Art thread

art thread
Show me your favorites

Attached: Spoopy.jpg (713x577, 55K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/X6zpz8b_Maw
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Heres a spooky one

Attached: 1510189444343.png (570x729, 661K)

Attached: 7FB58AB8-EC00-4C42-914A-C96FC2F75312.jpg (688x472, 98K)

Attached: KidsHazmat.jpg (750x513, 559K)

Attached: 1552191631222.jpg (1661x3051, 1.62M)

Attached: 1503717839918.jpg (1047x1280, 257K)

Attached: 2e99de44-2c0a-11e7-9cf9-25f0a9c3fc8f.jpg (537x700, 58K)

Attached: 1552203389592.jpg (506x606, 45K)

Attached: 1517260560946.jpg (1920x1080, 396K)

youtu.be/X6zpz8b_Maw

My favorite artists is definitely Caravaggio

Attached: Vaggio.jpg (1280x971, 209K)

Attached: 1546536390757.jpg (1600x1178, 557K)

Attached: 1200px-Michelangelo_Caravaggio_071.jpg (1200x932, 187K)

I love any kind of art but seeing this while frying balls had me stuck for an hour. wish I could find a decent image because this one does it no justice

Attached: 20180825_141706-3024x2268.jpg (3024x2268, 1.44M)

Attached: coolthing.jpg (1920x1080, 318K)

Attached: eric-kim-street-photography-sapa-0006247-4.jpg (2000x3020, 556K)

Attached: 1491685666814.jpg (700x788, 199K)

Attached: vaggio (3).jpg (1552x873, 352K)

Attached: Dvg0r8OXcAEx0ja.jpg (564x867, 126K)

Haven't seen a good art thread in awhile

Attached: carracci flagellation of christ.jpg (1471x2000, 257K)

I like this one.

Attached: 1511057834859.jpg (360x480, 52K)

might be better

Attached: 20190320_224542-2772x2225.jpg (2772x2225, 1.7M)

Attached: 1494618026047.jpg (500x735, 86K)

His sfumato and shades can't even be topped by Da Vinci.

Attached: Magdalene_in_the_Cave.jpg (3000x2469, 1.59M)

Attached: 1553050010_flae_sm_by_tanraak.jpg (1800x1397, 403K)

Attached: 1549607880262.jpg (1000x1000, 181K)

...

Attached: 1546150182889m.jpg (1024x576, 30K)

Attached: The Denial of St. Peter.jpg (918x662, 301K)

Attached: The Pit.jpg (600x386, 152K)

Attached: Giaometti Walking Man.jpg (542x1000, 94K)

Attached: Francisco_Goya_-_Casa_de_locos.jpg (812x500, 96K)

Attached: 1521846355781.jpg (639x790, 67K)

Attached: mark rothko red on maroon mural, section 74 1959.jpg (780x312, 14K)

Attached: 1cf508e3b323b4b6db8103142bff3123--amazing-paintings-art-paintings.jpg (580x800, 94K)

Attached: 1547010719817.jpg (3000x2317, 1.83M)

thread ruined
I'm out

Attached: idwt.png (500x500, 297K)

For those who like the spooky shit.

Attached: Codex_Gigas_devil.jpg (369x586, 106K)

$100m

Tell me how the universe of art isn't about money laundry.

Attached: rothko.jpg (440x846, 48K)

Attached: 2018020312Sette-opere-di-misericordia-Caravaggio-a-Napoli.jpg (940x493, 395K)

Attached: JMW Turner.jpg (3000x2358, 797K)

Cover from the indecipherable book.

Attached: unk.jpg (992x768, 185K)

Have you seen a Rothko in person? Have you given it the time it requires? I doubt that you have. Rothko once turned down a two million dollar commission because he felt the place the paintings were to be installed were going to be nothing more than decorations.

