Stumbled on your channel and randomly watched bits and pieces - it looks fascinating and worth a more systematic run-through. Of course, what everyone wants to know about nowadays is AI art... :-)
No Gottfired Helnwein. He gets lumped in with hyper realists and photorealists. I don't consider him either, although he shares similarities in techniques. What do you think of him?
Seems pretty ignorant to say that academic art is "done" and "passe" considering the large, but quiet revival of ateliers going on right now. There's a huge international community of people involved with and carrying on the tradition of classical realism. A lot of folks are fed up with the theory-heavy, substance and skill - lacking art education you'll get in contemporary universities. Why's there no mention of Richard Lack, Juliette Aristades, Jeremy Lipking, Cesar Santos, Daniel Graves, and countless others? I like most of these lectures, but I think this really shows the bias that exists against certain ideas in the art cannon as determined by the establishment. Who decides what's over or passe?
Well amazing that this lecture is here, and every better to read your critique and know even more names of artists to learn about. Your interesting comment just goes to show that there is a wealth of information out there for people interested in learning about art especially realism. In some areas there are not many free talks available and as well some do not let people bring their kids so lone parents have alot of difficulty going to these things. Thats what's so great about having these lectures here. To get an introduction or even one opinion. That fact that you offer criticism reminds us to think critically about the art opinions we here and read.
If you say that artist’s paint in a photo-realistic way because they find it rewarding to meet the challenge of it,fine. There are all sorts of challenges: building a house of cards, pie eating contests etc. When a painter produces a photo-realistic piece,only the challenge of making the subject look exactly like the real object is met. There is no art to it. It’s a form of showing off technical skills. “See what I can do!?” There’s no interpretation of reality. There is only reproduction of reality. It takes a technician to do that, not an artist. If I make an exact copy of a Cézanne still life, who is the artist me or Cézanne? My copy shows skill but not creativity. And if there is no creativity, there is no real art.
You explained semiotics as well, so would you say you think your audience is too stupid ? Or maybe you both just recognize that it's unfamiliar jargon.
Your lectures are exceptional.
Chuck Close and Caravaggio got me to start painting and really get into it
love your vids been binge watching everything art history to improve my painting it has helped a lot!
Love this topic. great lecture!!
A very, very interesting lecture
You are too good sir..
Best to read The Name of the Rose, by Eco
when is the next section on contemporary art coming? i love these lectures!
Neo Expressionism? looking forward to your next lecture. In any case thanks for posting the previous lectures.
Stumbled on your channel and randomly watched bits and pieces - it looks fascinating and worth a more systematic run-through.
Of course, what everyone wants to know about nowadays is AI art... :-)
Great channel!!
Why is the last lecture missing? I watched the last 2720 lecture instead which I suppose would be similar..
love your lil rants haha!
Well hello . Woke up to this 😎
No Gottfired Helnwein. He gets lumped in with hyper realists and photorealists. I don't consider him either, although he shares similarities in techniques. What do you think of him?
Seems pretty ignorant to say that academic art is "done" and "passe" considering the large, but quiet revival of ateliers going on right now. There's a huge international community of people involved with and carrying on the tradition of classical realism. A lot of folks are fed up with the theory-heavy, substance and skill - lacking art education you'll get in contemporary universities. Why's there no mention of Richard Lack, Juliette Aristades, Jeremy Lipking, Cesar Santos, Daniel Graves, and countless others? I like most of these lectures, but I think this really shows the bias that exists against certain ideas in the art cannon as determined by the establishment. Who decides what's over or passe?
Well amazing that this lecture is here, and every better to read your critique and know even more names of artists to learn about. Your interesting comment just goes to show that there is a wealth of information out there for people interested in learning about art especially realism. In some areas there are not many free talks available and as well some do not let people bring their kids so lone parents have alot of difficulty going to these things. Thats what's so great about having these lectures here. To get an introduction or even one opinion. That fact that you offer criticism reminds us to think critically about the art opinions we here and read.
Are there other lectures after this one?
Sir could you plz teach us Indian art history
If you say that artist’s paint in a photo-realistic way because they find it rewarding to meet the challenge of it,fine.
There are all sorts of challenges: building a house of cards, pie eating contests etc.
When a painter produces a photo-realistic piece,only the challenge of making the subject look exactly like the real object is met.
There is no art to it.
It’s a form of showing off technical skills.
“See what I can do!?”
There’s no interpretation of reality. There is only reproduction of reality.
It takes a technician to do that, not an artist.
If I make an exact copy of a Cézanne still life, who is the artist me or Cézanne?
My copy shows skill but not creativity. And if there is no creativity, there is no real art.
Identity art
Just subscribed, awesome lectures! Would love to share my art with you is there any way we can get into contact?
You explained semiotics as well, so would you say you think your audience is too stupid ? Or maybe you both just recognize that it's unfamiliar jargon.