the problem right there. Art is actually a huge normal part of life for the US (and other developed countries).

    But, it isn't in the form of a painting anymore. That isn't how people consume art anymore. I don't have a single painting on the wall (which is typical)... but I do have a TV and several computers. Why pay an artist to draw you a single pretty picture to look at when you can turn on a TV and be exposed to all kinds of modern variations of art?

    The "need" for an oil painting is not here in modern day. There are so many works of art and they are thrown at us constantly through our modern changing screens.

    BUT, the foundations of painting and making pictures like that is still very much needed (and appreciated, just look how people have responded to avatars art direction).

    The reason that the general population does not know artists name is simply a case of marketing. When a great picture is thrown at the public, it is done so under the "name" of whatever they are trying to sell. Game illustrations (like the lovely guildwars paintings), movie posters, matte paintings....all are done FOR someTHING else (instead of being presented to the public with the name of the artist).

    Basically, companies want to put all the work of marketing into something they OWN (which is whatever brand they are pushing). They don't own an artist and aren't trying to build up the artists fame (it doesn't really serve them), so they just leave that part out (or just stuff it in the credits somewhere).

    I think that is really the greater shame, that graphic artists are being lumped into a pool of nameless interchangeable workers....only recognized for what they do by other artists...
    The OP asked about living painters being famous not artists in general.

    "Everything must serve the idea. The means used to convey the idea should be the simplest and clear. Just what is required. No extra images. To me this is a universal principle of art. Saying as much as possible with a minimum of means."
    -John Huston, Director
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  36. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    195
    Thanks
    39
    Thanked 135 Times in 58 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Some clarifications are needed:

    First, I'm not asking this question because I just want to be a famous through art. If I wanted to be famous I'd shoot up a mall or something.

    Second, it's cool that you can name living artist, but you're interested in art. If I was interested in professional kite flying I'd knew the top people of the sport. I'm not interested in Kanye West's music or anything he does, yet I know his name and what he does.

    Now, all other forms of art - music, acting, literature - they are forms of entertainment. How can painting be such?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  37. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    6,802
    Thanks
    2,278
    Thanked 4,259 Times in 2,074 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by karmazon View Post
    I'm not interested in Kanye West's music or anything he does, yet I know his name and what he does.

    Now, all other forms of art - music, acting, literature - they are forms of entertainment. How can painting be such?
    You also know what Stan Winston does (did), you know what James Cameron does, you know what Pixar does, you know what Marvel, DC, Lucas Arts and Disney also do.

    Now again in terms of painting many are known into the names I mentioned above. You're not clarifying the situation, but dancing around the issue. The above are known for art, but many use a lot of people to make the art they do. due to the fact this is a mostly work for hire, the company gets the credit.

    You can think of it two ways, it's like knowing a Record company over a singer. Kanye West is in the news for what he does BESIDES the fact he's a rapper. If painters decided to crash the awards show via Kanye West style, we'd also know about them more. Not to mention they (being the musicians) are not only heard over the air but are featured in gossip, you see a music video featuring said musician. they invite him on a talk show, news interviews etc.

    I mean unless you want to go the Bob Ross route, the art is really what is seen, however it's usually done as a group effort.

    Here's the other way to look at it, can you name any famous background singer? (And there are a lot). That's basically what the collective of artists/painters are working in the industry, they're background singers for a company.

    Let's look at a Painter like Ernie Barnes (now deceased). What made me aware of him, was when Jimmy Walker was playing the son JJ in the TV show Good Times - he was a painter. It was Ernie Barnes who had done the actual paintings, but they needed JJ to look like he painted something. Ernie Barnes also did sports illustrations and Olympics posters/murals.

    So why is X person famous over a painter, simply because of TV/face time. Painters are busy painting, so that their works can be seen. Musicians in this day and age are needed to have face time to push records, after all video killed the radio star.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Register

Developed Actively by vBSocial.com
The Art Department
SpringOfSea's Sketchbook