Attached: The Room Philip Guston.jpg (560x661, 119K)

Attached: 1357543469748.gif (244x184, 256K)

were being deluded and sapped from our natural creativity and being fooled into beveling that this is art money will destroy us

Attached: 1502906785384.png (530x530, 422K)

Attached: William-Adolphe Bouguereau - Dante and Virgil (1850).jpg (3360x4265, 1M)

Have you seen Rembrandt's late self portrait? The one with the giant circles? Or any of Turner's later works where it's essentially smears of paint? Painters have always wanted to go towards abstraction, it just wasn't feasible until late in the game due to how they had to make a living and the way the materials were.

Attached: Ad Reinhardt Abstract Painting 1963.jpg (1362x1366, 75K)

Attached: beach.jpg (3840x2160, 1.22M)

Attached: seen_land.jpg (1000x800, 290K)

This is from Altamira, it's unknown what it is supposed to be, there are thousands of these kinds of things in almost every single cave painting site over the entire world. Experts know they are not a written language, but what their function is they can't figure out. One recent theory is they are abstractions, real things from the natural world that have been reduced visually to their essence.

Attached: arteAltamira_5.jpg (603x600, 118K)

Attached: giorgio-de-chirico-piazza-ditalia.jpg (1772x1421, 1.37M)

Hey man don't go contradicting his jordan peterson redpill bullshit, let the man have his echo chamber

Well he centennially is smug I'll say that

Attached: 1503718027135.jpg (600x577, 22K)

Attached: BleedingLean_charlie_immer.jpg (1080x360, 94K)

in your opinion what is more important in art: technique or expression? obviously the key is meshing both but if you had to choose which do you appreciate more?

Attached: John Brosio - Fatigue.jpg (1165x926, 209K)

I think famous artists have earned the right to be smug.

Jordan Peterson doesn't understand anything of what he is talking about. He doesn't understand what Modern Art is, he doesn't understand what Postmodernism is, and he doesn't understand what Marxism is. How he can even have the gall to call himself anything but a charlatan is beyond me.

Attached: RD1125pub.jpg (3860x4371, 1.56M)

Technique is an extension of expression. You choose the technique that best allows you to express what you need to.

Attached: RD1138pub.jpg (3876x3910, 1.57M)

Attached: lulz.jpg (886x463, 27K)

Technique is more important. Any idiot can throw paint on a canvas these days and call is expression. Technique is a true display of talent and skill refined through hard work and dedication.

>posts vomit on a canvas
>thinks his opinion is not trash

I would have to say expression you need to feel something while creating your art I've always been a fan of emotion if there is no emotion in what you do then it just feels blatant and assembly lined it takes the joy out of it.

Attached: 1542588621727.jpg (1080x1367, 963K)

never heard it put that way but I appreciate your input and honestly would agree with you

but art at its core is about expression

Except that, no, it isn't, and no, they can't.

Attached: de-kooning-bowl-pitcher-jug.jpg (534x416, 63K)

maybe for fags and women

>hurr durr no you

emotion is for little kids and sissies

pretty piece at a local museum

Attached: Snapchat-940546009.jpg (720x960, 39K)

Attached: René Magritte - The Lovers.jpg (4500x3311, 1.77M)

Attached: Snapchat-1978078403.jpg (720x960, 38K)

>literal stick figures
why is modern art so degenerate?

Thank God you have no influence over other people.

Attached: Cycladic head.jpg (999x1825, 925K)

Attached: 1493908781304.jpg (1861x1226, 1.43M)

Attached: Jacob More - The Deluge, Tate Britain.jpg (1800x1343, 666K)

>posting literal squidward tier art
are you a joke irl too?

look closely at their limbs, they have detail for muscles such as their calves and makes them more than stick figures to me, besides their elongated proportions

then what's the point of art to you?

Is this like fallout alt art? Or is fallout referencing this picture?

>stick figures
>degenerate
>

Cycladic heads date back about 5,000 years.

Attached: arteAltamira_2.jpg (600x604, 116K)

Attached: William Hogarth - Satan, Sin and Death (A Scene from Milton's Paradise Lost).jpg (1800x1461, 779K)

you need raw and genuine emotion or else just might as well be an unfeeling bot I don't step out of my zone unless I feel something "right"

Daybreak, 1922 Maxfield Parrish

Attached: Daybreak.jpg (1000x627, 182K)

how did he die?

or "wrong" but I guess that would be subjective that's what makes it fun

to display and immortalize one's genius and will

Attached: md_56b644749fe6-32975724116_8a972ba6a3_k.jpg (765x287, 51K)

Attached: Ilya Yefimovich Repin - Ivan the Terrible and His Son Ivan (1885).jpg (1200x877, 336K)

Anybody knows what this means?

