Insanity at a painting
Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop

Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Insanity at a painting

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    australia mate
    Posts
    1,624
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked 78 Times in 25 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    Insanity at a painting

    Hey guys. Anyone up for some contraversy? Here's an oil painting done by a Jan Nelson. Had to write a response to it and do a visual respnse to it for some competition slash school asignment.

    My visual response...

    and written...

    Response

    Everyone else in my class thinks that this painting is some strange insight into how technology is corrupting our youth. They look at this image and let their imaginations run amok to come up with some hair-brained interpretation of the painting, which is very simple, but executed so that it appears to be more of a photo than an image. I admit that this would be a very time-consuming exercise, reproducing a photograph in a large canvas, which the artist has obviously done, but is there any real skill involved? Anyone with any experience at all can reproduce a photo, and my visual response to the image took only an hour or two to produce, and it is almost identical to the work, even though I did not trace or use any methods other than a critical eye. Admittedly it is alot smaller than the actual piece, but one could argue that it is easier to include detail on a larger work than on a small area. I would be more impressed if the artist had painted something in front of her, or even something from her imagination. It takes alot more skill to convert the 3D perception of our eyes into a 2D image on paper or canvas, than it does to copy an already 2D image produced by a camera. Further research into the artist, Jan Nelson, revealed that she does alot of photographic work, so I would not be suprised if this foray into oil painting was based on a favourite photo that she took herself.

    Despite my distaste for copying images from photographs, and that is what it is, the artist seems to show a good command of the oil medium. The image however, does not include alot of perspective or mastery of difficult concepts such as placing folds in clothes and appropriate shadows on an imagined figure. If I wanted to see a photo-realistic image, I would look at a photo. Photo-realism has it's place where it is a demonstration of the skill of an artist, namely when one is drawing/painting what you can see. Overcoming innate mechanisms such as symbolism and applying a 2D plane to a 3D image is definately a task that requires alot more skill and expertise than simply reproducing a photograph.

    Overall I really think that this artist has taken a shortcut past learning such lessons as anatomy, cloth dynamics and light and shadow, in order to churn out yet another unexciting piece to clog up this nations galleries, and keep the real talent under the table.


    Yes, I took some liberty in describing the quality of my work....it's...uhh...poetic license...

    Whaddya think?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Malmö, Sweden
    Posts
    1,125
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I think it's a good painting, and that it does speak to me somehow. It says to me "kids today are fucked up and they play videogames and watch teletubbies too much". If that is what Jan Nelson wanted the painting to say, then mission accomplished. So what if she used a photo, or if she doesn't know anatomy or how to draw a cube in perfect perspective? To most people it's the final result that matters, not the process behind it. Most people that care about the process are artists themself, and i doubt Jan Nelson is doing her art for such a limited crowd.

    Hmmm.. i guess my point is, that knowing anatomy and stuff like that is very important for most artists here, including myself, but i don't think it's the
    one and only way to go. If you want Jan Nelson out of the museums, you better learn to paint really fucking good and then produce art that communicates to the viewer atleast as good as hers do.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    40
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    It does seem like everyone in school wants to look deeper into things then they realy are ...it is what it is and you take it in how ever you may. I think that's why it works, you can look at it and think nothing of it or you can go head over heals with the "deeper" meaning behind the whole thing, if there is one.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    986
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I believe there are no shortcuts in art. Copying a picture, using grids etc, are tools used for drawing successfully. You may feel there is no pride, or skill involved with the techniques, but the artist who created the piece may not feel the same way.

    About the meaning...I suppose its like symbols in books. You may think you found a symbol, but maybe your just over analyzing. You don't really know unless you ask the author.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    australia mate
    Posts
    1,624
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked 78 Times in 25 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Yeah, i guess i'm just a bit disillusioned...oh well, nice to hear what others think anyway.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

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
  •