I find it hilarious when women say "I find it hilarious..." and then say something that is quite the opposite of funny. I also find it hilarious that you care so much. I also find it hilarious that my comment is ironic.
+Ashley Casey I think they are being sarcastic, and dissing the snobs of New York and what not by calling this "bad art". Many of the paintings express a deeper meaning, which main stream modern community was supposed to, but failed at delivering.
I would give money for Good Art....i like Van Gogh f.e. Or Roy Lichtenstein......it hasn’t to be ultra realistic but needs a touch of „not everybody can do it“ or just an Great Unique Concept.
I really loved those pieces of art and I'm an artist myself! Lots of those are rookie mistakes and with training could be fixed. But tbh, I really liked a lot of them and would love to have them. The effort and sincereity are what matters.
modern and conceptual art are from two different time periods, "modern conceptual art" is a misnomer. modern is pre ~1965, conceptual is after and until today.
Yeah. The only difference is one group of people are trying to be good and the other group aren't. Way harsh. I'm just going to wash my mouth out with soap.
Some of this art is bad, yes, but other pieces have a uniqueness that is actually quite expressive. I thought a couple of the pieces were good enough to non-ironically hang in a home or even in an exhibit of lesser known artists. Although non of the art shows mastery of the canvas, they all show more promise than the "art" that plasters the walls of today's modern art museums. Money and prestige have ruined the art world and has made it inaccessible to those who aren't money launderers or pretentious enough to like objectively bad art. This exhibit is a breath of fresh air and I commend the curator as well as the artists who have made it possible
"I've seen worse at contemporary art museums." I can't even tell the difference between contemporary art and this, at least it's not canned shit and heaps of garbage.
The effort that has been put in is really what makes it remarkable. So many movies suck really bad, still a whole lot of work hours and people involved.
Harry Munter There is a reason why he became so famous. When he was 5 he finished one of his father's painting and with 18 he won a art competition or something like that. But he wasn't interested in drawing life like so he created his own style.
Picasso is a master in the world of art not only because he created cubism but he was a great artist before he developed his own style and that is why he became famous. He was recognize first a as a great painter and Lester also known for abstract. So don’t say anything about him if you don’t know
One day they might discover that one of these paintings is actually done by a famous abstract expressionist artist and is a lost work of theirs worth millions of dollars. A lot of these look like famous painters like Matisse or Willem de Kooning. But seriously though, I don't think anything could really be called "bad" art. She said it was about giving the artists the right to fail. I don't think any of these were "failures". Putting aside the whole topic of making money from art, or how much art sells for and all that, putting that aside completely for a moment, I don't think anyone can say a painting is "bad" or not. Of course, it is an objective thing of whether a painting looks like a photo or really realistic, or not. Either a painting looks really realistic and accurate, or it doesn't. But just because it doesn't, it seems silly to say that it's "bad" art. Again, completely putting aside the whole thing of making money or making a living from your art, the only thing that matters about art is whether the person felt joy when they were making their art, whether they felt like they were expressing something deep within them. Whether they felt just a little bit more alive while they were painting. If someone paints a painting that looks really realistic, and really skillful and accurate and all that, but it was complete drudgery for them to make it, they didn't have any fun making it and they just wanted to finish it and get it over with so they could show it off to someone, that is a failure in my opinion. That is completely against the whole point of what art is supposed to be about. Art is supposed to make the artist feel just a little bit more alive while they are creating it. That is the marker of good or bad art. Not what anyone else thinks about it. But how much joy and how much more it made you feel alive when you created it. Art is more about the artist than it is about the audience who may or may not see the art itself.. Art is not about the finished product that may either get praise from some and criticism from others. That's not important. Art is more about the process itself of creating art, than it is about the finished product. I got the sense from a lot of these paintings that the people who painted them were having a blast when they made them, ha ha. And that's all that really matters at the end of the day, at the end of the road. Everybody should paint a picture every now and then, and not worry about whether or not it is "bad" art and will get into a museum like this one day. All that matters is that someone paint a picture and have a little fun. What someone else thinks about the painting is really just secondary. That's just opinions and pretentiousness.