Attached: FB_IMG_1552945457098.jpg (598x720, 148K)

It means
>le trippy dippy, artist was so eccentric and cool lolz

His ego is huge and can't deal with the fact most people don't see his "art" as very impressive or good. He's like that guitarists who listens to metal that shreds so fast he thinks it's great but it's jumbled up noise

Attached: 1509690119794.jpg (1109x897, 227K)

>a rock with a nose dates back 5000 year
wow impressive

If that were the case then why didn't signatures appear until the Renaissance.

I haven't posted a single thing I made.

Attached: hand_mammoth.jpg (820x774, 419K)

They are a product of their own reality they created themselves and emerged into this world on their own accord

You just posted boring art to look at

because signatures are corny and degenerate

Attached: Adrian Borda - The Pursuit of Happiness.jpg (900x1141, 241K)

Population size could be a theory

Attached: 1475076399335.jpg (714x1000, 68K)

>Painters have always wanted to go towards abstraction
Interesting claim.

Attached: 1527035955553.jpg (1200x752, 1.35M)

Love Bo Bartlett

Attached: 1232568851537.jpg (680x987, 354K)

It's carved marble that would have then been painted, but due to the amount of time that has passed the paint has completely disappeared off of them. And it is rather impressive. Some of the Cycladic figures are towering marble sculptures.

How are they corny or degenerate?

Opinions are like assholes.

I fail to see the connection between population size and artist signatures.

Looking back at the extreme stylization of the past, tracing it into the work of the Baroque and Romantic artists, then into the Postimpressionists, I would comfortably make the argument that abstraction was an inevitability. And I would site specifically Rembrandt, Goya, and Turner.

Attached: sorcerervenus2.jpg (820x555, 297K)

Well not entirely, there are a few that has some faint traces and little tiny bits still on them.

Attached: ChristianMartyrsOfNagasaki.jpg (2183x2194, 1.56M)

Attached: 1472496192847.jpg (1024x614, 123K)

Low population < everyone in town knows ur a good painter

Old times < nobody really read so no need for written signature.

I thought u we're being mister smart guy but now I see ur just a hipster

Attached: 1515545308299.jpg (1478x1019, 188K)

Why is your argument against my claim that art is about immortalizing one's genius and will is that signatures are relatively new aspect to art, but also praise the genius of 5000 year old sculptures and cave paintings? Clearly a contradiction there. Signatures are degenerate and corny because they assume that the ego attached to the genius is relevant, when in 5000 years a scribbled name on the piece will mean little more than something to decipher and is ultimately arbitrary. Why should the ego matter when the art itself speaks for itself.

Oh, no. It wasn't that. It was more an issue that art was seen as just another skilled trade, like a carpenter. When Michelangelo signed his Pieta it was considered shocking and he was considered overly arrogant.

You claimed that it is to "immortalize one's genius and will." If it is to do that then, no, the art doesn't speak for itself, it speaks for you, and if it speaks for you then it is your ego that is on display. Hence why signatures are important.

A 5000 year old carved marble and the paintings in caves are to be praised because of how gorgeous they are, and what they can teach us about our past. And the ego is present even as far back as the caves. Hand print after hand print are found in the caves. It is one of the few commonalities found among all painted cave sites in the entire world.

Attached: Abatur.jpg (231x350, 39K)

Immortalizing genius in art transcends the concept of names and the ego. That’s the point. People who never knew of you will still appreciate the accumulation of skill and dedication you poured out into your craft long after you or any record of your personhood perishes.

Attached: mxRzYNa5pF-14.png (300x250, 15K)

These days nothing vanishes, so art can no longer be an imortalization of some genius lost to time.

Attached: Asterion.jpg (1200x1812, 159K)