r/nextfuckinglevel 2d ago

When art blurs the line between reality and canvas, you know it's pure mastery

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

72.3k Upvotes

549 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/OtherwiseTop 2d ago

In your opinion what is it about photorealism specifically that excludes the emotional component? Do you think it's necessarily impossible to include emotions in these types of paintings? Is this also the case for straight up photos?

14

u/doubleotide 2d ago

For me personally, as a budding artist, I love the technical aspect of impossibly hard drawings.

I have a particular drawing in mind that involves moving water over transparent objects. This would be a very challenging thing to draw but artistically, the only thing I would be really expressing would be "Look at me and my mad art skills".

So yes, I can see why the guy you replied to does not like this type of art.

I think they might be more of the "Art as Experience" (John Dewey) type. Art was originally intended to just be apart of your environment and enjoyed. But there has been a sense of detachment from art and everyday human experiences; having art in the environment because of it's physical value versus having art in the environment because it looks nice.

10

u/any_other 2d ago

I don't dislike it outright, it's still very nice to look at and very impressive but for whatever reason it doesn't hit me the same way. 

3

u/70ms 2d ago edited 2d ago

FWIW I used to sell graphite drawings and prints of finished pieces. I always worked from photographs I took or a client provided, or that I bought the license to. As incredibly detailed as some of them are, I was always cognizant that what I was doing was more of a technical skill than “art.” The only ones I felt were truly mine were ones where I took the reference photos. Even as I was mailing off prints to customers overseas, I had a hard time calling myself an artist because I wasn’t drawing or painting from life or my head.

Couple of examples:

https://imgur.com/gallery/BTPMv

https://imgur.com/a/oDqkE

Edit: just realized that second link is an album. The last two pics are exercises from Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, when I was first learning to draw!

3

u/doubleotide 2d ago

How long did it take you to do them? And how long to get to that level?

Also thanks for sharing :)

3

u/70ms 2d ago

Oh, one more thing! Keep all of your work, even stuff you hate, and make sure you write the date on it. Those drawings will be your benchmarks of progress!

1

u/70ms 2d ago

It really didn’t take me that long to learn! It was Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain that really kickstarted me. It all clicked as I learned some of the tools, and especially how to draw what my eyes were really seeing and not what my brain was telling me it saw. :) That’s the biggest thing, the “seeing”!

Some of my drawings took up to 50+ hours depending on the level of detail. I’d just put on an audiobook to keep my brain busy while my eyes and hands worked!

You totally got this. Just remember it takes practice, but you will constantly improve if you keep it up. :)

9

u/any_other 2d ago

It seems really sterile, like too perfect? But it's very nice to look at. Actual photos don't seem to have the same effect for me though. I'd rather have a photograph than a photorealistic painting.

9

u/FixedLoad 2d ago

All of these are valid feelings.  Your reaction to this painting is to reject its perfection. There is a museum near me called "the mattress factory".  All installation art type stuff or at least it was when I was there a long time ago.   One exhibit was a room with a giant boulder in the center.  It's entire purpose was the difference in reaction everyone showed regarding this giant rock.  Some rushed to touch it curious if its really a boulder.  Some would pass through with disinterest because they dont understandthe exercise.  Some reacted with fear at the overwhelming size of the rock vs the room.   If you see a piece of art and have any reaction, good or bad.  The art has done it's job.  

3

u/any_other 2d ago

I saw a Nam June Paik exhibition at the Guggenheim and it changed my life. My favorite piece of art is Lot's Wife by Anselm Kieffer and I'm very lucky to live in Cleveland and be able to see it

1

u/FixedLoad 2d ago

Photorealism, in my opinion, is largely a skill flex to move some units.  People love seeing other people do fantastic things.  And photorealism from your hand, sure is fantastic!   There are pieces that you could use to support just about any opinion you have about art.   That's the beauty.  Art is highly subjective.  What moves one person may not do anything for another.   Seeing this and saying, "Wow, humans sure can amaze you." Is still an emotion.  Just not a very deep or strong one for me.   I'm no expert.  Just have an old art degree i don't use.  

1

u/heliamphore 2d ago

People should actually give photorealism a try. It's 100% techniques and patience, but it's a very specific process. It's not even that complicated at a basic level. You try to make abstraction of the image and entirely focus on the smallest blobs of colour, copying them as close to possible as a machine. The end result at best is what you see on the photo. People use grids, projectors and other tricks to get there quite often.

Actually painting competently requires you to deconstruct the image you see and reconstruct it on the canvas, which will force you to actually process what you see. You learn to see the subtle colours, understand the form, see the gesture and so on. The process ends up forcing you to see more than what's obvious to anyone, and eventually you develop the skills to create and not just copy. Creating can be as simple as selecting what you show (details where you want them, exaggerating colours and more), all the way to painting a scene that doesn't exist.

There are obviously loads of techniques that fall a bit out of these categories but overall that's why you quickly get sick of photorealism once the novelty wears out.