To top

Abstract..... and why it should be so, and why it is....

Post and view comments about the art in the galleries and art in general.
User avatar
CoffeeAndSmokes
Postaholic
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 11:39 pm

Abstract..... and why it should be so, and why it is....

Postby CoffeeAndSmokes » Fri May 11, 2007 12:26 am

Hey....

Figured I should start this thread because mainly, I do want to enquire the minds of people who feel that abstract art appeals to them, and to not.... and also to the artists that create these fantastic and ellusive works.

There is a fascination for some.... crap in the eyes of others, so, I think, let your words out in this thread so we can get some real understanding on what is the purpose of abstract art in the artworld.

I must admit, I am still trying to understand the concept, but I believe there are others that are trying to do the same thing.

So go ahead...
What do you really think of abstract art?

C&S.
geezermon

gottcha ...here goes

Postby geezermon » Sun May 13, 2007 11:26 am

firstly: take one of your own paintings....one you and others really like....
secondly: consider the area inside the eyeball that contains the image of your painting...upside down.
thirdly: consider how your own brain views and adjusts and enlarges the image inside your virtual biological mind.
fourthly: now blur the image so much in a computer that all you can see are color areas. randomly encircle those areas with black line so you can positive mask them....
use your sampler to pull the major color from each area then fill in the same area in a duplicate saved image...which is the blurred area.

the result is an abstraction of your original art.
it is abstract art. those creating abstract art are doing so from very real visuals from their mind's memories, or learned techniques etc. it is the same skills you use to create visual illusions of realities you find in your quest for painting imagery.

the success of an abstract painting has a number of requisites: elements which the viewer can relate to relative to time, era, age, sex, sexual views, society etc...>>>like some spray can works are considered art and some are considered defacement...depends on who is viewing and with what reason or purpose.

like a couple making it at the beach...to some it is simply live porn...to others it is simply 'scoring in public'.

Picasso in the 1400 would have been burned as a witch.

i like to ask why i like an abstract painting or hate it. i took a class where we reduced classic works into the basic abstract elements>>>as i described.
then all abstract works became interesting, boring, stupid etc. as i understood where they came from.
geezermon
ps. of course, my disclaimer here is i am just a manual labor smuck and not an art critic. :twisted:
User avatar
CoffeeAndSmokes
Postaholic
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 11:39 pm

......NO, you haven't.....

Postby CoffeeAndSmokes » Mon May 14, 2007 1:05 am

geezermon wrote:firstly: take one of your own paintings....one you and others really like....
secondly: consider the area inside the eyeball that contains the image of your painting...upside down.
thirdly: consider how your own brain views and adjusts and enlarges the image inside your virtual biological mind.
fourthly: now blur the image so much in a computer that all you can see are color areas. randomly encircle those areas with black line so you can positive mask them....
use your sampler to pull the major color from each area then fill in the same area in a duplicate saved image...which is the blurred area.....


Yeah, well, this is my problem.... why would I want to do that to one of my paintings?

And for what purpose?

If the purpose is for a "study", then I cannot see the point of obliterating one of my paintings for the exercise. hehe :D

To me, I already know what the final outcome of the painting will be before I attempt it...
It will be stuffed :!:

Maybe I might be mad or something, or my visions are too narrow... :?
I'm missing the point somewhere, i'm sure. :roll:

Thanks, Geezermon for your comments.
I can see this is going to take me some time for the understanding to sink in.

