History of Art

>>17660
Photography and film. Everything since from Picasso to Pollack has been just meme artists. Metropolis and 2001 are greater than any painting of the last 150 years

File: 8-magritte-the-lovers.jpg (88KB, 600x438px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 600x438px

>>17660

File: KennethClark.jpg (52KB, 460x288px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 460x288px

Civilisation is a pretty great documentary series.

File: BRUCEMOZERT12.jpg (69KB, 615x461px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 615x461px

>>17772
Why did photography develop? Was it out of need, or simple curiosity?

>>17870
idk I mean why not. Doesn't seem like something expected by ancient futurists unlike machines and flying

I know shit all about visual arts but I've studied music history, and it's largely a consequent of non-artistic events. Like, medieval art (or at least the shit that survived) is largely religious, and modern art was reactionary to shit like WWI. That kinda thing. Obviously technology plays a part too, if it can be used in composition.

>>18212
Yeah, I guess you're right.

File: Sainte-Chapelle-Interior.jpg (2MB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x1333px

Why are massive projects like pic related never undertaken anymore?

Is it because kings would commission them purely because they wanted to see something beautiful or leave a legacy, whereas a democratic committees would see it as too expensive and risky?

>>19865
Trump Wall could be the next feat.

>>17870
Speaking as someone with little direct knowledge: probably curiosity at first. Photography sounds like it would have been a good way to put newly-developed chemistry knowledge and techniques to good use.

>>20542
Wasn't there evidence of an ancient greek pinhole camera?