Crit me

>>2718860
it's shit, kys

>>2718860
What is the thing in the center? Is it like a representation for a heart or something?

>>2718860
Pretty dumb.

File: IMG_1469.jpg (1MB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x2448px

>>2718871
Close! It's a artificial heart. Robotic yet beating

>>2718861
>>2718873
Constructive as usual.

>>2718860
>>2718876
Why? What is the point of this? What are you even expressing?

>>2718883
I'm getting really fucking sick of telling people I love them. The words are becoming hollower with every utterance, yet I need to speak them.

>>2718883
You can't tell from the image, but that font is constructed from 8-segment displays like in old alarm clocks.

It's becoming mechanical.

>>2718888
I hope someone murders you.

>>2718876
>Constructive as usual.
because you are shitting up the board and we don't want you here

when you go also take >>2718885 and >>2718568 with you

File: IMG_1409.jpg (868KB, 1784x1784px) Image search: [Google]

868KB, 1784x1784px

>>2718898
>Shit on an artist threads
>Mango threads
>Story threads
>meme threads

And asking for a critique is shitting up the board? Fuck you, Look at the title
>/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>2718908
do you want to know what all those threads got in commune and your thread doesn't?

after reading them I end up saving random pics which I like, and I might study them later to understand how the artist did certain things, or I might have a discussion with a random anon on what a certain artist did wrong or right, or simply vent my real life or art stuffs with others

what your thread does is only to kill such a good thread from the bottom of the catalog

>>meme threads
this is one

>>2718860
no

burn it

just no

File: debo_009_05_01.jpg (43KB, 800x555px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 800x555px

Sorry but this board is strictly obsessed with traditional art and have a very condescending view on many forms of abstract work due to the lack of skills and practice required.

And to be frank, what kind of feedback do you even expect? Isn't the basis of collage work purely based on the idea itself? As far as I know there are no standards on which to critique them.

Furthermore, most collage work from avant-gardists that are similar to yours are pretty much impossible to understand without the context of the work. For example, pic related is the work of Guy Debord under the Situationist International movement. It was created to challenge the cartographic orthodoxies of representation by the 'spectacle' (which is a term they used to refer to mass media). And this goes on and on with their philosophical views and attempts to invent new forms of social ordering. These kinds of work, despite having meaning behind them, is nothing more to me than bullshit if I can't understand it without the presence of context.

File: DSC02345.jpg (191KB, 731x1500px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 731x1500px

>>2718932
I'm going to properly respond to this when I get back from work. I need to run at the moment.

However I agree that these works need to be contextualized and situated. I view my works as non-representation landscapes taking posters and advertising materials from a given region as their base. From this landscape I may try hamfisting in a concept or simply let the fragments exist as design elements. Previously I was trying to create glyphs informed by the elements.

For some context
> https://theblackbox.ca/project/mapping/
> https://www.instagram.com/blackbox.art/

At the end of the day it can still be critiqued on design solely.

>>2719024
Yo my G - since your work is graphical in nature and collage like i would look to graphic design for inspiration.

I would think of employing contrast in shape - areas of rest and areas of noise - for example the last image you posted is cluttered a lot, the images you sample as collage material has to be sorted a bit, think of cutouts that would provide visual interest, and others that serve as bigger shapes that create areas of rest - too much noise eliminates any sort of focal point, which can be a strategy if you are trying to create patterns or imagery of similar purpose.

As you are trying to communicate something, or put more focus on one thing over the other - i would suggest from a visual standpoint to be more deliberate in the types of contrast you create.

This is also strictly visually speaking.

Conceptually, i would think of the nature of the imagery you sample, pick things that put each other in a sort of tension, that create an idea together so as to avoid just having arbitratry symbols - it must work as one cohesive statement.

http://garadinervi.tumblr.com/

A graphic design blog that i look at often, even though most of these are of commercial nature, the simplicity and clarity of communication (or otherwise) is something you should pull from.

I hope this helps :-)

>>2718860
I like the overall concept, but the background could have used more thought. The little cut up pieces make it look messy and amateurish.

File: Unknown.jpg (232KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1080x1080px

Splitting these up to dump some work.

>>2718932
>Isn't the basis of collage work purely based on the idea itself? As far as I know there are no standards on which to critique them.
The effectiveness of communication could be critiqued. Material handling, contrasts, composition, line & shape, effect as well. Not really standards, but there is always room for improvement and I'm not sure where Loomis is. I've been looking at Thomas Hirshhorns work as of late. Collage is mainly a deconstructive conceptual technique though, it's hard to construct something new (what I was attempting with the glyphs).

I actually love that way of mapping out an area. By psychological relations rather than physical geography. In our increasingly decentralized world physical boundaries are meaning less and less. For fucks sake I'm taking about art shit on a hungarian borscht imageboard. That's one problem with gathering materials, for all the time I spend in front of my computer I need screenshots and clippings. I've experimented with printing over already collected materials as a way to try bridging this gap between online ephemera and physical collage.

