Analyze That!

This piece is simply amazing. I’m not sure of the artist, but I have seen similar works done like this that are done on a flat surface, but look entirely 3-d. The line shown here is that of a genius. It utilizes straight lines that actually line up with lines that are on or in the street that help add to it’s optical illusion. The color here is utilized in a dynamic way by accenting itself off of the otherwise drab, “boring” colors of the asphalt. This helps to make the image itself pop and come out at you also adding to the optical illusion. Within this work I believe that texture is an important element for two reasons. The first is that this work is depicting a woman in a pool extending her leg upwards. The work displays several different textures including water or liquid, smoothness from the tiles that make up the pool, and also the soft supple texture of the woman that is in the pool. One thing that subtracts from the works reality is the mass of the woman. As you can tell there are people walking near this work of art and a person actually standing on part of it. It’s pretty easy to tell that the woman is a lot bigger than she normally would be if drawn to scale. Another key concept that makes this piece more believable is the use of the overlap. When this work was created, overlap had to be accounted for when drawing the depth of the pool and the sandals, and all the things that are floating. Obviously the space and light depicted are right on with what the artist was trying to accomplish. The space occupied totally tricks your mind into thinking that there’s real depth there, and the light looks like it would be from summer time in the heat of the day. This piece is very interesting and a work of art in itself!

-Shawn

Analyze This!

http://www.towson.edu/heartfield/art/superman.html

Watch the magic

Light & Color

For this assignment I decided to use an object with complimentary colors (green/red) that could express light differences with the simplest of change. The object used is a mask that I’ve kept since I was a kid (of Raphael from the Ninja Turtles). I placed it in between two boards of a fence and snapped away. The reason I chose to display it on a fence was quite simple. The fence is aged and brown which to me has a more somber or depressing value when held up against a bright animated “toy” that perfectly resembles a child-like feeling (for me the value is different because than most because I remember playing with anything and everything Ninja Turtles).

The first picture was taken at approximately 11:45 AM with perfectly clear skies. The picture is perfectly lit with a hint of overexposure in the middle of the mask. In this picture the masks’ colors “pop” so loudly that a quick glance might trick someone into thinking that a cartoon has been superimposed over an actual picture. In this picture I captured the exact expression I was going for which was bright colors against dull morose ones. The browns, blacks and grays of the fence seem to react in a clashing manner that almost compliments the greens, reds and whites of the mask.

The second picture was taken around 3:45 PM with perfectly clear skies. This picture brings out an entirely different effect of the mask and setting with a simple dash of shadow and much warmer colors. Digital camera’s have an odd way of rendering color when the sun isn’t perfectly over an object. With my digital camera I find that when the sun is in upward or downward motion, you get warmer colors whereas when the sun is directly above you (the first picture), everything seems colder or more “stale”. The second picture gives the mask more character and even changes its value for me. If you compare the two pictures, the lighting changes so much. In the first picture the mask almost looks flat like it’s painted or stuck on the fence with no outward protrusion. In the second photo the mask is obviously three dimensional and looks like it’s coming out at you. Unfortunately between the two photos, the mask fell out of the fence, so for the second picture the masks aren’t in the same exact place, but the shadow exemplifies this idea.

My favorite word for the first picture would be sterile because to me the picture has more cool colors and leaves me feeling stagnant, without a connection to my past. I guess this wouldn't make sense to most since my value of the mask is obviously different from yours. My favorite word for the second picture would be synchronicity because it resonates a youthful memory within a mature (real) setting.….it fills the void that separates me from adult to child.

Line & Space.

Wow. I never thought that something so simple could have such a profound effect on how I look at things on a day to day basis. I remember after reading the first chapter about line that I paused and took about 10 minutes just studying random lines in my room. I guess what I'm starting to learn is that the elements of art are not necessarily that obscure or difficult. The foundations of art extremely basic, it's all about how you use them. After reading the chapter about space I had a similar effect, but it did take longer to set in. For some reason I have a harder time connecting with the element of space, but I do enjoy works where artist utilize it effectively. For example I loved Matisse, Durer and Rubens, but had a more difficult time understanding Gygli. Also, space is harder for me to see or understand in real life than line. I guess space requires more three dimensional thinking? The easiest way for me to see "space" (or at least the way it would be if painted/drawn etc.), is for me to imagine that I am going to attempt to draw what I am looking at, because everything that I see is usually three dimensional. Linear perspective is another element that requires some creative thinking (or untapped consciousness) for me to see or notice without aid. Examples that I can think of are: looking down a road, looking into a drawer that's fully extended, or looking at the angles of the inside of a building. Contour lines are probably the most difficult for me to see at work in real life. While simple in usage and definition, I can't seem to wrap myself around the fact that the line isn't actually a line, rather something that defines volume? The most apparent representation I've found of this seems to come from glares, and or the line that a glass full of liquid makes?? And yes, my surroundings do actually seem as if they are getting more interesting. The thing is that I get so distracted or am so busy that I don't seem to notice it. But, if I stop for a second and try to think about some basic elements or art (the simplest is line!), then I can start to sit back and recognize things that I did not before.......I guess it's thinking more like an artist who is about to recreate something on a canvas.

Controversial Art

In my opinion there are many social benefits to controversial art. For one, anything can be considered controversial to anyone. Basically as long as art can stay controversial, we can remain free in that we can display almost anything. I include almost because I believe society will always place limits and boundaries on what can actually be said and done (displayed). For instance today people can post pictures or drawings of our president that are unfavorable, 50 years ago people wouldn't think of doing that, (and no I don't think that's because 50 years ago more people liked the president at that time.) The other thing about controversial art is that some artists thrive on their controversial work. What I'm trying to say is that if you take away things that are considered controversial, you may very well be eliminating artists while you do this.

Would the world be a better place if all art conformed to predetermined standards? Absolutely not. If this happened all art would end up looking and feeling the same for the most part (if not immediately, then soon after). Art to me is about completely free expression. The minute you start putting rules on art, it is no longer your work of art. From there it becomes art that you made, but with restrictions placed by others. This doesn't mean that if someone tells you to paint a tree that it is no longer your art. But if someone says that the trees leaves must be green, then they've just taken away your perspective, or YOUR art. I believe that conforming art to predetermined standards is almost impossible, it just depends on how obscure you want to go. For instance if you said all paintings must be done on solid objects, that would cover your majority of paintings, but not all. Either way I would never agree with this communist way of thinking.

From this weeks content I've actually learned a lot about myself. I like to consider myself an artist even though the only "artsy" things I really do are make music and photoshop now and again. That being said I like a lot of things that other people don't. I've always enjoyed viewing art and being the one that thinks that basically everything (in life that someone does) is art. However I did find myself a bit uncomfortable with some of the Maplethorpe work. Now I am not homophobic nor do I really have a problem with nudity, but seeing this did evoke some prehensile notion that it was "not good to look at the genetaliea." I believe that this has to do with one's outlook on society and personal insecurities, but when I saw those images I can't say that my first instinct was to not look at the genitals.

-Shawn