So I was in drawing II the other day and my professor says
"Why would you want to draw like the old masters?"
"So what they can produce realist drawings of the human form? That's no fun"
"Their pieces are unimaginative and boring"
None of us could voice our opinions without our grades getting completely shit on so we let it slide.
I'm a not even a drawing major but god damn did this make my fucking blood boil. hOLY fucking shit
Photorealism wasn't really a trend in art until the 1980's. The "old masters" all copied from life, but exaggerated the human form to whatever idealization and/or convention was popular at the time, i.e. long necks, tiny dicks, masculine females, etc.
OP, your professor sounds like he's trying to be "cute and pomo". Don't take him too seriously. If the old masters inspire you, then study from them. You certainly won't be wasting your time by studying the old masters.
Fuck you. Just because something has a hint of realism doesn't make it a photocopy. Even portraits have elements of composition, selecting what to depict, and color/value choice. Look at rembrandt's self portraits and tell me they're photo-realistic copies.
>le human photocopier
I guaranfuckingtee you think realism artists always copy from life.
>inb4 muh style.
You can't even draw realism from imagination, so you need to project yourself through others, calling them "le autistic human copy machine realism is shit and boring never try it".
I'm not an attention whore like you, begging for likes with pieces of shit anyone can do, that you refer to as "stylistic".
Yeah, faggot. Point out where did I mentioned "cheating".
If any little cunt wants to defend animu drawings/throw shit at hyperrealism please tell me what pictures did the artist (le human copy machine) use to paint picture related.
Moebius said that he admired those old guys and wanted to do a classical piece, but to do so you have to study for years in one particular style and also sit on one picture for long-ass time while he needs to make a good picture in 10 minutes. If he draws for 10 minutes and it's not good for him, he scraps it.
>If any little cunt wants to defend animu drawings/throw shit at hyperrealism please tell me what pictures did the artist (le human copy machine) use to paint picture related.
Ask your teacher to do an alla prima anonymously from life for a chops test & that everyone knows about the inquiry.
Hate me some punkbitch teachers, man.
>My tutor said similar things the other day, get over it
I was talking to one of the better painting tutors from my paint&print course about how I was now studying anatomy at post grad. He knowing anatomy doesn't make your life drawings better, he pretty much said that all the stuff I wanted to learn was outdated and useless and I should just be making work. But you know what? I said to his face that I disagreed, whilst still respecting his opinion and joked about being an old fashioned old soul. We talked some more, I went home and didn't make a thread on 4chan about it.
Because different people believe different things, and doesn't make them 'right' or 'wrong' or even bad artists.
Grow up OP
But he is right.
The autistic level of anatomy mastery that /ic/ holds in high regard is completely useless both in the modern art industry and in the commercial art industry. It won't get you into a gallery and it's a waste of time for publishing projects.
You really don't need to be any better than solid construction and basic bone/muscle landmarks. If at that point you still dedicate more time to studying anatomy than you do to design, composition and storytelling, your art is useless.
If your humans already look like humans but you still refuse to produce finished pieces because "it's not at the level I want yet", you're just making excuses not to hurt your fragile ego and will never make it.
That's one problem I have with /ic/ - I can't learn design or composition for shit from it. No materials of any sort anywhere. People don't even post their inspirations or what they want to achieve or why they thought they will draw like this and this.
Week ago or so we had a thread that asked specifically about this, how to tell story with an image or painting. There were some fine examples posted there, like this one digital painting of an older guy sitting in self-made body armour playing with superhero dolls when being approached by younger gangsters with machettes etc. One of them was sitting next to him reading a newspaper with some future date and article about youth violent crime wave after the contamination spreads outside.
There was just so much going on there and from everything in it you could piece a story and a mood, the way the older character looked up with shocking gaze, how the younger guy was non-chalantly leaning over him, how the other guy sitting next to the older guy was keeping his cool but still being part of it, bandaged hands and all...
