I hate that I can’t discern what’s good and what’s not good in visual art. I know it’s all truly objective, but even take this art from this random Twitter guy for example. It looks good to me, but also super derivative of that basquiat style. Would an art student actually like this or chalk it up to biting?
I hate that I can’t discern what’s good and what’s not good in visual art. I know it’s all truly objective, but even take this art from this random Twitter guy for example. It looks good to me, but also super derivative of that basquiat style. Would an art student actually like this or chalk it up to biting?
Art is subjective it really just depends on what you want out of it
He just biting basquiat
Idk take some time to go to art galleries and museums and see what you like
U have to learn about art and do it yourself. I mean I’m sure some art students would like it and some wouldn’t. Would u really like this if u didn’t know who basquiat was?
Most art is to some degree derivative. There’s nothing wrong with it, it’s the nature of inspiration. I knew plenty of kids in art school that were a little too similar in technique and style to their favorite artists, be it Rothko, Schiele, Cezanne, Matisse, Gauguin, or Basquiat. I certainly was guilty of this. There was this one kid who was a freshman on my last year that got really popular in the community, who basically painted Frida Kahlo style paintings except in each of the self portraits he did he’d be twerking in it. I think he’s developed his own take on the style since then, but all artists to some degree have their roots in inspiration from other artists
There's no rules with art don't limit yourself, enjoy what you enjoy fam that's the beauty and diversity of it
art is subjective IMO. do whatever you find cool, and put it out. someone may f*** with, someone may not.
kills me when mfers say something “isn’t art”. That statement always begs the question: “what is truly art then?”
Most art is to some degree derivative. There’s nothing wrong with it, it’s the nature of inspiration. I knew plenty of kids in art school that were a little too similar in technique and style to their favorite artists, be it Rothko, Schiele, Cezanne, Matisse, Gauguin, or Basquiat. I certainly was guilty of this. There was this one kid who was a freshman on my last year that got really popular in the community, who basically painted Frida Kahlo style paintings except in each of the self portraits he did he’d be twerking in it. I think he’s developed his own take on the style since then, but all artists to some degree have their roots in inspiration from other artists
KTT has absolutely disparaged artistic a***ysis by calling any sort of statement about the work that isn’t explicitly made clear by the artist as “reaching”
The reality is that all fine art is made for the sake of expression of some sort of concept or feeling. You must look beyond the simple aesthetic appeal and ask why the aesthetic appeals to YOU. How does it make you feel? What did the artist feel when making it? What did they have in mind for you, the viewer?
Most art is to some degree derivative. There’s nothing wrong with it, it’s the nature of inspiration. I knew plenty of kids in art school that were a little too similar in technique and style to their favorite artists, be it Rothko, Schiele, Cezanne, Matisse, Gauguin, or Basquiat. I certainly was guilty of this. There was this one kid who was a freshman on my last year that got really popular in the community, who basically painted Frida Kahlo style paintings except in each of the self portraits he did he’d be twerking in it. I think he’s developed his own take on the style since then, but all artists to some degree have their roots in inspiration from other artists
the artists who make a major impact and jumpstart new movements aren't derivative
they synthesize a bunch of different influences and show reality in a new way
an art student doesn't necessarily know what's good and what isn't
it really is a matter of if you think it's good and it isn't a carbon copy of something else then it's good
in this case they're just biting though lol
the artists who make a major impact and jumpstart new movements aren't derivative
they synthesize a bunch of different influences and show reality in a new way
Yup, Monet and Picasso are the biggest shows of this
it’s just about what you think looks good. theres no conventional way to interpret art (unless it’s nft then it sucks)
it’s just about what you think looks good. theres no conventional way to interpret art (unless it’s nft then it sucks)
idk if its just about that like sometimes those plaques next to the painting really unlock a piece in a way that you wouldnt on your way otherwise . particularly for more abstract stuff
to answer your question op theres no real answer apart from look at more art it all really depends its such a nebulus world of stuff. maybe watch some docs about artists or movements/scenes that you do like. your example is tough cus yeah its just a kinda mid basquiat rip
Consume a lot of it and you’ll discern what’s good and what doesnt bring anything new
Major in architecture at a good school
step one for all great artists & connoisseurs
Find an NFT artist and study his work back to front, look at other NFT artists who are currently minting and understand their scene. Buy maybe 10 NFTs that are currently cheap and available and as they grow in value (exponentially), sell and trade to more expensive and renowned NFT masters. You will begin to find a deep appreciation in the nuance and expression of these works that maybe wasn't understood at first.