Modern art is intended only to ensure that plunge the viewer into shock

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Meister, Jan van Eyck (niderl. Jan van Eyck, approx. 1385 or 1390-1441) - the Flemish painter of early Renaissance, a master of the portrait, the author of over 100 compositions on religious subjects , one of the first artists who have mastered the technique of painting with oil paints. Leonardo da Vinci (Leonardo da Vinci) (1452-1519).

[Meister]

I put it completely wrong. As far as I read that the da Vinci found a way to strengthen the composition of oil, due to which it is better to fall on canvas, reproduce colors and persisted. Those of oil, the brothers invented van Eykami, had many shortcomings, so not popular. This is the version that I knew. Glad I will hear other versions.

began to look into this issue, and now that he has found.

http://www.openspace.ru/news/details/328/

Oil painting techniques were invented in the territory of modern Afghanistan for centuries, before it mastered in Europe. That is the conclusion reached by French scientists who examined the oil painting of the Buddhist complex of Bamiyan (Bamiyan).

Buddhist monastery in the caves of Bamiyan functioned in IV-VII centuries AD Here, in particular, were carved two giant statues of Buddha that were blown up by extremists from the Taliban as "idols insulting Islam".

After the overthrow of the Taliban forces of the international coalition in Baminane reopened scientists. Oil paintings made on cave walls and depicting the Buddha, discovered by Japanese scientists for the first time they were dating VII century AD Now the French have confirmed this pre-dating.

According to various estimates, in Europe began to paint in oils between X and XIII centuries.

[LCR]

Сообщение от Meister

As far as I read that Da Vinci has found a way to strengthen the composition of oil, due to which it is better to fall on canvas, reproduce colors and persisted. Those of oil, the brothers invented van Eykami, had many shortcomings, so not popular. This is the version that I knew. Glad I will hear more versions.

Deficiencies were of course, yes, they have now, but nevertheless, most of what is called "Flemish primitives", oil, as well as Italian easel painting 14-15 cc ..

Returning to the da Vinci: He really experimented with oil. In particular, he tried to use oil murals (Last Supper). Unfortunately, his experiment had the most unfortunate consequences for the preservation for this painting.

Сообщение от Meister

began to look into this matter, and now that he has found.

http://www.openspace.ru/news/details/328/

Oil painting techniques were invented in the territory of modern Afghanistan for centuries, before it mastered in Europe. That is the conclusion reached by French scientists who examined the oil painting of the Buddhist complex of Bamiyan (Bamiyan).

This reflects mainly the fact that the grand opening of the "hover in the air and made independently of each other in different places, that is, the development of European painting of the discovery of oil in Afghanistan, had no value

[Meister]

Сообщение от LCR

The disadvantages, of course, was, yes, they have now, but nevertheless, most of what is called "Flemish primitives", oil, as well as Italian easel painting 14-15 cc ..

but how can the Italian easel painting 14. painted with oil, if it was invented by van Eykom only 15 in. He could not have it in 10 years to invent and circulate everywhere at once?
After removing the issues of oil equipment maker, still turns out that its invention in the 15 th century gave a powerful impetus to the development of art in the next two centuries. Do you agree with me?

Сообщение от LCR

This reflects mainly the fact that the grand opening of the "hover in the air and made independently of each other in different places, that is, the development of European painting of the discovery of oil in Afghanistan meaning did not have

This is understandable, it's me for general information.

[LCR]

Сообщение от Meister

and as can be Italian easel painting 14. painted with oil, if it was invented by van Eykom only 15 in. He could not have it in 10 years to invent and circulate everywhere at once?
After removing the issues of oil equipment maker, still turns out that its invention in the 15 th century gave a powerful impetus to the development of art in the next two centuries. Do you agree with me?

Sorry, an error out)))
It should read, 15-16 centuries.

Perhaps you're right, the invention of machinery oil in 15-16 centuries. placed in front of the art new challenges. But before that it operated no less intense, has no less remarkable artists.

I think you look at the development of art from the outside - Indeed, the advent of photography in the late 19 century. art emancipated from the need to "make similar", so the events in the early 20. impression of a leap forward. But I'm not sure that the appearance of all these-isms so important. In the 20 century. were remarkable artists, they were before. Who in the 20. can compare, say, Rembrandt or Velasquez?

In my understanding there is no progress in art. Romanesque sculpture, for example, vizantiysaya mosaics or Persian miniatures for me - the highest, unsurpassed art.

[Frool007]

LCR, unfortunately artificial demand (banks, companies, businessmen from the art ...) looking for where to invest melting means, generates a lot of goods: ostensibly of paintings, drawings. items supposedly creative persons. Especially monetary enterprise "happening". Many of the people, everything seems in fact to the same "svyazi_svyazi_svyazi. It is well known that the art of win-win situation. Also need to maintain the price of what is already purchased and is in the bins. Net commerce. So it appears that an unknown person in the market is worth nothing.

[Meister]

Сообщение от LCR

I think you look at the development of art from the outside - Indeed, the advent of photography in the late 19 century. art emancipated from the need to "make similar", so the events in the early 20. impression of a leap forward. But I'm not sure that the appearance of all these-isms so important. In the 20 century. were remarkable artists, they were before. Who in the 20. can compare, say, Rembrandt or Velasquez?

