George W Bush unveils portraits of world leaders at presidential library in Dallas
114 replies, posted
[QUOTE=zombini;44473835]Those paintings are actually fairly decent, and besides, he's a better painter than most people that i know of.[/QUOTE]
He's a better painter than Hitler, that's all that matters.
Where's Baracco Barmer?
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;44474352]Hitler was a pretty good painter, I wonder why he never got into art school.[/QUOTE]
Wonky proportions. They never said fuck off they said practice more and come back later.
He's no professional, but certainly better than Ryu-Gi
[QUOTE=_Kent_;44474385]He's no professional, but certainly better than Ryu-Gi[/QUOTE]
don't make fun of the homeless like that
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;44474352]Hitler was a pretty good painter, I wonder why he never got into art school.[/QUOTE]
Abstract art was coming online, and the perception of things that perceived "realism" were considered not art, but illustrations.
Sorta why Norman Rockwell got so much shit.
For example... Norman Rockwell...
[t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Perpetual_Motion_by_Norman_Rockwell.jpg[/t]
Jean Metzinger
[t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/be/Jean_Metzinger%2C_1907%2C_Paysage_color%C3%A9_aux_oiseaux_aquatique%2C_oil_on_canvas%2C_74_x_99_cm%2C_Mus%C3%A9e_d%E2%80%99Art_Moderne_de_la_Ville_de_Paris.jpg[/t]
Both are amazing artist, but because of the era and point of time, people enjoyed things that were not basically just painting what can be seen, but rather what could be imagined. This is why art these days can only seem to come in a way of abstractness. People don't want illustrations, because it's a job of the wealthy, rather than the supposed "struggling artist".
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;44474427]Abstract art was coming online, and the perception of things that perceived "realism" were considered not art, but illustrations.
Sorta why Norman Rockwell got so much shit.
For example... Norman Rockwell...
[t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Perpetual_Motion_by_Norman_Rockwell.jpg[/t]
Jean Metzinger
[t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/be/Jean_Metzinger%2C_1907%2C_Paysage_color%C3%A9_aux_oiseaux_aquatique%2C_oil_on_canvas%2C_74_x_99_cm%2C_Mus%C3%A9e_d%E2%80%99Art_Moderne_de_la_Ville_de_Paris.jpg[/t]
Both are amazing artist, but because of the era and point of time, people enjoyed things that were not basically just painting what can be seen, but rather what could be imagined. This is why art these days can only seem to come in a way of abstractness. People don't want illustrations, because it's a job of the wealthy, rather than the supposed "struggling artist".[/QUOTE]
Personally I think it takes more talent to make something look real than to make something look "abstract." Some of my favourite paintings that I've seen recently has been Ducks Unlimited fundraising paintings that my store puts up, that are so detailed it looks like a photograph. I actually have to look for the brush strokes in most of them. In my opinion, that takes a hell of a lot of talent, and is a lot better than blotches on a canvas.
[QUOTE=Masterofstars;44474378]Wonky proportions. They never said fuck off they said practice more and come back later.[/QUOTE]
Proportions are the hardest for me to draw
Brb gonna kill 6 million Jews and take over half of Europe
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;44474502]Personally I think it takes more talent to make something look real than to make something look "abstract." Some of my favourite paintings that I've seen recently has been Ducks Unlimited fundraising paintings that my store puts up, that are so detailed it looks like a photograph. I actually have to look for the brush strokes in most of them. In my opinion, that takes a hell of a lot of talent, and is a lot better than blotches on a canvas.[/QUOTE]
I agree. My house has quiet a few paintings of the outdoors, and honestly its' amazing the detail some artist put into these types of things.
[t]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Vr5AdXrV-Wc/Ul6u_zwflnI/AAAAAAAAGiI/PaKLcv5SvDQ/s640/RainbowTroutRelease.jpg[/t]
It might just be my background, but the detail in this picture makes me get nostalgic about fishing for rainbow trout in Lake Erie.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;44474555]I agree. My house has quiet a few paintings of the outdoors, and honestly its' amazing the detail some artist put into these types of things.
[t]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Vr5AdXrV-Wc/Ul6u_zwflnI/AAAAAAAAGiI/PaKLcv5SvDQ/s640/RainbowTroutRelease.jpg[/t]
It might just be my background, but the detail in this picture makes me get nostalgic about fishing for rainbow trout in Lake Erie.[/QUOTE]
I'd buy at least one of these Ducks Unlimited paintings if the minimum bid wasn't $300.
[t]http://www.ducks.ca/assets/2013/12/winters-wolf-full.jpg[/t]
Winter's Wolf - Guy Hobbs
[t]http://www.ducks.ca/assets/2013/12/totem-and-bear-full.jpg[/t]
Totem and Bear - Robert Bateman
[t]http://www.ducks.ca/assets/2013/12/esprit-full.jpg[/t]
Esprit d'automne - Martine Cyr
THAT is what I call art. I'd link the Ducks Unlimited site, but since it's a fundraising auction it may be considered a no-no here.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;44474352]Hitler was a pretty good painter, I wonder why he never got into art school.[/QUOTE]
His style wasn't in vogue at the time.
Reminds me of my own work.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;44474502]Personally I think it takes more talent to make something look real than to make something look "abstract." Some of my favourite paintings that I've seen recently has been Ducks Unlimited fundraising paintings that my store puts up, that are so detailed it looks like a photograph. I actually have to look for the brush strokes in most of them. In my opinion, that takes a hell of a lot of talent, and is a lot better than blotches on a canvas.[/QUOTE]
Both realism and proper abstract have entirely different skill-sets of their own. It's really unfair to compare them to each other, or to say that one takes more "talent" than the other.