You know, not even animation or comic, but a single drawing can and should tell a story by good composition and initial design. Frankly I feel the most important from all those tutorials and books I've read was this page:
And I never seen anything like this posted ever again on /ic/ bar animation general.
This, storytelling/composition is what makes an image ingrain itself in the public's mind.
All the most famous paintings are scenes save for "La Gioconda" and "Girl with a Pearl Earring", the first is aided in it's popularity by intrigue and an exiting life history, and the second interacts with the viewer.
Hell most famous portraits are storytelling through iconography.
Even in sculpture anatomy is less important than gesture. The last sculpture thread had a bunch of anatomically perfect but artistically meaningless sculptures.
Which are the ones that ingrained themselves on people's minds? The Lacoon Group, The Thinker, Pieta, Rape of Proserpina, Beata Ludovica, all thick in storytelling. Even David breaks anatomical accuracy for the sake of good gesture and spectacle.
I mean he's wrong. I'm a faggot who loves all sorts of contemporary art - from abstract to conceptual to whatever - but your instructor is an idiot if he thinks that the old masters are boring. They persist for a reason.
Painting and drawing have meaning in them. Even if you paint a photo perfectly, the painting will have a totally different effect. There's no escaping it.
The old masters didn't even do very realistic paintings. They often had highly stylized anatomy and rendering techniques and color palettes that were far from what life actually looked like. Why do so many plebs confuse the old masters with the 19th century realist masters?
Not to say the 19th century masters were human photocopy machines either, that'd be an equally retarded statement, but they did paint more realistically and true to life than the old masters.
>The autistic level of anatomy mastery that /ic/ holds in high regard is completely useless both in the modern art industry and in the commercial art industry.
I just wanna draw porn of my waifu ;_;
Assuming against my own good judgment that you're not trolling...
Don't draw realistic porn.
Check out all the best realistic smut, it's almost entirely single-subject pin-ups. Realism impedes many of the solutions stylization allows for showing more dynamic and interesting scenes.
Porn compositions are so repetitive and boring compared to hentai because there's just so many flattering ways you can represent two+ bodies fucking in a real or realistic setting.
That's not completely true, if your passion is truly in anatomy and the human figure and not just because you got peer-pressured by anonymous users, you can still make a great career out of it.
For example, see Scott Eaton
>This, storytelling/composition is what makes an image ingrain itself in the public's mind
>Yeah, let's talk about the fucking painter and the meaning of lesser details inside his work instead of the hideous shit he produces. That's how you critique art now. Stupid plebs will never get it.
Nigger, back in my times ironic comments were short and funny.
Have you seen what they do? Most modern artists have literally no sense of conposition.
>mfw in vocational art college
>mfw only 2 year program
>mfw 6 years of experience and I'm outta this shitty country and have my h1b visa
fuck liberal art colleges, vocational is where its at, usually still decent teaching but no bullshit social justice aspect
One more retard that's not gonna make it.
If you don't even understand what storytelling WITHIN a painting means everything you draw is a waste of time. Drawing for drawing's sake but never art.
i didn't say photobashed, i mean it could be but most likely he used collage/photobash as a reference to paint from.
is that to understand? am i blowing your mind here? are you in school?
If a pleb can't understand the meaning of your painting, it's shit. The power comes from bottom to top being able to appreciate it, not some shitty "enlightened" club of subjective faggotry.
Hah you people are so fucking insecure. Everyone in this thread who thinks realism is a waste of time must be into anime and stylized fan art! Haha nice projecting.
I wish you luck though, the only people that will like your realism art will be insufferable pretentious snobs. Have fun with that.
>bottom to top being able to appreciate it
>"enlightened" club of subjective
All these faggots getting insecure because it turns out muh perfect anathumee means shit in real art both fine and commercial.
/ic/ has always been a waste of time because you absolutely devote yourselves to the least important aspect of art.
I'm not that organized senpai, I chucked a lot of that old trash. Just take it from me I couldn't draw the figure for shit back in 2008-9, now I'm decent, here's a recent sketch from life drawing.