In no case does not diminish the significance of Romanesque sculpture and Byzantine mosaics. L think I'll be more global. I say that in the history of art have been spikes in which the arts was gaining tremendous momentum, and that was produced later for several centuries, was based fundamentally on just those peaks. I absolutely agree with you that at all times were talented artists in every century. But their maximum concentration in one time in one place "falls exactly on these outbreaks. Agree that the ancient Greeks, and later the Romans for many centuries ahead have predetermined shapes and forms of art. After Byzantine art grew out of Roman and not whether such a development culture in Greece and Rome, no one knows when to appear Byzantine art. Sculpture, mosaics, vases, paintings, etc. - It's actively developed precisely at the time of ancient Greece and the Roman Empire, so I think that if there was a strong leap in the development of art. (and, I would like to mention a European. to Asia, he had nothing to do. so happens that we are exposed to pro-European point of analysis of the stories).
Next, in my opinion, the strongest in the art of revolution came with the invention of oil. You yourself see how many names: Raphael, Michelangelo, Velasquez, Titian, Rubens, Cranach, Breughel, Bosch, etc. Where the same name between 500-600, and 1400? and where the same names since the mid 17 to mid 19? Yes, in these times of big names to appear, but their unity.

Сообщение от LCR

Indeed, the advent of photography in the late 19 century. art emancipated from the need to "make similar", so the events in the early 20. the impression of a leap forward.

Not bad impression. Impressionism, expressionism, abstrakitsya, supremacism - that impression? Gauguin, Cezanne, Monet, Van Gogh, Kandinsky, Campendonk, Marc, Picasso, Dali, Filonov, Malevich - this impression? All right already, we will not consider Dyushama, Pollock and Warhol ... this century there was a grandiose leap forward in the art was invented many new types and forms that do not understand that concept at all possible to invent a new right now. That is what was dedicated to my first post that you have a light hand was called a fool.

[LCR]

Сообщение от Meister

agree that the ancient Greeks, and later the Romans for many centuries ahead have predetermined shapes and forms of art. After Byzantine art grew out of Roman and not whether such a development culture in Greece and Rome, no one knows when to appear Byzantine art.

Byzantine and Romanesque art in the same way as an obligation of Greece and Rome, in which the art of the Renaissance must romance and Byzantine art (yes, the continuity of communication with Greece, the Renaissance and the rhythm is written much, but enough to look at Ravenskie mosaic, to be sure, that the relationship of this art from the Byzantine Empire was no less strong, the influence of Romanesque art, and say nothing).

Сообщение от Meister

Next, in my opinion, the strongest in the art of revolution came with the invention of oil. You yourself see how many names: Raphael, Michelangelo, Velasquez, Titian, Rubens, Cranach, Breughel, Bosch, etc. Where the same name between 500-600, and 1400? and where the same names since the mid 17 to mid 19? Yes, in these times of big names to appear, but their unity.

During these periods appear not less than the great masters. Another thing is that their names did not reach us, for various reasons, not the most recent of which - that the Middle Ages did not practice the cult of the name ( "work without the artist's" - now, on the contrary, "the artist without works, for example, Duchamp, but not he alone)

Сообщение от Meister

Impressionism, expressionism, abstrakitsya, supremacism - that impression? Gauguin, Cezanne, Monet, Van Gogh, Kandinsky, Campendonk, Marc, Picasso, Dali, Filonov, Malevich - this impression? All right already, we will not consider Dyushama, Pollock and Warhol ... this century there was a grandiose leap forward in the art was invented many new types and forms that do not understand that concept at all possible to invent a new right now. That is what was dedicated to my first post that you have a light hand was called a fool.

Well, firstly, because for me, and not only for me, almost half of these names should be disposed of

Secondly, from left, who can be compare with Tami as quoted by you Rembrandt or Titian? The recent exhibition "Picasso and the old masters" demonstrated feebleness Picasso in comparison with some of El Greco.

Impressionism, expressionism, etc. - No more than words: the artists were good and not so good. For example, in cubism per Gris has a dozen Metzinger. But in general, if we talk about a painting, I am deeply convinced that 17 century to organic one example, far exceeds the 20 th.

[Meister]

Сообщение от LCR

The Byzantine and Romanesque art in the same way as an obligation of Greece and Rome, in which the art of the Renaissance must romance and Byzantine art (yes, the continuity of communication with Greece, the Renaissance and the rhythm is written much, but enough to look of Ravenskie mosaic, to make sure that the connection of this art from the Byzantine Empire was no less strong, the influence of Romanesque art, and say nothing).

continuity is present everywhere. It can not take something out of nowhere, must necessarily be based. Its size and extent of borrowing - is another matter. Something more impact, something less.

Сообщение от LCR

In these periods appear not less than the great masters. Another thing is that their names did not reach us, for various reasons, not the most recent of which - that the Middle Ages did not practice the cult of the name ( "work without the artist's" - now, on the contrary, "the artist without works, for example, Duchamp, but not he alone)

Ok, well call me then at least a dozen is between mid 17 and mid-19?

Сообщение от LCR

Well, firstly, because for me, and not only for me, almost half of these names should be disposed

Secondly, from left, who can be compare with Tami as quoted by you Rembrandt or Titian? The recent exhibition "Picasso and the old masters" demonstrated feebleness Picasso in comparison with some of El Greco.

даааа?? or you can specify what names to throw?
Who compared to Rembrandt? Malevich, Kandinsky, Filonov, Gauguin, Van Gogh ... I was shocked they are not less, and sometimes much more ...

Сообщение от LCR

Impressionism, expressionism, etc. - No more than words: the artists were good and not so good. For example, in cubism per Gris has a dozen Metzinger. But in general, if we talk about a painting, I am deeply convinced that 17 century to organic one example, far exceeds the 20 th.

Have always been both good and bad artists. At the same Titian had 1000, and even two very mediocre artists.
But in terms of innovation and depth of ideas, the 20 th century, I am sure, on both blades puts 15-17.

[LCR]

Сообщение от Meister

But in terms of innovation and depth of ideas, the 20 th century, I am sure, on both blades puts 15-17.

No, you serious?