>studying the Equus genus when I find this pic Paleolithic

File: f1834148ba2c695fb96d22a76c4f91b4.jpg (155KB, 600x348px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 600x348px

It's more just the stylization of the anatomy I love, whether intentional or not. So fluid while retaining structure.

>>2932067
>Why is paleolithic art often so aesthetic and seemingly have such a nice grasp of shape, rhythm, anatomy and style (for the time period)?
Well they didn't just stiffly copy a photo or anything, it was drawn from memory after many many hours of observing these animals in the wild.

>>2932085
That doesn't explain shit. Most people have spent a lifetime observing a certain two legged animal an can't necessarily draw one in any sort of composition, gesture, or style

File: 84505-004-9AE8CD22.jpg (35KB, 550x363px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 550x363px

>>2932090
People don't look at other people the same way hunters watch their prey.

Paleolithic people also butchered their own animals, so they would have gained some anatomical knowledge from that.

File: chauvet.jpg (979KB, 1166x1217px) Image search: [Google]

979KB, 1166x1217px

>>2932067
I don't think paleolithic art is often as good as the (best) paintings at lascaux, except for chauvet (also in S. France) and a maybe a few others.

>>2932106
These are gorgeous, I love how they popped the lions with a white outline. It's funny how that sort of style is still sought after millenia later; Those lions may as well have been drawn on toned paper and appear in a gallery somewhere in this day and age.

>>2932106
Chauvet is some next level shit. The aesthetic is just so good, it seems obvious there were artists 30.000 years ago that must have been capable of human figure drawing. Those drawings just haven't survived, like the near-totality of prehistoric art. Too bad we'll never know much about the many cultures that have come and gone since then, short of having a time machine.

File: Chauvet2.jpg (237KB, 1368x1380px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1368x1380px

>>2932222
Sorry I forgot to congratulate you on your numbers by the way.

>>2932067
They also made the first steps into the world of animation:
https://youtu.be/UM7gRh41pBA

>>2932067
I always wanted to know the artist who drew these.
What kind of person they were? It fascinates me so damn much... I wish i could have time machine and meet one of them in the past.

Were they just nobodies? May be in their society people who could draw were treated like wizards?
Damn...i want to know more about those artists.

File: 1459400756828.png (950KB, 1280x5121px) Image search: [Google]

950KB, 1280x5121px

did those guys use sand as their sketchbooks?

>>2932402
[[[It was most likely women since the men were out all day hunting]]

>>2932434
>somehow, the one who didn't hunt knew how prey and predators looked like
>inb4 but anon, they look at the dead bodies of the food the males got back in the cage
>>2932375
the ones who drew those obviously saw the animals in their natural habitat

File: téléchargement.jpg (14KB, 276x183px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 276x183px

>>2932067
Cause they probably were focussing on representing movement and not form. There is that cave in Chauvet, France, were animals are represented like multiplied on top of each other like an animation storyboard

>>2932485
Oh I just saw some poeple already talked about that cave, nevermind haha

>>2932067
>>2932076
That's some great form
>>2932106
But that is essentially cubism/futurism, taking the same approach to representing movement

>>2932526
no, they didnt think about style. thats why they are so good. they weren bogged down by culture. there werent hundreds of art movements and they had nothing to build upon so they did only what they were interested in

>>2932103

What's the deal with those creepy humanoid figures? That's some ancient aliens type shit

>>2933071
probably some hairstyle or adornment that was the shit back in the day

>>2932357
>Those drawings just haven't survived, like the near-totality of prehistoric art
I think the general consensus is that it was taboo to draw the human figure in ye olden caveman days.

File: Lascaux_01.jpg (135KB, 315x231px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 315x231px

>>2934637
There are stone age cave paintings of humans, as well as little figurines (often a lady with big tits) 15k + years old. We just have an overall low sample size so it's hard to tell how common it was. And none of them are done with the skill level of the Chauvet painter posted above (which I agree are the only "good" stone age paintings uncovered yet).

Eg. this complete piece of shit

>>2934637
>taboo

more likely they drew animals for hunting purposes, some historians think that caves like chauvet were "school rooms" where more experienced hunters could teach younger ones about the anatomy and weaknesses of their prey

>>2934966
i doubt it, maybe they were made for storytelling sometimes but i think the main reason they did them was because the could and people liked it, like oh yeah thats a horse, cool

>>2934966
>>2935912
I mean frankly no one has any clue and they are just guessing. It's artwork done by a culture so far removed from anything around now and so long ago that it's difficult to know anything about the motivations behind it.