All I know is that reality is extremely fragmented on or offline and blurs together. That's why I feel a representational landscape is a bit of a sham. It does nothing to represent the landscape as perceived, but captures the landscape as is or landscape + painterly eyeballs.

See Map Understand Believe Action

File: Unknown-1.jpg (201KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 1080x1080px

>>2719067
With that one I put myself into a corner. By adding the text ontop and trying to fit it to its original layout I severely limited my options while creating it. There was maybe 4-5 peices that could fit into a given area at any place and still be cohesive, that restricted me in trying to organize my canvas. Personally I kind of hate it. In other peices I restrict my form to this goddamn energetic triangle (@kandinsky) and then use it as a generic field of color.

The idea was to take some generic blatantly commercial imagery and deconstruct it, reconstructing a new cohesive (important, cohesive!) from the fragments. As far as the sentiment I was trying to encapsulate robotic going-through-the-motions love. A love that is essential to life yet so goddamn stale. Ironic / Sincere at the same time.

File: Unknown-2.jpg (173KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1080x1080px

>>2719028
I'm actually going to cross post this to /gd/, but I never even considered going that route. I'm a painter and have been looking at these damn things as pure hue paintings. Huh.

>contrast in shape - areas of rest and areas of noise
There's a reason I prefer to use the triangle. It's simple to cut out and leads to a jumbled (albeit messy) rhythm. It leaves the eyes rolling about the composition like a fucking rollercoaster following sharp line here and there. But varying the scale of some form to reveal imagery and let the eye rest is a good idea. These shapes are too damn similar in scale. Maybe a sphere or two, but fuck rectangles. I'm using square canvas for the balance it brings. But most of these works are pretty noisy.

>types of contrast you create
I need to try and blow away this even-ness in shape and material. I'm actively avoiding neutrals (commercial imagery and all that) but my handling and proportions could use a good dose of Itten. Material texture/source could be another one to abuse. I'm noticing these magazine cutouts handle much differently then my usual posters. I might be able to exploit that.

>Conceptually, i would think of the nature of the imagery you sample, pick things that put each other in a sort of tension, that create an idea together so as to avoid just having arbitratry symbols - it must work as one cohesive statement.
This is my biggest problem. I'm waffling around with statements. Mind pointing me to some resources with cohesive statements? That blog was a good start. Would be appreciated. :3

File: 1464166427880.jpg (176KB, 568x543px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 568x543px

>>2718876
>constructive as usual

Easiest bait of my life, and you've got 19 whole replies.

If you can't tell why you're part of the reason art is mocked then I want to be as ignorant as you. Life must be super enjoyable.

>>2719263
Where do you see yourself heading with collage work? Also curious to know what initially steered you in this direction?

>>2718860
This is the stupidest shit. You are why most western art is trash. Bet you cant draw a fucking passable face.

>>2719266
>>2718860

these two are cool
i don't really care for the other ones

File: Unknown-1.jpg (214KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 1080x1080px

>>2719309
>>2719680
>If you can't tell why you're part of the reason art is mocked then I want to be as ignorant as you. Life must be super enjoyable.
>Bet you cant draw a fucking passable face.
Because I'm waffling about some little cut up shapes? Please enlighten me fgt. I'm not a figurative artist. That and I am socially avoidant and don't look at people when I talk to them. Fun fact, when I paint faces I need to view it as goddamn landscape. I'm face blind. Wooooooo.

But seriously, this shit takes skill and I invite you to do better.

File: Unknown.jpg (223KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 1080x1080px

>>2719698
Thanks, they're simpler though. A focus on one central figure/symbol.

>>2719678
>Where are we going.
Collage is excellent for deconstructing an environment/idea, but we've had a good solid 50 years of postmodern critical bullshit. My goal is to find a way to construct ontop of this deconstructive method. I think >>2718860 is a good step toward this. Sure it's made of discrete components but they create a cohesive message/image. We'll see how this goes.

>What steered me
Used to be an oil painter, mainly landscapes but over the past year I've been integrating collage elements. The works by Picasso/Gris were sort of my launching point. Once I went full cubist I started working in other streams of abstraction. It got to the point where I was using collage as a method for underpainting my oils and creating symbols on top (mostly Emoji and the like). Eventually I tried going non representational with my symbols (letting the under collage speak to the design) and now I just said fuck it and do collage.

Here we are.

>this thread exists
>my humble plea for critique in the beginner thread ignored alongside others

welp i guess its my fucking fault for not opening my own thread
sage

>>2720154
>sage
>name
>2k16

I dont get it. It is quite visually unappealing and messy to be honest. Maybe minimalism would have worked better with just a black Background and the main Motive as a well lit photograph

>>2718888

I cut myself on that edge.

>>2718914

>You best start believin' in meme threads Miss Turner