I made that picture a while ago, I'm surprised someone saved it. I believe there is some truth to it. Did you save it from here or from elsewhere? I'd like to know how far it may have spread if at all.
>>2343460 The source for the bottom pic is the same as the one for the top, unfortunately I've long since forgotten what that is. I believe it's an entry test for an art school in China (it might not have been a college age school either, just for the record, I honestly can't remember). I bet you could find it if you cropped it out in photoshop and used google image search, I'd do it myself but I'm feeling sick and I'm going to call it a night.
>>2344179 found it on another site with this caption "Exam markers inspect students’ exam papers for the national college entrance examination to the higher academy of fine arts at the paper inspection site in Xi’an, Shaanxi province, China."
While I did make the image in op, I must admit I don't even have it saved to my computer and had deleted it shortly after I'd first posted it. In hindsight, I quickly became critical of the assertion I'd made with that image for a variety of reasons.
One reason being, while it might be called spontaneous, there is little 'original' about what the woman in the top picture is doing and it's long since past the time we stopped pretending that it was. This kind of art; pictures of oneself in 'zany' attire, not-so-edgy liberal political theatre, and miscellanea adorned in expletives are no less common in this world than are depictions of space marines, dragons, and chicks with rockin' tits of the sort that many artists are otherwise unfairly derided for.
Another reason is that I quickly felt that associating the emphasis of fundamental, foundational knowledge as somehow limiting one's ability to create original, spontaneous work was off-base. Rather, this is an individual (or a cultural) problem-and a common one at that. Having been imparted with strong foundational knowledge of the 'rules' of art is neither limiting, though nor is it a guarantee that the artist won't have the personality and imagination of a turnip. It was certainly wrong of me to use submissions to an entrance exam to promote, in a roundabout way, this idea that I never really agreed with.
So in short, I believe there is some truth to the literal statement it makes, but I'm conflicted about the message it sends, if that makes sense.
Its true but not necessarily a bad thing. >but look the west is just liberal bads shitting on walls and calling it art! there's plenty of good artists in the west as well. Originality is important especially for an artist. Having something interesting is far better than having something technical. While being able to do both is superior both are important to an artist and the former is harder to teach.
>>2344166 It sucks that there are no more fine art/actual art teachers! But there of course is hope in the world. First off, some of the paintings there are actually quite nice, and second, there are a few people who actually know how to draw realism, but they are often hard to find.
>>2344560 I'd say there's still plenty of good art teachers out there, you just have to seek them out and they'll straight up tell you you're shit and what you need to do to improve. Most people don't realize gitting gud is a self driven experience and expect the teacher to do it all for them. The issue with all the bad 'artists' isn't that their teachers are bad, its that they don't attempt to get better on their own time.
>>2343443 Asian art is mostly copying what's been done. I feel like there are gems among western and eastern art that combine technical skill and creativity. Just because you're drilled in fundmentals doesn't mean you're good, and the same goes to truly exploring the meaning and creativity that makes art.
It all boils down to how easily someone can recreate your art. If your idea is great but you suck technically, someone will just use your idea and do it better and vice versa. The ones possessing both will last many years in creative fields. One trick ponies will fade away once the trend is over. Skilled craftsmen will be just one of many. Although then the problem with art and design differentiation.
>>2343443 Incredibly true. Americans are lazy and dumb so that's why we invented abstract art. I go to a school that can be called purely abstract and conceptual. I have a girlfriend from China who is also an artist, and she tells me all about her education over there and it made her so amazing at fundamentals. I am almost the only sole artist in my school that has a heavy emphasis on perspectuve anatomy and technicality
>>2344166 Ironically, Richard Williams couldn't even find work as an animator if he had to start out in the industry today, because the average skill level of Calarts, Sheridan or Gobelins animation grads is way higher than what he ever reached during his entire career.
>>2345496 You must go to a really terrible art school if you are the best at fundamentals and anatomy. You might have memorized some anatomical landmarks and muscle groups, but you can't seem to properly construct and connect them at all. Also the face of that rider is just terrible. If you cared about fundamentals you'd at least have a simple Loomis head construction down.
>>2343443 I think it's partially true. Eastern art education however seems to much more successfully teach the fundamentals. Spontaneity and "originality" are worthless. The counterpart to purely technical skill is not that. I feel like it's a very shallow misattribution of what makes something artistic to say it has anything to do with spontaneity or "being original" (quotes because these people are rarely original). Originality comes just from being in your own time and place and doing things truly artistically, a way poetic in every aspect of it. I'm not sure if any schools actually teach that though, besides the bits which are alluded to in the study of tha fundies.
