Art

[Bruv]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

Listen, I did art school, and was never well accepted when suggesting a piece of art, was not art. It has no defining line, but I am more than sure a lot of people are just plain hoodwinked.

"I did art school"
But did you have an artistic bent ?
Sounds like "I did London" as an American tourist might say.
I worked and lived in London for many years, and never visited the Tate.
When I eventually did I was amazed and confused and enthralled in equal measure.
Some of it was laughable....as Art.
But.........I stood and looked to try and see why it was there.
Some still failed to impress......some I thought was not Art as I knew it.....but never the less worthy of being there.

It is all in the eye of the beholder....isn't it ?

[Sweetpea]

Yes. as I said, no defining line. Yes, I do have an artistic bent having grown up in a family of professional artists.

[Churchill]

He's just discovered something else to be pedantic about since the Hindley thread. Bit cliched imho. Next we'll all have to crack open the red wine and waffle about it for weeks.

[poppy]

First piece is OK, an interior designers dream, they went for that style in droves. If I remember rightly it is quite large, they looked good on the wall of some luxury New York loft apartment.
The second piece is great a masterpiece but photographic, at the time it was painted you could not have made a good photographic record of things the way we can now.
Today art needs to be more than the sum of the parts, if you want a photographic record you can now use a decent camera and digital get something amazing.
Art needs to be a little more now. Needs to show the soul or emotion or just something a camera couldn't get.
The Constable rooms at the Tate left me bored to tears, wall after wall of light effects.
Where as the preraphaelites like Rossetti, had me spellbound. As did Dali, Gaughan, Degas, Monet, Manet and the lovely Vincent, his starry night bowled me over.
For old masters I love Titian, the use of white under clear glaze colours to lift them makes his paintings glow.
Oops sorry starting to go off on one.
What I want to say is art is different things to different people.
I loath and detest Hurst, I don't care for Emin but others do.Who am Ito say what anyone should like

I love this Monet, makes want to sit in the sun beside the lilly pond and dip my toes in th ewater

[Sweetpea]

You see, it's all opinion. I find Monet a bit messy and wishy washy, but marvel at power of the (probably Percheron) horse in the foreground of the painting I posted.

But I love Vermeer

[terrywit]

whats tittle?

nun peddling smack?

[poppy]

Originally Posted by terrywit

whats tittle?

nun peddling smack?

very good Tel, but just a normal run o the mill, well heeled woman of that ime.
I think that one is just called, woman with scales, or possibly ballances, cant quite remember.
Again it is the light thing using loads of white, and clear glazes as onthe blue fabric high lights, love this style

[Sweetpea]

Light is Vermeer's speciality. Pretty sure it's 'Titled: Woman with Scales.

[poppy]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

Light is Vermeer's speciality. Pretty sure it's 'Titled: Woman with Scales.

yes pretty certain that is the name, I love playing with light.

many people try to do this.
Some of the modern humorous artists do it too.
Beryl Cook used to hang out and paint the locals in some of our old haunts in Plymouth. She though, an entirely different style used the same tricks to get that glow of light.
I wish I could master it, I nearly but not quite bring it off in my humble stumblings, one day maybe.

[poppy]

This Dali is amazing the way he uses light to define Narcissus one image from the other