Rothko thread pls explain

File: Francis Bacon Studies of the human body 1975.jpg (614KB, 1920x2599px) Image search: [Google]

614KB, 1920x2599px

Just to prove how I'm not a general hater of modernism, I fucking love Bacon. So feel free to also post your favorite works of his.

The sublime.

>>2582178
Please, I'm a blockhead. Bring more details.

File: Lucjan_Wedrychowski_The_Temptation_of_St._Antho_44060.jpg (28KB, 556x800px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 556x800px

>>2582169

Ok, what do you want? I can't explain to you how he became prominent because it's actually a fuckton of different things and his suicide probably added to the attractivness to his art. But about art itself:

Color field painting is basically doing color studies as described in Hornung's book "Color: A Workshop For Artists & Designers 2ed".

Rothko is an example of extremely good color studies. Remember that what you see on the internet doesn't really give credit to his paintings - he required every painting to be seen from specific distance and in specific light conditions, some of his paintings should even be seen in darkness.

He mastered color and was basically at the end of what fauvism started. His simple forms due to the color choice give illusions of being further back or in the front or even moving/vibrating a bit like in his "Yellow and Gold". He also had this idea of standing close to fuckhuge canvas to be swallowed by color. Also no borders to give that feeling of a painting being only a part of a whole.

See at this painting of Lucjan Wędrychowski. If you stand in gallery normally you can't see the face in the smoke, you need to position yourself specifically to be able to find it. Similar things but turned to 11 happen with Rothko.

To be honest, Rothko is one of the few painters where I would say you can't really get it unless you see the paintings in person.

His process is pretty crazy. He developed many new techniques that are still used today in traditional color mixing. Like using vegetable oil mixed with pigment to create extremely translucent and reflective washes. He did hundreds of layers on his paintings to create his effect. Allowing light to penetrate into the very thin layers of paint and give that real depth.

I guess you can understand then why a computer screen image doesn't do it justice.

>>2582197
even on my monitor, staring at the OP image as big as it'll go, the line between the yellow and gold is constantly shifting/panning, almost vibrating even, it's a very neat effect

>>2582169
Reminds me of the patches of paint left behind for the last paint job, on walls of museums where they only paint around the object and leave the original paint colour on an unseen spot behind the painting frame or something

>>2582169
they're very calming to me and there's a sense of getting swallowed whole by the atmosphere, a lot of it is lost in a small digital photo and there really is a different effect when you see the color fields on a huge canvas.

there's also something I like about the subject matter and the context being stripped away, the art getting to the emotional core of things. of course I like representational painting as well but I think there's a place for art like this, and I believe it came from a genuine place and not from someone trying to be pretentious, so it doesn't matter to me whether it took an insane amount of skill or not.

File: rothkosubwayseries1.jpg (160KB, 721x480px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 721x480px

>>2582208

This is pretty true I think. There's also a pretty good documentary about him I forget the name but it's part of a series.

I like his early work too, jarring for some reason.

If you're ever in London, go to the tate modern. On the third floor there's a room specifically built for a series of his paintings, the Maroon and Black ones. They're placed across from eachother and the lighting is dimmed. Standing and getting lost in them is something pretty special.

>>2582169
its because people are desperate to seem "deep" so they choose the shittiest art pieces, and and call them masterpieces to make people think that they are "deep"

>>2584680

Confirmed for knowing jack-shit about painting and colors.

>>2582169
>>2582172
The answer is, "modern art."

"Modern art" is a scam where people produce absolute piles of shit (occasionally literally), then get promoted by a gallery as being 'ground-breaking' and 'against the mold.'

This sham gained popularity in the mid twentieth century as galleries realized actual artists were somewhat rare (at least rare enough that you couldn't fill a new gallery with work on short notice) and often took weeks to produce a single piece. So galleries found they could make a whole lot more money by promoting "artists" who could shit on a canvas three times a day, then come up with a back story for the art instead of letting it speak for itself, then sell each piece for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

With absolutely nothing to do with that orange and yellow piece requiring any tangible skill on the part of the "artist," Rothko must also belong to this group.

>>2584269
>jarring for some reason.
The reason is it's shit. Of course it's jarring, those columns aren't even remotely near evenly spaced.

>>2584680
>>2584789
uh oh, whops, threw the fishing pole in instead. look, see, you went and got the hook caught in your hand as well. gotta be more careful, anon.

>>2582169
You're supposed to see it in person bruh

People have actually cried in the presence of these master pieces

It's supposed to over stimulate your sense of the far horizon or some shit

>>2584808
You probably think taking a photo of your lunch and throwing a filter on it is art too.

>>2584680
This. They're pseudo intellectual garbage who are too stupid to learn actual painting

>>2584827
>actual painting

File: ....gif (499KB, 300x248px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 300x248px

>>2584680
>>2584789
>people discussing artists like normal human beings
>NO ITS A PIECE OF SHIT AND ARTIST IS NOT DEEP JUST BRAIN DEAD

>>2584827

I'm 100% sure you don't know enough about painting, pigments, how to prime canvas or how to place layers of color on top of each other to achieve such effects like Rothko did.

>>2584963
Well I don't know about that other anon, but I sure don't. I also don't know how to draw ideal anime dickgirls, or photobash at Maciej levels. Guess I'll never be a gud arteest.

File: 1424467664_West, Benjamin (A Mighty Angel Standeth upon the Land and Upon the Sea).jpg (37KB, 400x594px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 400x594px

>>2585105

That's true, you will never make it. Let it be my first and last revelation for you.

>>2585105
The funny thing is, you actually won't, for the exact reasons you gave lol

>>2585112
Confirming Rothko, Maciej, and Shadman are the new trifecta of art gods of /ic/

>>2585115
Confirming Michelangelo and Sargent knew all about photobashing anime dickgirls against color fields.

>>2585152

>not knowing about camera obscura and Leonardo and Vermer
>not knowing that Caravaggio was drawing pretty boys like women, Leonardo being accused of contacting young boypussy whore and Michelangelo trying to get fucked by other painter

Oh wow, what a little faggot. Guess who isn't going to make it.

here comes the

>I hate this thing I viewed on my tiny fucking screen that was intended to be viewed in person, 5 feet from your face.

Go find a museum with some Rothkos, turn your phone off, and sit there with it for a long time...seriously...a long time. This is how it was intended to be seen, he never foresaw or created with the intent of some fat neckbeards viewing his paintings via photographs that were printed, then scanned, then scaled down to 600px wide, copied, re-copied, and poorly represented - all seen on these neckbeards' phones while they take a shit on the toilet.

>>2584543
I fucking love that Room. The room started to vibrate a bit sitting there forever. The soft edges of the colors started to disintegrate outward after a while.