I really like the idea behind it all. "We're celebrating an artist's right to fail", its a beautiful irony. Because every artist starts from somewhere, and they celebrate it by exhibiting their works to give appreciation on their path to the arts
I love how you're allowed to touch or get close to the paintings. It's makes this museum less stuffy. Ironically artists like Picasso at some point had their paintings turned down by museums so the rejected artists created an alternative art event exhibit of rejected art next to the museum. The funny part is, most of the people during the event went to their exhibit rather than the "real acceptible" museums 😂. Serves them right!
thing is, if some of these paintings had been done by established artists working a scuzzy anti- aesthetic - they could be worth a lot of money. But that's the trouble with being unestablished - first you gotta get your degree and have a few shows before your bad art is taken seriously.
The one with the fellow in the coconut I find both funny and rather well done. The Pals one with the monkey and clown looks like a book cover for Curious George..
The quality of the art is subjective. It all depends on the viewer's eye. Are they saying abstract and minimalistic works such as those of Picasso are bad art?
i think what they meant by bad art is art that seems to intend to do something, art that one can see the artist's intention, but fails to deliver it and ends up being awkward
I don't think these artworks are bad. They are just someone's interception. I think this lady is actually rather rude, not wanting to acknowledge that art isn't perfect.
+Levi Ackerman, she is entitled to her own opinion, as an artist I can admit that not all of my works I produce are perfect either. If everyone had to acknowledge that all pieces of art work are without a flaw then art school would serve no purpose.
Levi Ackerman that's how stupid or ignorant people are and I'm already afraid to put my art in a festival show or gallery in a gallery I love.people just mean and don't care , makes me sick what people say to others work even if it's a famous art.
"I don't think these artworks are bad. They are just someone's interception." Uh...buddy? Interpretation + perception =/= "interception". That's a different word that means a totally different thing. "Artwork "is also already plural, you don't need an extra s. Their artwork might not be bad but your English is pretty hilarious.
There's a difference between interpretation, an artist having their own style and unique form or art, and artists that simply lack knowledge of basic anatomy, color theory, and depth
At the Detroit Institute of Art they have on display a giant red canvice at least 10 feet tall with a white stripe down the middle. If that is something that qualities to be in a museum then the artwork in this video deserves to be in a museum as well. Most of the art shown wasn't that bad.
I hate CBS Sunday morning because my mom watches it every Sunday and it reminds me that I have to wake up early the next day and go out in public and be a human being
I love it. I've been an artist since childhood. And I love art like this. There's an artist that buys thrift store art and makes it worse, I can't remember his name though.
Even though its called as bad art, its still pretty historic to me,the effort and passion is still inscribe in those 'bad art' , they are still a masterpiece
I think some of the paintings are pretty good
yeah
+Bruce John Wayne thats the point
+svenlittlecross apart from "theres a fucking human being creating this stuff for intimate and honest reason", quality next to that is irrelevant
me too
Well executed but awful concepts
I find it hilarious how they blur out paintings of nipples....
But forgot the one at 4:18
TH-cam policy..?
Free the nipples activist
Mastermind12358 it's time to fap
I find it hilarious when women say "I find it hilarious..." and then say something that is quite the opposite of funny.
I also find it hilarious that you care so much.
I also find it hilarious that my comment is ironic.
Needs more deviantART Sonic OC section...
we don’t go there
i applaud everyone who’s art is on that museum. Even though their art is considered bad, at least they did something and tried. That is so precious.
they seriously had to censor,, it's art holy shit
Pambie yes, but if it goes against youtubes guidelines, then they have to censor it.
My impression of TH-cam: _"Viulence, guuuuud, nipples, baaaaaad!"_
Pleasekillme I don't think it's against TH-cam guidelines.
Maybe the nipples were swastikas
I felt like. People have seen worse.
Some of these are better than modern art
You dare compare the nonsense that is contemporary art, to these masterpieces? Shame on you!
Elliott all of them are as good as modern art and wayyyyyyy better than contemporary or post- modern "art".
Ikr XD
maybe if any of you had a shred of knowledge on modern art you would post comments a little less generic
Mysllaw M. Well I can see where he is coming from. Popular art (mainly contemporary or modern) looks the same and if you ask me it looks Stupid
A few of these aren't that bad tbh XD
+14freckles14 3:09 i want that one
1:44 is my personal favorite
True
I feel they are bad, but they are also pretty original and their have their own 'spirit'. You can tell that it's not a random selection.
Am I the only one who would buy this art?