>>2344166 laughing because the school I go to has us learn traditional media as the very first thing, and if you can't into traditional drawing and painting then you can get the fuck out of their 3D design and animating programs. (Gnomon)
The guy being quoted in this pic doesn't know shit, stop posting it. There are plenty of traditional atelier type schools.
>There are plenty of traditional atelier type schools.
On what basis do you make that claim, because you personally go to fucking Gnomon? I live in a major metropolitan area in the u.s., and if I do a google map search for "art school" I get dozens (maybe hundreds) of dance, music and performance art schools, many enormous "conceptual art" schools, and only two small atelier style schools that are the size of a garage. How many "atelier type schools" exist where you live? Does it count as "plenty" if you have to travel all the way across the country or take courses online to attend it?
>>2346643 I look art classes at 2 different colleges,I had open slots not in my primary degree but of those classes I took almost all of them were foundational and technical based. There was plenty of the "but what does x mean? Is a blank canvas art?" But those are important questions to ask when thinking of deeper meanings. However you could bet your ass if you tried that shit on a real project your ass would get an F unless the prof knew you knew exactly what you were doing.
The 2 schools I went to weren't even big art schools, just run of the mill public universities. I'd be more shocked if art schools of higher standards are more lenient than that.
>>2346646 The person quoted has traveled to schools all over the world and lived through the phenomenon he's talking about. He's not saying that these schools don't simply exist-in fact in an omitted paragraph from this diatribe he claims that things are "getting better", but what he's saying overall is that with the rise of "anything goes" conceptual art they'd become the exception rather than the rule. Luckily, with the advent of the internet we can find the remaining (and emerging) schools that teach tangible skills if we want them, but even today, by going to your local art school you have a good chance of signing a large portion of your life away for absolutely fucking nothing.
I asked him if he knew what an anecdote was because he (likely a >25 year old anon) was speaking as if the entire world revolved around his personal experience at Gnomon (or at least that he knows better than an 82 year old career artist and lecturer that's been to schools across the world) for which, assuming he's one of the 290 million people in the united states who aren't native to California, he had to travel hundreds, maybe thousands of miles (or take courses online) to attend.
Maybe he does live in California or another state with a handful of decent schools to choose from, but if he doesn't, there's likely a reason he traveled as far as he did instead of going to any of his local schools. Again, it's not that "good art schools don't exist", it's that there are simply more schools that emphasize "anything goes" degenerate art than those that don't. A lot more. That's what the quote is about and why that poster is full of shit-nigga basically contradicted himself.
Art schools, as a rule, used to be exclusive places where you needed a solid understanding of fundamentals in your chosen craft to even consider attending, now with relatively few exceptions, these schools are "conceptual" art schools; for-profit money mills where naive adult children go to fingerpaint and play with garbage-and then leave in astronomical debt for their trouble.
>>2346865 Your entire post stinks of retardation. >This guy's anecdotes is better because reasons all anecdotes are bad and typically wrong. >muh cali there's good art schools across the country >more schools emphasize anything goes than don't I highly doubt that. >b-but look anecdote no. >art schools used to be an exclusive place where you build solid understanding of fundamentals in a specific craft no they haven't. I think you're trying to go back to trade schools, which did do such things because they're preparing you for specific work. but university art studies do not have the same goal as trade schools and they shouldn't. People have this weird idea that universities are supposed to teach you a job, this is not the case, they exist to prepare you for a multitude of different things so you can do things on your own time. Universities are supposed to put out people who, on top of knowing how to do certain things, are capable and willing to explore things that are beyond the common person.
>>2346876 >university art studies do not have the same goal as trade schools and they shouldn't.
>People have this weird idea that universities are supposed to teach you a job
Yes, people have this "far-out, wacky, zany" idea that if they're going to spend tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars than they ought to be left with a means of recouping their losses in the end instead of being coerced into taking selfies with cans of baked beans on their head or making drawings of turkeys using their hand as an outline for 4 years.
>Universities are supposed to put out people who, on top of knowing how to do certain things, are capable and willing to explore things that are beyond the common person.
>beyond the "common person"
More people attend college than don't. Attending a liberal arts college and being taken for everything you're worth for the next ten years with nothing to show for it except a "novel experience" is exactly what the common person is all about.
