FAQ  •  Register  •  Login

Define "Artistic"

Moderators: Brendan, Phan-Tom, duey

<<

AvatarZ

User avatar

Highest Rank Possible
Highest Rank Possible

Posts: 1116

Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:41 pm

Location: Tujunga, CA

Post Thu Apr 17, 2008 8:31 pm

Define "Artistic"

Today I visited a Hammer Museum, one near UCLA (the university I'm hoping to be accepted in by :D ).
Saw some very inspirational and creative arts there. Many of them have a theme, a story, a consistency, a historical background, an expression...etc.
Then I started to ask myself, does having craftsmanship and technical skills really make one "Artistic"? If so, then everyone, with enough practice, can be artistic! When being asked what kind of words are associated with "artist", most people would describe them as "creative, imaginative, inspiring, expressive" and such, you don't see much people saying "great drawing/painting skills...".
I used to believe one's an artist as long as he enjoys art, but now I no longer think I deserve this title, at least for now. I've been drawing only portraits of people, so what they're rendered in a seemingly "professional" way? What concepts are expressed that way?
How can you express yourself in an inventive way? (Riding bicycles on country roads and embracing the nature don't seem to work for me)

Please do not feel offended by what I said, these critisms are more toward myself than toward you. If you do get mad by what I said, I apologize for I really don't mean to.
I'm not a good artist, but i'm good at pretending to be one...


My DA: http://lordavatarz.deviantart.com/
<<

quicksdraw

User avatar

Respected Member
Respected Member

Posts: 466

Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:44 pm

Location: LANSING, MICHIGAN

Post Fri Apr 18, 2008 2:17 am

Beats the s hi t out of me. Someone that makes a works of art thats good in the category that they are good at,,,,is ARTISTIC!
Last edited by quicksdraw on Mon Apr 21, 2008 12:38 am, edited 2 times in total.
<<

jadelu7

User avatar

Monitor Tanned
Monitor Tanned

Posts: 146

Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:00 pm

Location: Luxembourg

Post Fri Apr 18, 2008 4:28 am

I can relate to feeling very non-artistic (non-original, non-creative and a whole lot of other "non-" stuff) after seeing some spectacular artist's fantasy put on a piece of canvas or paper...which is probably why I stopped drawing completely for 7 years. Then again, I see some art that is as simple as it gets (Mark Rothko's color blocs is an example)...something a 5-year-old could come up with if given a set of colors. So, in my very uninformed opinion, the word "artistic" can have a broad sense...but essentially it comes down to whether you are able to make YOUR art YOUR OWN, i.e., have your own style and reason for doing it, make your art elicit emotions from spectators. And supreme skills here are secondary because a work of art can be technically perfect yet emotionally dead/flat. In fact, I believe that concentrating on honing one's skills to superhuman level (especially in photo-realism drawings) may become counterproductive, as you risk turning into nothing more than a high quality photocopying/painting/drawing-machine, forgetting about the WHY you're doing the particular piece of art.
Who dares, wins
<<

straycat

User avatar

The Resident Critic
The Resident Critic

Posts: 2816

Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 5:26 pm

Location: Glendale

Post Fri Apr 18, 2008 4:43 am

I totally agree with jadelu7...especially about just being a human copying machine. :roll:
But in my case...I don't have a particular style.
Maybe I have but never liked it.
So, my style is probably to copy....
and I won't consider myself an artist..probably a renderer ? :roll:
I'm open to criticisms...keep them coming.


My DA: http://straycat27.deviantart.com/

CLICK to go to the LITTER BOX.
Image
<<

mangamaniac

User avatar

Addicted
Addicted

Posts: 98

Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 1:24 pm

Post Tue Apr 22, 2008 2:32 pm

To me, every piece of art (painting, drawing, sculpting, inking,etc) has to be created bye someone artistic. I'm not excuding copying some picture or anything, cause I think every person that copy a picture copies the way he see's that picture and that's the artistic touch of it. Even the masterpieces with have so many details in them... they reflect the way the autor see's life (he probably see's every little details of objects and everything). Every piece of art is unique and originality can be seen in each and everyone of them !! Maybe you don't imagine something when you're copying but you're always putting your own touch!!
<<

JCR3WS

Highest Rank Possible
Highest Rank Possible

Posts: 1020

Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:00 pm

Location: New Harmony, IN

Post Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:34 pm

my guess would be having these abilities to create, design and produce would be artistic.

if someone can think, hmm a circle and 4 straight lines could make a stick person... that would be creative, then they would design it out in their head how it should look, then put it on paper, that would make them artistic for being able to do something like that.

i guess it would at least,lol.... my .02

Z ur an artist man, dont throw your self out the window as a waste
<<

thiagoleal

User avatar

newbie
newbie

Posts: 18

Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:17 am

Post Wed Apr 23, 2008 8:33 am

I think in a more direct way. Since Ricciotto Canudo from Italy published Reflections on the Seventh Art, people got to consider seven kind of art: music, dance, painting/drawing, sculpture, drama, literature and cinema. Later, photography was considered the 8th art. From this point, things got out of control. Comics, or graphic novels, got the concept of 9th art and until video game was turned into the 10th art, with digital art coming as 11th.

I'm more fundamentalist. To me, there's only eight kinds of art, the seven originals plus photography. These "modern" art are just adpatations of the first ones. Eg: comics to me are a variety of drawing, that is a plastic art as painting. Digital art too - it's our modern and eletronic form of plastic art.

So, anything that you can include in this concepts, to me is art.

But that can be GOOD art or BAD art.

Music is a form of art. So, any music is art. But Britney Spears is a very poor and bad kind of art while Pink Floyd is a good form of art. Ludwing von Bethoven, better art.

Cinema? Art. National Lampoon's films are art. Bad art. Francis Ford Coppola is good art.

And that you can apply in everything.
Thiago Leal
João Pessoa, Brazil
http://thiagoleal.deviantart.com

Image
<<

mangamaniac

User avatar

Addicted
Addicted

Posts: 98

Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 1:24 pm

Post Mon Apr 28, 2008 3:31 pm

The good and bad art you're talkind about is REALLY relative to every person!! I could say Hip Hop music is bad art ... and someone else would say that I'm crazy!

I don't think there is something like good art or bad art. It's more from peoples tastes.

Return to Everything Else

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests

cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.