How do you improve?

>make shitty paintings
>looks like shit

>professional makes shitty painting
>looks good

how

File: download (1).jpg (3KB, 214x235px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 214x235px

>>246644
>How to improve?
Be Rothko

File: rothko1.jpg (116KB, 720x932px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 720x932px

>>246644

File: image.jpg (280KB, 2040x1360px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 2040x1360px

>>246644

File: midday in the outskirts of moscow.png (4MB, 1266x1806px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1266x1806px

>>246644
use smaller brushes
use more colors
>pic related

when someone ask you what the fuck is this. tell them "this is what blind people think sunset would be.Every blind people always want to know how the world look.this id what he tells mebla bla bla "

>>246689
Thanks for making an old man laugh, topkek

>>246706
I hope you're joking you ignorant swine!

>>248029
Oh you can go all elitist on me but the truth will always be craft > concept. Even when talking about improvement. I see how you can sit around for hours and improve your ability to conceptualise. But to me it'll always be a point a view at a given time. Whereas craftwise you can improve your skills and nobody can argue, it's there.
I've never been fond of this entartete kunst anyway.

>>248310
Ah dear Anon, there is plenty craft involved in Rothko's work, if you actually even did a little background research. Tell me your thoughts of abstract painters like Kandinsky and Klee.

>>247903
Is their truth to this statement? you sound very factual and i dont know enough to dispute it.

File: thomas_kinkade_oil_painting.jpg (35KB, 566x378px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 566x378px

>>248333

> this image triggers the abstract expressionist

>>246706
reducing is so simple – thats why its so hard. You can always add shit, its not improving.

>>248333
pleas don't ask. we know his answer already

>>248333
>trips of discord
Alas my friend, I was only talking about improving the craft of representing something with brushes ("thing" or "thought" or "emotion").
I'm stating that although you can improve both, an improvement in your mastership of representation can be observed while an improvement in the conceptualisation of said representation can always be questioned because in the end it is a matter of opinion.

That said, I admit liking kandinsky from what I've seen (don't know his work much). Not because of good craftmanship but because it is to my taste.

and >>248396
>reducing is so simple
Yes I see you've managed easily to reduce your intellect enough to hop up a bandwagon you don't even understand. With your almighty superior feeling you've judged me and you obviously don't need to hear my point so please don't read above.

File: 8ae66f79bbf0e8c330700a61446b1328.jpg (88KB, 650x805px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 650x805px

>>248425
>craft = accurate representation

If that's your interpretation of craft, I wonder how it's possible for you to find Kandinsky to your taste. You speak as if any abstract painter (like Rothko) doesn't hold the knowledge or skill of depicting realism, when in actuality the majority of the most revered painters went to art school and learnt everything from the ground up.

Their development (as painters) and their own personal interests impact the visual style of their work towards the new. It's natural for painters to experiment. Why half of /ie/ (and 90 percent of /gd/) insist on limiting a painter's ingenuity and rep to displaying craftsmanship in realism singularly is baffling to me.

What is your taste? I'm curious.

Speaking personally, I'm a lover of both the old (Renaissance and Medieval in particularly) and the new. I say new, but I don't mean all, or even most conceptual or contemporary art. There's a handful of modern pieces of work I like, and a couple of artists, but that's all really. It's very easy to fall into the trap of saying 'compared to the old stuff, this is new stuff is crap', but you really mustn't. Art is meant to be a personal experience, the work shouldn't be ranked and lined up next to the Ghent altarpiece before deciding it's value. You decide. For me it takes a level of craftsmanship, and a level of communication that the piece has to emit.

I feel both Anish Kapoor and Marc Quinn do both of those, so I respect the work.

>>248442
/ic/ *


brainfart.