+Ashley Casey I think they are being sarcastic, and dissing the snobs of New York and what not by calling this "bad art". Many of the paintings express a deeper meaning, which main stream modern community was supposed to, but failed at delivering.
please do!! help your local art economy!
The very last one before the the end of the video was prime. (A sun with a face).
I would not pay for it. For None of it....
I would give money for Good Art....i like Van Gogh f.e. Or Roy Lichtenstein......it hasn’t to be ultra realistic but needs a touch of „not everybody can do it“ or just an Great Unique Concept.
"Few works meet the museums low standards."
LOL
where my kpop people at
I have find my people.
I have find my people.
I have find my kind of people.
ayyylmao kpop
I really loved those pieces of art and I'm an artist myself! Lots of those are rookie mistakes and with training could be fixed. But tbh, I really liked a lot of them and would love to have them. The effort and sincereity are what matters.
I agree. I have been painting abstract art for ten years. I didn't think these were so bad!
I prefer these paintings one thousand times over the pretentious modern conceptual art.
Larry Myers Your hemorroyds must be bleeding bad!
modern and conceptual art are from two different time periods, "modern conceptual art" is a misnomer. modern is pre ~1965, conceptual is after and until today.
Larry Myers lmaaaoooo
Museum of bad art? Surely they mean the Tate modern.
pooyah666 ohh no wonder 1960s art sucks! Didn't know that was also mondern art.
We already have museums of bad art they're called modern art museums
Modern art is easily worse.
Yeah. The only difference is one group of people are trying to be good and the other group aren't. Way harsh. I'm just going to wash my mouth out with soap.
Are the artist in modern art dumb or are we dumb that just cant understand the meaning of the painting?
Haha so true. Check out fArtism.org
wtf i see you everywhere
She should print out DeviantArt vore art screenshots and pin them up.
Oh, hey! Didn't expect to meet another plate of spaghetti here. :)
@@ieatspaghettiwhenimsad.2159 lol
still better than modern art
+nachoolo YES
josh71111 Nope, modern art is an overpriced piece of shat.
you can buy sme of that abstract art in IKEA for 15 bucks
josh71111 No it's definitely not beautiful.
*post modern art
Some of this art is bad, yes, but other pieces have a uniqueness that is actually quite expressive. I thought a couple of the pieces were good enough to non-ironically hang in a home or even in an exhibit of lesser known artists. Although non of the art shows mastery of the canvas, they all show more promise than the "art" that plasters the walls of today's modern art museums. Money and prestige have ruined the art world and has made it inaccessible to those who aren't money launderers or pretentious enough to like objectively bad art. This exhibit is a breath of fresh air and I commend the curator as well as the artists who have made it possible
#freeartnipples
"I've seen worse at contemporary art museums." I can't even tell the difference between contemporary art and this, at least it's not canned shit and heaps of garbage.
The effort that has been put in is really what makes it remarkable. So many movies suck really bad, still a whole lot of work hours and people involved.
If Picasso signed one of these paintings it would be considered a masterpiece and worth millions. Contemporary Art is sickeningly pretentious.
Dan Arthur I agree, I agree, I agree, oh do I ever agree with you, soooooooo much.
Harry Munter There is a reason why he became so famous. When he was 5 he finished one of his father's painting and with 18 he won a art competition or something like that. But he wasn't interested in drawing life like so he created his own style.
Mood
Picasso is a master in the world of art not only because he created cubism but he was a great artist before he developed his own style and that is why he became famous. He was recognize first a as a great painter and Lester also known for abstract. So don’t say anything about him if you don’t know
how is picasso contemporary ? lmaooo know your onions before stating your opinion love
One day they might discover that one of these paintings is actually done by a famous abstract expressionist artist and is a lost work of theirs worth millions of dollars. A lot of these look like famous painters like Matisse or Willem de Kooning.
But seriously though, I don't think anything could really be called "bad" art. She said it was about giving the artists the right to fail. I don't think any of these were "failures". Putting aside the whole topic of making money from art, or how much art sells for and all that, putting that aside completely for a moment, I don't think anyone can say a painting is "bad" or not.