C&S. :D
geezermon

not the original, but a photo in digital #1 same #2 filled

Postby geezermon » Mon May 14, 2007 5:31 am

it is the same story...if knowledge exists on a subject, then the content is comprehensible.
took me quite a while to understand, but the professor was insistant and we all finally got the whole manner of seeing differently.
layout and colors, whether realistic or abstract are patterns [not the real thing].
so a person has to first realize what they are creating are patterns resembling the objects being painted.
...a painted vase is not a real vase....it is an illusion...whether the illusion works or not depends upon the ability of the artist to create the illusion in a fashion acceptable to the viewer [artist or layman or critic].
the human hard wired mind...the biological brain matrix...how one thinks is as diverse as fingerprints...
so the acceptance is as varied as there are persons viewing the painting.
abstract art contains...should contain...elements of colors and shapes, which coordinate with the real world surrounding the artist and/or viewer. if something is off, then there are reasons for the negative reactions. what those reasons are might take time to understand...critics might help or hinder understanding depending upon the mutual or lack of mutual 'art sense' involved.
******************************
i was suggesting you 'see' the elements of your own works...not as illusions of realities, but as areas of colors and forms combined to create the illusion of realities. it is a reduction of art work into the foundations of illusions...which is what we all had to do in the class at THE MARYLAND INSTITUTE COLLEGE OF ART. i hated the class at first, then realized i could apply the whole thing in future creations of my own.

so my graphites do not start with anything more than the past copyrighted elements [characters of the 1990s], then the whole scene and location forms around them. i do the same with color imagery.
the whole time i am both lost in the work and aware of the interrelationships of colors and forms>>>
the flow of abstract forms creating the illusions of a reality, which [being fictional] is an illusion in its theme.

a good example are the aborigine painting of Australia. Roos simply do not, but do look like the paintings...thus are abstract works.
hope this helps a bit...sorry for the mind bending here. i am not you with such a fine sense and control in creating such masterful landscapes...
and i first see the overall color and shapes, which draws me into the details of the landscapes...which is incredible considering how small the size is even on my 21 inche Super Scan Hatachi monitor.
best in your quest
geezermon :D
User avatar
Gary Dee
Extreme poster
Posts: 9235
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:09 am

Postby Gary Dee » Tue May 15, 2007 2:00 pm

Thanks for the info Geez.
C&S, I'm beginning to think what I thought was an abstract perhaps isn't an abstract at all. I thought abstract was something rather colorful but wasn't a traditional picture that you could easily tell what it was. Only the creator knowing precisely its meaning, but some fairly good at figuring it out or at least getting close.
I have only painted one abstract and its meaning is fairly obvious, and I want it to be. It seems to be the best way to make a profound statement. I can't think of a 'traditional' way to make that statement. The same thing goes for the one I'm painting now, but it is far more obvious than the last. So is it an abstract? I figure the answer will help us both. :)
Art by Gary Dee
Gary Dee's Gallery
Gary Dee Wingo's Original Paintings Portfolio

"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" *John Lennon*
Life is not about surviving the storm...its learning to dance in the rain.
geezermon

WOW! a whole new funhouse of art thinking!

Postby geezermon » Tue May 15, 2007 4:04 pm

had not give much thought on how learning about abstract paintings changed my views so long ago in the 70s.
now i realize i took in the whole thing and it changed my art forever. i think really for the better.
also i enjoy...really love creating imagery to share with others seeking to share their imagery too.

so C&S thanks a whole bunch Mate for the asking.
it woke up my wondering. kicked my artistic arse hard!
made me realize i have more to learn about this art quest to learn about why and how i create.

and thanks Garydee...your paintings make me proud to be part Native American.

feels great! like when i did my first painting, then
stepped back and wondered. it is a warm fuzzy feeling of joy.
a great thing for a geezer to realize he can still feel such things in the heart.
geezermon
User avatar
CoffeeAndSmokes
Postaholic
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 11:39 pm

Stepping a step further

Postby CoffeeAndSmokes » Wed May 16, 2007 1:29 am

garydee47w wrote:.... Only the creator knowing precisely its meaning....


This is probably my main concern.
And how can the viewer possibly come to fathom it's meaning?

Suppose, for example, when it comes to the viewer's point of view, how can they throw these pieces together in their mind... (depending on the intensity)... without any "hints".. (quoting Talentale, no animosity intended... :) ).

It's this "putting these pieces together" which is my fallacy to understand all this.
Or is it something else, or more?
Or do I have to rely on my imagination and the piece blossoms into something the viewer has to create in their own mind?
Therefore, does the viewer know that they forked out $2,000 for a particular piece of artwork without the notion of what really happened? Do they really know that you cannot copyright your immediate imagination concepts without it being put into reality? :D .. Hehe, only kidding....wow.... :!:

Is this point appropriate for a basis, or am I drifting into some self-creative-abstract hypothesis?