("Proper Abstract" meaning that it actually has message that can be deduced, and had actual thought on how to structure the composition.)
It's like comparing Flight Simulator to Deus: Ex. You just can't, it would be an insult to both.
Though I do have to say that the whole wobbly red square on white canvas or random scribbles type of "abstract" is just a load of pretentious crap in my opinion.
[QUOTE=Jacen;44474865]Both realism and abstract have entirely different skill-sets of their own. It's really unfair to compare them to each other, or to say that one takes more "talent" than the other.
It's like comparing Flight Simulator to Deus: Ex. You just can't, it would be an insult to both.
Though I have to agree that the whole wobbly red square on white canvas type of "abstract" is a load of pretentious crap.[/QUOTE]
I can acknowledge the talent in, though can't say I'm very fond of, the kind of abstract painting like Picasso or that Melting Clocks painting, my issue is with a lot of modern stuff, where it's fucking random blotches and/or streaks on paper and they call it "abstract art." I feel stuff like that is both unappealing (and, unlike the artists I mentioned earlier whose work is visually appealing, I think "art" like this is unappealing to the point of being ugly) and takes no talent.
They're actually okay.
I mean, I might hang one up in my house, even.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;44474889]I can acknowledge the talent in, though can't say I'm very fond of, the kind of abstract painting like Picasso or that Melting Clocks painting, my issue is with a lot of modern stuff, where it's fucking random blotches and/or streaks on paper and they call it "abstract art." I feel stuff like that is both unappealing (and, unlike the artists I mentioned earlier whose work is visually appealing, I think "art" like this is unappealing to the point of being ugly) and takes no talent.[/QUOTE]
Oh, sorry, I thought you were just brushing all of abstract under the rug.
That's pretty much how I feel on the matter. It needs to at least appear that some kind of thought or effort went into it.
[QUOTE=Moustacheman;44474898]They're actually okay.
I mean, I might hang one up in my house, even.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, he's not nearly as bad of a painter as a lot of people make of him.
Though the Putin one looks kind of wonky, though that may just be Putin.
[IMG]http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/5369602-3x2-700x467.jpg[/IMG]
George knows what he painted. Why else would everyone look so smug?
[QUOTE=T553412;44474331][t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/de/The_Courtyard_of_the_Old_Residency_in_Munich_-_Adolf_Hitler.jpg/800px-The_Courtyard_of_the_Old_Residency_in_Munich_-_Adolf_Hitler.jpg[/t]
Hitler was also a skilled painter, yet look at how he ended
Artistic skills are one thing. Political clusterfucks are another.[/QUOTE]
Yes and this thread is clearly discussing the latter, so would you please stop bringing the former up. Nobody has forgotten that he caused a political shitstorm.
[QUOTE=Adarrek;44474046]Yeah but there are many more important leaders that could be there...[/QUOTE]
Just because he isn't important to you doesn't mean he isn't important to others or doesn't effect the world in some way.
i like his paintings
especially his puppy ones, they're adorable
[QUOTE=Sprockethead;44474100]Just to be sure, you guys arent forgetting that he is responsible for the financial destruction of your nation? And thus the ruination of millions of lives worldwide? The death and destruction his foreign policies have wrought?[/QUOTE]
Your right! Fuck Bill Clinton!
[QUOTE=T553412;44474331][t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/d/de/The_Courtyard_of_the_Old_Residency_in_Munich_-_Adolf_Hitler.jpg/800px-The_Courtyard_of_the_Old_Residency_in_Munich_-_Adolf_Hitler.jpg[/t]
Hitler was also a skilled painter, yet look at how he ended
Artistic skills are one thing. Political clusterfucks are another.[/QUOTE]
perspective looks a little fucked up imo
[QUOTE=STeel;44474969]Yes and this thread is clearly discussing the latter, so would you please stop bringing the former up. Nobody has forgotten that he caused a political shitstorm.[/QUOTE]
Mmm, yeah, I tend to bring up Hitler quite a lot in SH, come to think about it. Sorry about that
[QUOTE=Mr. Zombie;44474964]
George knows what he painted. Why else would everyone look so smug?[/QUOTE]
It feels like I'm seeing the world through his eyes in a way. Harper is a smug neighbor and Cheney is one of the friendliest guys around.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;44474352]Hitler was a pretty good painter, I wonder why he never got into art school.[/QUOTE]
He couldn't do human proportions very well. He wasn't flat-out refused entry into art school, he was reccomended for architecture college because his depictions of structures were rather skilled.
[editline]7th April 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;44474522]Proportions are the hardest for me to draw
Brb gonna kill 6 million Jews and take over half of Europe[/QUOTE]
"[I]I can't paint zhe trees right! I vill kill [B]EZERYVUN IN ZHE VORLD![/B][/I]"
-snip- (late reply)
wow...he uh, could definitely use more practise, and "better than what most people could do" doesn't mean much because most people wouldn't care enough to do shit in the first place, but...definitely a sweet gesture. his presidency kinda sucked (that might be an understatement) but as a private person he does seem like a decent guy. at least warm and sociable if nothing else.
They look so naive, his paintings. How could he get President?
[QUOTE=Killuah;44475921]They look so naive, his paintings. How could he get President?[/QUOTE]
you have to be a good painter to be president? well there's the problem with this country, we need to start electing good painters!
[QUOTE=Killuah;44475921]They look so naive, his paintings. How could he get President?[/QUOTE]
They're so naive, his posts. How can he breathe oxygen?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.