Of course, it is an objective thing of whether a painting looks like a photo or really realistic, or not. Either a painting looks really realistic and accurate, or it doesn't. But just because it doesn't, it seems silly to say that it's "bad" art. Again, completely putting aside the whole thing of making money or making a living from your art, the only thing that matters about art is whether the person felt joy when they were making their art, whether they felt like they were expressing something deep within them. Whether they felt just a little bit more alive while they were painting. If someone paints a painting that looks really realistic, and really skillful and accurate and all that, but it was complete drudgery for them to make it, they didn't have any fun making it and they just wanted to finish it and get it over with so they could show it off to someone, that is a failure in my opinion. That is completely against the whole point of what art is supposed to be about.
Art is supposed to make the artist feel just a little bit more alive while they are creating it. That is the marker of good or bad art. Not what anyone else thinks about it. But how much joy and how much more it made you feel alive when you created it. Art is more about the artist than it is about the audience who may or may not see the art itself.. Art is not about the finished product that may either get praise from some and criticism from others. That's not important. Art is more about the process itself of creating art, than it is about the finished product. I got the sense from a lot of these paintings that the people who painted them were having a blast when they made them, ha ha. And that's all that really matters at the end of the day, at the end of the road.
Everybody should paint a picture every now and then, and not worry about whether or not it is "bad" art and will get into a museum like this one day. All that matters is that someone paint a picture and have a little fun. What someone else thinks about the painting is really just secondary. That's just opinions and pretentiousness.
Robert so basically by your definition art is selfish.
Oof, as an “artist” this make me feel pretty insecure
As long as the art you make makes you happy it dosen't matter if it's "good" or "bad" what matters is that you had fun creating it .
I really like the idea behind it all. "We're celebrating an artist's right to fail", its a beautiful irony. Because every artist starts from somewhere, and they celebrate it by exhibiting their works to give appreciation on their path to the arts
About half of them are actually good. Especially 0:53 and 3:23. I would downright buy Lucy in the Fields.
Yelling Hayfire the one at 3:23 is terrible
Still better than most contemporary art.
All*.
I love how you're allowed to touch or get close to the paintings. It's makes this museum less stuffy. Ironically artists like Picasso at some point had their paintings turned down by museums so the rejected artists created an alternative art event exhibit of rejected art next to the museum. The funny part is, most of the people during the event went to their exhibit rather than the "real acceptible" museums 😂. Serves them right!
Touching messes up the painting I'm surprised they got to touch the painting
finally a place to get my art into
your ordinary lynx same
Same *cry*
thing is, if some of these paintings had been done by established artists working a scuzzy anti- aesthetic - they could be worth a lot of money. But that's the trouble with being unestablished - first you gotta get your degree and have a few shows before your bad art is taken seriously.
I actually like the man with the poofy disco hat.
A lot of this stuff is good.
Idk if theyre the only museum with "bad art", the MoMA has some pretty questionable things
My daughter sent me a link of another video by this creator! This stuff is absolutely what the kids and I do all the time! This is hilarious!!!
Great concept Museum Of Bad Art!! ,,,can't wait to see my donation Green Wet Suit Couple Romancing the Swamp!!
So it's a family refrigerator?
That coconut bathtub one was good. :)
This makes me so happy. I love this lady - "Celebrating the artist's right to fail." :)
The painting at 0:09 of a lady with a green vest sitting on a red chair is quite lovely. It doesn't belong there. I'd love to buy it, actually.
The fantastic museum is a paradise, I love ❤️ the beautiful and amazing Artworks ❤❤❤
I'm gonna send them all my drawings. Oh my god i loved it so much
Imagine getting called up: "Hey, we want to display your art in the museum of bad art."
3:22 Makes me think of my grandmother and her love for flowers.
I liked almost all of these?
This cures my cancer.
All of those are better than "modern art"
The man in the puffy disco hat was way too good.
Anyway, I fail to see the point of this museum. Any modern art museum is more than bad enough.
0:59 "I've seen worse at contemporary art museums!" Dang, you beat me to it.
The one with the fellow in the coconut I find both funny and rather well done. The Pals one with the monkey and clown looks like a book cover for Curious George..
some of these are actually amazing and deserve to be in museums
These type of places will inspire a hidden artist in a person
Honestly, I would visit this museum everyday. I enjoy looking at artists work.
I love it. It reminds me of my art. Soon as I get money I'll set up a museum for Houston's bad art community.