Too many questions for such a complicated medium, I think. There is a lot to learn.

Regarding aboriginal works, Geezermon, yes..., abstract in their own way, but a lot of emphasis has gone into a lot of detail for internal anatomy of these works and the storyline and visionary aspects are easy enough to follow for these.
The dot paintings are a different story though, really, they are only explainable by the author, or the particular knowledge of the elders which reside in these areas.
I would believe these particular works are a better example.

Keep on posting, people!

C&S.
geezermon

ah! the differences of views = the differences of the views

Postby geezermon » Wed May 16, 2007 5:39 am

:D Well C&S, your points are food for thought totally.
the class i took was basic. the whole deep thought thing was in the Masters and Doctorate Programs years later for others seeking to be Critics etc.
it does get into the whole area of mind views ...those individual things...if the aboriginal thinking is anything like Native American...there is a deep spiritual view also...which is beyond human thinking even if a human is doing the considerations.
then the artist is 'moved' to create.
i do imagine your deep love of Australia, Australian Life, your life in both the real world of earning aliving and the surreal world of art...so many things merging to make up the 'move' to do art.
this is abstract thinking too...there is nothing set in stone...frozen into an unmoving image mentally as the virtual mind itself in in constant flux in dealing with living...being a living creature...
and moving inside the ever chaning environment...
which , for you , is Australia...and also virtual spaces of the internet...etc.
each tiny movement changes the inner self that creates art.
***********
i posted some preliminary works in graphite...
the focus was the Ambush of an elfgal by a monster.
it was to take place in a area like the Outback.
but...i realized the rock formation demanded something other than clouds and brush...
so enter the castle...this is not yet posted as it is not yet created. what my life force and mindset will create is yet unknown...but this weekend i will find out.
**********
i really think abstract art is a careful 'blurting out of skills, thoughts, views, experiences, reactions etc.'...confusing to the viewer, but to some the perfect thing to hang on a special wall and ponder over and over...each time resulting in similar to, but very different conclusions.

so the 'confusion' becomes desirible...like the ever changing natures of life...the web of life the circle of life...life in all its aspects...one painting can become a stimulation for the viewer and also for the artist during creation.

the AMBUSH ON ANOZ is imaginary...a construct of the overall story...but for the moments of creation, it is a 'real event' in the virtual spaces of my mind...i react to it, live inside it, ...the event...
i am there with the gal she is calling to me unaware of the impending attack...i am anxious, fearful, angry, protective of her...this miss of the imagination....ALL THIS IS AN ABSTRACTION OF MY IMAGINARY WORLD. yet...its 'soul' is as real as my life is real for those creative moments.

so abstract art is far deeper, if done well, than the cursory viewer realizes. the very successful abstract artist can impact upon wide audiences of many races, nations etc. each impact is different and each is similar...it is not a vase painting, which in itself can contain abstract impact colors and shapes.

guess this is confusing, but i too am still considering this 'Pandoran' thing you have started...for good i think not as the myth theme.
:shock: :D :wink:
geezermon
User avatar
Gary Dee
Extreme poster
Posts: 9235
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:09 am

Postby Gary Dee » Wed May 16, 2007 10:09 am

Another essay, Geez? You better know I'm just kidding :wink: There's a lot of info there and I for one, appreciate it. Thanks. :shock:

So if you look at an 'abstract' together with the title, and there is hardly any doubt about its meaning, is it really an abstract? :roll: :)
And C&S, what do you think? :P
Art by Gary Dee
Gary Dee's Gallery
Gary Dee Wingo's Original Paintings Portfolio

"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" *John Lennon*
Life is not about surviving the storm...its learning to dance in the rain.
User avatar
Carson Collins
Extreme poster
Posts: 2653
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:41 am

Postby Carson Collins » Wed May 16, 2007 11:52 am

Perhaps it would be more useful to think of abstraction as a scale or continuum, rather than making a division into abstract vs. non-abstract art. It's not an issue that can be thought of in terms of black or white; there's a huge gray area. A painting may be more or less abstracted, however, it is impossible (for me anyhow) to imagine a painting that does not contain some element of abstraction.

Image

Return to “Visual arts”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests