hey does anyone have any really good nature paintings? ie natural landscapes painted, i think it was popular from dutch painters in 1800s but i wasn't really paying attention when i went to the art gallery in london because i was 11 and bored :DD, for me this is the best art ;].
If you're looking for dutch landscape paintings you're more likely to find works from the 17th century, in the 19th century this genre was dominated by french artists. The National Gallery has an excellent website where you can browse the complete collection: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/ Since paintings from this era are considered public domain by now you are also likely to find content at WikiCommons: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Discussing what art is "good" or what makes an art piece is better than the other is about personal taste. Personally I wouldn't really care if someone is fond of paintings made of poo which likely many people would find utterly disgusting.
On May 28 2007 14:53 fusionsdf wrote: Really really glad this thread has managed to avoid being infested with modern 'art'
Oh I would like to, but most modern art is sculpture or plastic and thus pictures don't do it any justice.
I mean I could tell that is a 7 x 2,4 metre steel plate that is standing freely and by itself, but there is no magic to the photograph, or is there? You have to be close enough to smell the rusty metal to get it.
Also one could say that modern art starts at the time abstraction was applied to the image, in which case we had a lot of modern art, Salvadore Dali or Edward Munch for example.
There's is such a beauty to the reduced form of the woman, Picasso's skill is unbelievable.
On May 28 2007 15:15 suffeli wrote:Personally I wouldn't really care if someone is fond of paintings made of poo which likely many people would find utterly disgusting.
Actually there has been an artist in the last century who sold his own shit in cans. They were even labelled "artist's shit", some people really bought it. But I struggle to remember his name.
EDIT: Google is my friend.
In 1961 Piero Manzoni produced 90 cans of 30 grams each.
[QUOTE]On May 28 2007 15:15 suffeli wrote: [IMG]http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/157/lihrgigerok3.jpg[IMG]
HR Giger, Li I, 1974
Discussing what art is "good" or what makes an art piece is better than the other is about personal taste. Personally I wouldn't really care if someone is fond of paintings made of poo which likely many people would find utterly disgusting.[/QUOTE]
Michelangelo's Tondo Doni, loved this painting ever since I first saw it at the Uffizi.
Here you have the sacred and the profane, with the groups of naked people in the background, and Mary, Joseph and Jesus in the foreground. You also see John the Baptist on that border between the two, looking up at the young Jesus, and dressed in his hermit clothing. Their arms form a circle, you can follow Joseph's shoulder to Mary's arm, to Jesus' arm back to Joseph, Godhead symbolism.
And it looks amazing, amazingly difficult when you consider he painted it by hand. Just look at the fold and creases of their clothing, really looks like it was done by a computer when you see it first-hand.
Dali is one of my favorite artists. I have a very nice book on his works. I also like the Artists that blizzard has, I just recently bought a book called \"art of WOW\" which at first glance was the butt of a joke. Most the work in there by Sons of the Storm is very nice. I love sketches more than paintings, I prefer cartoon, or fantasy art over realism or still drawings.
I found this on YouTube since it was on the front page, it is "500 years of female portraits". Their faces are morphed into each other, it's great IMO.