The quality of the art is subjective. It all depends on the viewer's eye. Are they saying abstract and minimalistic works such as those of Picasso are bad art?
i think what they meant by bad art is art that seems to intend to do something, art that one can see the artist's intention, but fails to deliver it and ends up being awkward
I'd abasolutley want to have that piece at 4:20 .... noteably, it is the picture at 4:20 I like most. I see what u did there.
Thank you. I need my own Art gallery here in Jamaica
These people dont understand how brilliant some of these pieces are.
I don't think these artworks are bad. They are just someone's interception. I think this lady is actually rather rude, not wanting to acknowledge that art isn't perfect.
+Levi Ackerman, she is entitled to her own opinion, as an artist I can admit that not all of my works I produce are perfect either. If everyone had to acknowledge that all pieces of art work are without a flaw then art school would serve no purpose.
Levi Ackerman that's how stupid or ignorant people are and I'm already afraid to put my art in a festival show or gallery in a gallery I love.people just mean and don't care , makes me sick what people say to others work even if it's a famous art.
"I don't think these artworks are bad. They are just someone's interception."
Uh...buddy? Interpretation + perception =/= "interception". That's a different word that means a totally different thing. "Artwork "is also already plural, you don't need an extra s.
Their artwork might not be bad but your English is pretty hilarious.
Levi Ackerman you must be a contemporary artist if you think this isnt trash
There's a difference between interpretation, an artist having their own style and unique form or art, and artists that simply lack knowledge of basic anatomy, color theory, and depth
Big Fan of Bad Art. I would buy a paint by number kit of an Art piece displayed at the museum.
“found where?” “in the trash” 😭😭😭
I love this idea so much!
the one at 4:20 is really beautiful in my opinion
This is actually really nice. I'd love to visit
Have they seen deviant art?
I have one of these in my hometown, too. It’s called the walls of the art corridor in my high school.
At the Detroit Institute of Art they have on display a giant red canvice at least 10 feet tall with a white stripe down the middle. If that is something that qualities to be in a museum then the artwork in this video deserves to be in a museum as well. Most of the art shown wasn't that bad.
Might be an omage to The White Stripes, they are a band from Detroit and that's their aesthetic and color pallet pretty much.
I hate CBS Sunday morning because my mom watches it every Sunday and it reminds me that I have to wake up early the next day and go out in public and be a human being
Still better than so called contemporary art
*insert "modern" art critique from people that don't even know the difference between modern and contemporary"
Looks a lot better than most modern art I’ve seen. At least they didn’t just toss paint on a canvass!
The art is not good art, but the display of the art is good art.
All of these art is way better than what i can do.
I think it's better than most art.
This is actually better than "Art" for sale displayed in hospitals.
the Madonna and child one was my favorite
The one with the lighthouse didn't seem so bad!
these look a hundred times better than modern art right now which is so recognized around the globe
Oh man how do I send them my masterpieces of narnia on a lobster, backwards centaur, and fish legs
Wow finally a place where my art can be appreciated
The one in a coconut is actually really cool
It’s my favorite
At 4:20 the painting looks like a pretty sophisticated expressionistic piece of art.
Welllll... the one at 4:21 looks cool to me.
Better than most of the modern contemporary garbage in museums nowadays🤷♂️
Better than modern art.
A lot of these painting are really good though
The miniature dude in coconut is actually highkey amazing and I want that painting
Considering blue line, blue and yellow, blank canvas which sell for millions this seems like a great collection.
I would gladly buy something like this over those modern art.
Love it. All much better than anything I could make.
Better than any modern art museum.
The painting of the lady in the field is actually a nice painting to me.
the sun face in the end really got me
Come on, some of those works are excellent and creative.
Lucy in the field. The wind seems to be blowing in both directions. Well indeed.
I love it. I've been an artist since childhood. And I love art like this. There's an artist that buys thrift store art and makes it worse, I can't remember his name though.
"Whopping $13 offered for return of prized Bad painting."
I like how every event unfold around MOBA sounds like a satirical comedy movie.
Even though its called as bad art, its still pretty historic to me,the effort and passion is still inscribe in those 'bad art' , they are still a masterpiece
Man I would be honored if my art hung in that place!!!!
Finally! A gallery I can apply to!
I absolutely love this
Finally, a museum for me
That bad art she is displaying is a million times better than anything I have seen in a modern art museum.
some how better than most modern art