/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>3709102
> i dont need to prove my main statement either.
I mean generally you do kind of need to prove or provide evidence in support of the things you say. Otherwise you're probably just lying or delusional.

And like, you bitch about your work "getting no attention" and then refuse to publicly exhibit your work? Wow I wonder why nobody knows who you are, anon.

>>3705087
>What are the current movements if any?
memeschlock my dude
>Is traditional painting still alive?
gonna be a resurgence
>How does one start painting? Any beginner recommanded techniques?
I started by doing cut out transfers to canvas, then graphite transfers to canvas, and currently grid transfers to canvas.

I also started with the cheapest paints, canvas panels, brushes, etc. Also started small with 8x10s then started esploring into different canvas sizes as I started to get a scents of the whole thing.
>How different/harder is it compared to drawing?
same same but different.
>Once you have something to sell, how does it go? Is it true that it's basically about who you know and that the quality doesn't matter that much sometimes or is it a stereotype?
yeah like if you got friends or acquantences that just want to be able to flex about owning original art, and they'd like to think they're supporting you, you could probably get away will pictures of literal shit.

But at the same thyme if nobody else cares about you and everyone's a critic so you generally have to do something neat if you care about appealing to strangers.
>How do you go about analyzing paintings like pic related?
it's a feels painting that can add life and texture in a lot of different types of space.
>Is it just like experimental/noise music, something visceral that you can't analyze much?
you can analyze the color choices, the nature of the brush strokes, the color locations in the frame, the emotions it elicits, and then there's always art history lore and it's influences or whatever.

>Lastly...talk about anything painting related beside those questions.
just do it. lean into impulses and set out knowing you're more than likely going to make a bunch of shit. Put more pride in the effort itself than the outcome.

>>3702755
>>3703530
>>3703655
stacatto strokez 4 dayz boye

>yeah keep calling criticism "hyperbolic" and hide being the wording.
saying "you have no concept of form whatsoever" is a meaningless shitpost. There's no argument or concept that can be applied going forward. Hyperbolic absolutes are literally always cancer.
>You've been told a hundred times by now that you fundamental skills are undeveloped
And then I've asked a hundred time if (you)s can elaborate and it always just devolves into ad hominem memes. Like what specific aspect of le fundamentals do you think are "undeveloped?"

And even then, so what? The entire thing is about seeking a novel aesthetic through a sense of innovation from ignorance and subversion by leaning into doing things "wrong" and spiraling out. My goal hasn't been to adhere to "fundamental" standards since I stopped academically studying art when I was 18.
> and you rely way too much on crooks like grid, transfer and tracing. you are in denial.
Every notable painter used grids. And canvas transfer is a standard practice, and not being familiar with either of them means that you're actively refusing to further your education.
>you pretty much proved that you are t. Dunning Kruger with this post.
Except I'm not "overly confident" in my own abilities. And I've been painting for years now. And you're still not making an argument. Projecting meme labels is what you do when you're not capable of anything else.