>>2346897 >spending tens to hundreds of thousands to learn how to draw you can do that for free, that's not why you go to college. >common person its not about if most people do or don't go to college, its that someone who goes to college should be able to do more than someone who didn't. What you learn in college should help you with your job, but their goal is not to teach you the job, their goal is to teach you how to do things beyond being a mindless piece in whatever industry you choose to work. If you want to be a concept artist for blizzard, so be it. But getting the degree means you should be able to use your own knowledge and abilities to improve upon existing ideas of concept art rather than just copy and paste the same images at a high quality.
If you're going to college to learn to draw you're wasting your time and money just as much as someone who gets a computer science degree just to become a code monkey.
>>2345496 Today you learnt a valuable lesson: Don't post your art on /ic/ to win an argument. It never works out. You can't even take the criticism you get from it seriously because it's just people trying to tear you down for disagreeing with their opinion on something.
>>2343443 I went to a fine art school in the US and can completely confirm the top half, at least based on attitude. We did have figure drawing classes and "study" classes but they were fairly minimal, and basically instead of being taught techniques we were just made to do whatever we wanted. Basically, it was 80% "practice in whatever way you want" after some point. Besides critique, there was minimal mentoring. Lots of people's portfolios consisted of stuff that looked like pic related. It counted as their own style though, so it was treated as equally as something that was very technically well-drawn, sometimes even better just because of the person's attitude as "an artist" made it legit or something. IMO it was really shitty. Made me lose all interest in academic art and I'm doing science now.
>>2348460 Also, to append: Some kids did draw/paint realistically with really great technque, but it was more of a "that's their style" thing rather than an ideal. Technique from certain people's portfolios was lacking basically because of the whole freedom thing. Some people didn't care about anatomy, so after the mandatory figure drawing classes they didn't have to do it anymore, so they "stunted their growth." But their portfolios consisted of other things similar to the pic in >>2348460 so it was ok. That's their style. I guess you couldn't "BS" your way through the whole thing though because if you couldn't draw for shit you wouldn't make it past auditions anyway.
>>2349078 to me there is 0 appeal. nothing going for it compositionally, ugly character designs, trying too hard with the anatomy (aka don't know how to apply it to real figures), ugly poses, flat, no thought on negative space, bad lines.. i could go on. it's just amateur and basic in every regard
>>2349078 basically it reeks of /ic/ anatomy compensation. >b-but look I got the anatomy (mostly) correct >t-that means I'm better than -those- losers r-right? As sarcastically stated the anatomy is mostly right, still pretty bad in parts but better than most. the drawing as a whole is pretty boring and generic though and has plenty of things wrong for someone claiming how amazing he is and how everyone else is so bad.
>>2344166 I feel weird after reading that. Thank god that I'm learning art properly. I'm entirely self taught and have been making really good progress only after 6 months. Very fast especially after reading how little progress some people can make in 1-3 years. I feel the only reason this is is because I'd forced myself for about 2 months to entirely draw as realistic as possible human anatomy/biology, realistic shading and realistic textures. Only after that did I begin with stylized stuff. Still sort of suck with drawing hands though. I'm considering getting into animation this year so I'm having to prepare myself for that.
Sorry for the blog. Pic related. Not my work but similar to my style and skill level. Though I've only drawn non-digitally.
this was true, in my case. the school I went to focused singularly on concept alone and really stressed abstract thinking. they scoffed at the fundamentals...I remember taking a basic drawing course where the professor said learning perspective was unimportant and wanted to just glaze over it as fast as possible. the guy idolized donald judd, btw, to give you an idea of his taste. the student gallery was also frequently a joke. I remember one time I walked in to see someone's display, which was literally nothing but store receipts stapled to the wall, unedited. god. needless to say, I quit the program after a year or so.
>>2343443 I think 'tradition' in a way is fundamental to contemporary western art. What it comes down to is not talent but justifying how your fits into the art world, networking and being famous. Whilst I hate the 'I could do that argument' for many artists talent is secondary to the fore mentioned points. At least thats what I reckons
>>2345407 >>2346604 His words were entirely factual at the time, art was dead, nobody gave a shit. It didn't return to Cal Arts and later Shediran until Eisner realized Keane wasn't getting any younger. Nowadays animation is back on stride but the late 90's and early 00's were particularily barren of good animation project that weren't pretty much a bunch of koreans following after an old master.
>>2351064 Mainly true but for many fields the professors are supposed to lead you along critical thinking so you're doing more than regurgitating information, aka the creative shit. This applies to all fields not just art. In more technical fields it's a guarantee they know a certain amount since you can't easily test all the necessary information needed in a reliable time frame for hires. With art however, even with a degree it is still highly portfolio based. You can almost as easily get an art job without college as with one given you're good at drawing.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.