Who is the author of the portrait?

[Seriy]

K-Maler,
NATA NOVA, yes, I plan to take a vacation and compensatory time off, just work out a pattern, because I became interested in painting portraits. However, when this happens? no idea ...

Posted 9 minutes

Сообщение от U_Z

I know. But still I wish you a "movement" in the direction of the original painting.

I "be original" I will not. The fact that I have a gun out - it's uncontrollable, it is in the subconscious, and from there transferred to the hand. It can only score some more impressive or, perhaps, time. The influence of Picasso, Derain, Vlaminck, Matisse on me and one deep, it comes out from everywhere and will continue to come out. A "knit" because it fits the type of my psyche. Would have been different mentality, perhaps influenced by other artists and other art to come out ... Incidentally, in America, none of Picasso, with regard to my art, do not remember, but definitely talked-Serg Matisse ...:-)
 Lempicka interested because at closer look you see not only the influence of mannerist and art-deco ... personally I can see the influence of the Fauves, particularly Derain, amounting at times to follow, and Cubism, ie, it appears to me Lempicka - "native" an artist.

[NATA NOVA]

Сообщение от Seriy; 1892301"

turns out, I Lempicka - " native " artist .

Lempicka ( style ) in the artistic sense , deep secondary (IMHO ) .. The commercial success of " falling into the stream of style and taste "- that is another subject ( the subject of another study)

Learning should be (better) in the original ( primary sources)

Posted 3 minutes

Сообщение от Seriy; 1892301"

I " be original " I will not.

"Originality" - meant "individual uniqueness"
( I understand U_Z)
To have a priori swept aside " search yourself" ?

[Seriy]

NATA NOVA, I'll describe here now as I am a graduate of Moscow State University, Ph.D., a former high school teacher, I understand that such an individual style and secondary primacy in painting. Cited about science, because my explanation would be slightly formalized and mechanistic, not in terms of art.
 Painting is something that is discussed and evaluated, not career, not an artist, not the environment, not even an array of his work ... just a picture. A picture - this is an equation with many variables.
Some of them are described in detail the theory of composition and color theory. For example, a detailed analysis of prof.Kandinsky what happens if you move the angle to the edge of the blade, and the point - in the center, and no matter what you do represents the corner, and that is the point.
Some of these variables has not been studied in such detail, some of the variables introduced by new generations of artists.
 The equation for a given variable, one has the right solution and an infinite number of wrong. The correct solution is in the painting style. New styles of painting are rare and often a collective work, but the result can be explained only one picture, because, as mentioned above, a correct decision. A single picture to explain what Cubism, one in order to explain what impressionism, surrealism, one, etc. If you can not define the style of the artist in which he works, it probably is - slurred, t e is an infinite number of wrong decisions.
 There is no primacy of painting, the picture is always secondary, because it can either be done entirely in one style, or composed of several styles. Yes, there are revolutionaries, like the founders of Cubism - Picasso and Braque, but in real life to anyone with this deal is not necessary.
When we think we see something new, it is likely that we are poorly educated in the history of painting. I enjoyed a very original Picasso Romanesque period, until I saw a painting by Cezanne, Picasso, which is used to create it. And this work of Picasso with a wide field of pure ultramarine and shades the ground around a thread can be stretched to other artists, such as N. Nesterova with the same field of pure ultramarine and shades of the earth - white, black, ocher around.
So what's involved in an artist? Two things-first, he must learn to clearly, accurately, clearly, to speak - for this to understand how the pattern is arranged and to be able to use this understanding. Second, he must understand how styles can reflect his personal psychophysics, that person is inherent, because if the artist will use his alien styles, he has nothing intelligent does not work, the individual must meet psychophysics viewed by styles.
When people say, "it is necessary to seek an individual style," to me it sounds like "it is necessary to seek a mirror in which I look different."

 Lempicka - an outstanding artist and full recognition is yet to come. Glamour, cover characters overshadowed her artistic nature of its achievements. But time carries with it signs of the times, topical, posters of her images, performs forward synthesis of styles that it has implemented and embodied in the 20's and 30's. She has a great nude, stunning still lifes, portraits of great - the farther, the better they will appreciate. It works very fine color, which is the coat in a portrait, a blow in the eye. So can only supermaster.

[NATA NOVA]

Сообщение от Seriy; 1892451"

Lempicka - an outstanding artist

Who can argue? Moreover, the brilliant success that has tremendous historical and investment ( and glamorous ) potential ... but before the terrible horror of secondary ..
It is necessary , do not , it depends on personal goals .. And if you do not understand something , and the anatomy of time and energy to spend DO NOT ! (Here we have planned a "conflict of objectives" )
......

PS: And here is what I Th besvozmezdno crucified ? (The ban is time, in BAN !)

Added after 1 minutes

Сообщение от Seriy

It works very fine color

3 ha, ha!
(Three ha ha) > > >

[Seriy]

What about follow - anatomy ... I do not know the anatomy of Modernism in general did not follow. I have already cited the example of Picasso nude in blue , where the model sits in a position, physically impossible. Here's an example that I do not give rest , Grigoriev from the exhibition in the Tretyakov Gallery, take a look at the upper lip of the model is that , true to anatomy ? I corrected the following , as expected, only the result is a curve. T e when right is wrong, from an artistic point of view. Perhaps the eye need some kind of wrong to get caught .
But the picture is the basis of everything, absolutely everything, here I agree 100%.

Добавлено через 6 минут
NATA NOVA, her life was not easy, she often had to start from scratch.
Starting with the 40s she fell into a creative crisis, living in the wilds of Mexico, that in this glamorous?
World fame came when she could no longer fully her he borrowed.

[Seriy]

NATA NOVA, her life was not easy, she often had to start from scratch.
Starting in the 40s she fell into a creative crisis, lived in the wilds of Mexico, that in this glamorous?
World fame came when she could not she fully to borrow.

[NATA NOVA]

Seriy, anotomiyu have to learn to forget, to know not to remember ..

[Seriy]

NATA NOVA, which bans?
we talk of cultural cup of tea about life and art-Who's to blame?
What should I do?
- The eternal Russian questions .. the weekend :-)

[NATA NOVA]

Сообщение от Seriy

which bans?

Creative <Creative!
That's when I start a lot of terendet (react, grovel, this signal: "time pobanitsya" (mental organization such ..)

Added after 15 minutes

Сообщение от Seriy

her life was not easy,

Seriy, Lempicka, ingenious appropriator and glamor, its engine, the life you can find a lot ..

[I-V]

Seriy, an excellent portrait was (och. like).

Not Lempicka, of course, the other - something in the spirit of the English school, specifically, "Bloomsbury" (Vanessa Bell, Duncan Grant, Bernard Meninski, etc.) Good job, in a word