Simon Faibisovich, the exhibition "Evidence" on Gogol Boulevard, 10

[Вивьен]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky

That I love this picture.

You have good taste.

[L-ana64110]

Use a canvas-prints for the artist is slavery, m, e to be in captivity outcome-profit \\ if the name is well known \\.
This emasculation of the creative process,,,,, because the very state of inspiration, the imagination, intellectual activity is exactly what hypnotically fascinating artist, and voluntarily deprive themselves of such happiness - it is wrong and damaging.
I'm not against technological progress, but all must be justified objectives, well, if the goal is to get money for a branded name?? but it will not last long,,,

[Евгений]

Interesting discussion on the forum:

Сообщение от Tasha

Quote:
Note from Tyutchev:
"It's strange, when the artist complicates what can be done simply, that it is not clear what to photograph, then process the image in Photoshop, and then transfer it to the canvas with oil. Do not be simpler and fairer would be to print one image size you want (and so do many artists).
Explain to me please, why the artist do this? "
----------------------------------------------
tasha:
"I think an artist working in photo-realism, that explores the fine line that separates reality from art. You look in the mirror and see only the reflection of the real world. Minutes to watch five minutes of looking, looking at five o'clock, and suddenly the quantity turns into quality, op - pas, and you're through the looking glass! "When an artist redraws the picture, it adds something intangible, which is not in the original image. a little brighter the color in one place, just a dim light in another, something else and not having much sense in a piece of alien life generalize, merges with many fragments of your life and, therefore, is endowed with meaning. In my opinion, just empowering sense of meaninglessness and a goal in this case. add and theft of private life, creating a sense of community and belonging. When you look at the field photography - see "strange", picture impenetrable. A painting invites "enter". "
--------------------------------------
.......

[Тютчев]

My answer is Tash in this topic:

Сообщение от Tjutchev

Thanks, tasha, for a very interesting explanation. Your text shows you as a person who knows how to look inside themselves. This quality is truly creative person. I'm nice that you write exactly what the feel and realize themselves. I agree with you all except that the fine which yield fotorealisty in their works can not be achieved in conventional photography. Sami fotorealisty no secret of his method, and even emphasize the fact that its essence is precisely in the fact that the maximum accuracy to copy photograph. To quote an excerpt from the book Gantry OT "Photorealism" (Moscow, Galart, 1994):

"... If you still try to summarize the most important principles of their method, it will, perhaps, the following text -" symbol of faith "fotorealista:
- Human art of the late 20 th century after the temptations of pointless and conceptual art inevitably returns to the figurative, scene painting. To this return was not commonplace, the artist must avoid already passed the art of "realistic stamps.
- As modern man fotorealist becomes dependent on whether the visual material that surrounds it, from the environment saturated with visual information. Photography, film, television, reproduction, advertising - this is The Draw culture largely impress immediate reality, nature as such. To ignore such a powerful impact artist can not, but he can use it - to make this "second nature" and a hero, and an instrument of his art.
- Creating a picture, artist based on photographs, slides, reproductions, not only to simulate as closely as possible nature, and often with a desire to show the world already "missed" a camera lens. For him, photography is the subject of an equally real and important as reality itself. This - feature all the modern consciousness, often, when a reproduction of a snapshot of more convincing than what they depict.
- Fotorealist believes: technical means are able to convey the world undeformed. The artist does not trust his vision - it is selective, and approximately. Photography is fairly and accurately.
- New superrealnoe art should be created antitraditsionnymi means. photographs, slides transferred to canvas and are reproduced in detail. To get rid of the picturesque and remove strokes inflicted hand, the artist works-airbrush-paint, stencil, high-gloss acrylic.
- Large format - that's the only thing that should distinguish the picture as the final result of the original photo. And it gives rise to the enormous size of the viewer with a vague suspicion - in the film feels a certain absurdity, hidden meaning, a subtext. In fact, a visual document, reproduced pictorial means, acquires a new formal shell, but also semantics. When you copy photos (even if absolute and objective), a new meaning, beyond the reality of the image is connected with the detachment. In general, the aesthetics of photo-realism, this art is the end of the technological age, offers a way of interpreting contemporary issues of concern in their own way understands life ... "

I would only add that a huge amount of work with modern technologies is not a problem. It turns out that with the development of technical progress in the method no longer need. Fotorealistam no longer required to redraw the canvas slide in large size, it can be done using conventional photo technology.

http://forum.artinvestment.ru/showpo...5&postcount=26

[Евгений]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

Thank you, Tasha, for a very interesting explanation. Your text shows you as a person who knows how to look inside themselves. This quality of really creative person.

 Dear Tjutchev, agree with you ...

[Тютчев]

Сообщение от Eugene

Dear Tjutchev, agree with you ...

Where tasha?! What - a long time since I read her interesting posts! It is interesting to communicate with a person involved in the creative process itself. It will be very sorry if she, like many, left the forum. I'm tired of art - the compiler! Their understanding of art as it indirectly! They first hear the opinion of "authorities", and then decide whether it is good or bad. That's accepted now among the "advanced" Shishkina curse, how do they curse in vain! And see, feel and make their opinion - this is a luxury for them! Afraid to make a mistake, his - that understanding, no! And when you ask specific questions, in response to "profound" silence. And so we live ...

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Tjutchev

What - I'm tired of art - the compiler! Their understanding of art as it indirectly! They first hear the opinion of "authorities", and then decide whether it is good or bad. That's accepted now among the "advanced" Shishkina curse, how do they curse in vain! And see, feel and make their opinion - this is for them the luxury!

Have your personal opinion in matters of art - that's fine. Who can argue? But the existence of the prevailing opinion (consensus reached market trends) in this case should not be ignored. Otherwise, you can do so much "wonderful discoveries" that will not find it.
I recall that site and forum devoted to art criticism is not, and investment in the arts. Roughly speaking - a site about the money. Therefore, the problem of many participants - not to discover new names, and converting knowledge into money, to find variants with good growth potential price. I understand why this is happening. No one interferes in private place Surikova two heads higher than Malevich. But it will have to accept that the work of Malevich will always cost several orders of magnitude higher than Surikov.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Vladimir

website and forum devoted to art history is not

But interesting, and whether there are such sites and forums Initiation art history?

would have been interesting to go look and see how distinguished and well-known art critics put it their texts instead of placing them in magazines but in books and albums entered for the fees. - >

[dedulya37]

Сообщение от Vladimir

But it will have to accept that the work of Malevich always will cost several orders of magnitude higher than Surikov.

But this is a very controversial statement.
So it begs the language "do not judge, ye be judged."

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от dedulya37

But it is a very controversial statement.
So it begs the language "do not judge, ye be judged."

I do not see anything controversial here.
All the significant works of Vasily Ivanovich in museums, and Malevich serious things will still be at the auctions.
Compare the sale of paintings of these authors. Are the last lots:

Malevich: Suprematisch Composition
Hammer price USD 53 500 000
Sales date 03 ноя 2008
Location New York NY (US)
Size 88,5 x71 cm - (34,7 x28 in)
Auction house Sotheby's
Dated 1919
Lot number 6
 
Surikov: The Standard with the Madylion kept in the Armoury of the Moscow Kremli

Hammer price GBP 12 000
EUR 13 345 - USD 20 017 - GBP 12 000
Sales date 01 дек 2009
Location London (GB)
Size 42,5 x36 cm - (16,6 x14, 8 in)
Auction house Sotheby's
Dated --
Lot number 338