Share this Bulletin

Realism on OMM

Thu 13th Dec, 2007

The photo realism that some people do on here is really amazing. Some people are able to work from a photo and make it look like a photo once it's done. But is that beautiful? In my opinion, no. I have grown to dislike photo realism to be perfectly honest. Photo realism used to be the only thing that I could appreciate, but is that art? I do think it requires a lot of skill to draw so realistically from a photo or from life, but that requires so little imagination. I'm not saying that photo realism is not art, simply easy unimaginative art. I personally can render things amazingly realistically. I can make images that look like a photo. I have that skill, but do I use it? Not often. I prefer to come up with my own unique ideas. Think out side the box. I hate just copying a photo. That's skill, not art. When someone can use their imagination and then render something realistic with no photo referencing, THAT is what's amazing and beautiful. Or when someone can reference a photo, but put in their own colors, not make every shading bit correct. Some examples of that which I like are Hallie Stiller's large piece and Deanna's "Love Stinks" piece. Where they are not photo realistic, that gives them and amazing quality about them. You can see the movement of the brush strokes. You can see the colors. I think every piece needs movement, and the two I mentioned have it. They have a beautiful flow, and fantastic expression. They aren't just renderings of photos, but also a piece of the artist. Just a photo copy doesn't give the artist room to leave a bit of their own style behind. Also, Allison Pascoe's "I think... I Feel," is a great example of great use of color to render something realistic at the same time. I think the drawing tool that was created is great in the sense that it was Jozsef Fejes' great form of artistic expression, but i highly dislike the high extent to which it pursues realism. Is photo realism so beautiful? I think not. I think stylized pieces are beautiful.

These are my thoughts, if you're offended, let it be. I'm just sick and tired of seeing all this photo copying being praised on this site.

EDIT: So I logged on for the first time 2 weeks today (dec31) and was glad to see that the exact person I directed this to read my bulletin. However, I deleted the comment. As I said, "if you're offended, let it be." I don't want to argue. I posted this to get my views out, not to fight. Thank you.
And I feel as though I must clarify; I am not trying to put down realism, but put down photo copying. I do quite a bit of realism at school, but the images are from my brain, not from a photo. I guess my point is that art should be your own ideas, not a copy of someone else's photo.

Comments & discussion:

Jin K
Mon 17th Dec, 2007

thank you Maria. And I must say that I think your piece "Wink" is amazing. i love the colors. it's a beautiful rendering with imagination. :)

Maria De Gier
Sun 16th Dec, 2007

I agree. Though I do think there's nothing wrong with realism. As you say, an own interpretation on a photo is much more worth than a copy. Copies aren't really useful... as there is the original being more perfect, always.

Making your own photo's though, using them to inspire you, is as much art as creating an image from your head alone. Remembering how things look like is, in a way, taking a mental picture as well-

I think you have to have some skills to be an artist.

that skills can involve realism, but to me, the skill to create ideas , emotions, stories... is as much important.

Just never stop learning. Never stand still.

Jin K
Fri 14th Dec, 2007

thank you deanna :) that last sentence is exactly what i was trying to say. I wrote it out in a few paragraphs, but you eloquently put it into one sentence. :)

Deanna
Fri 14th Dec, 2007

Wow, I cant say that I disagree with your opinion, while it makes for a lovely picture (realism) but where is the imagination. It does have beautiful results yes, but it is not for me. I do think it is amazing that someone can make a painting look as if its photography, And it is a wonderful way to show expression and feeling, its art in every sense of the wayI just dont prefer to draw realism from a picture.

I might get inspiration from a picture but I will not sit there with it in my hand as I try and render every little detail. I rather take a glace then close my eyes, I try and feel what the person was feeling and then add in my own feelings at the same time. Like you have mentioned, my painting Love Stinks, was inspired from a glance in the mirror, I was sad and crying. I had to get it out so I signed on and started to paint that reflection of my feelings. When the painting doesnt look like me, it does show my feelings at that time. When I could have gone grabbed a camera and take a picture of myself, then start to draw from the photo and made every little thing look like me I choose not to, thats just what I like. While Realism from a photo is a beautiful art form, in my own opinion, it does lack that imagination and sensibility that one might get from inspiration from ones own mind or from the people and things around them. ~Deanna

Shanna Muston
Fri 14th Dec, 2007

I suppose, with mine they are usually all made up, and i might do a whole visual diary just for planning, sometimes i like that more then doing the actual painting! Im not sure what other artists do to prepare, but i guess thats wat ur getting at? I dunno, art is cool because theres so many different styles and things, i think thats gonna be my conclusion, otherwise i'll keep going around in circles forever questioning everything : art is cool.

Jin K
Fri 14th Dec, 2007

I've done super realism, and my style shows through, and people can still tell it's done by me, I just don't see it as going through an artist thought process. There just art ideas being thrown around in realism. That's what gets to me. I like to stick to my stylized individual ideas. I can't say that in realism, the artist doesn't go through the artist's journey, because I believe they do, I just feel like they don't delve deeper and they just skim the surface. skimming the surface is not enough for me. realism itself is not what gets to me i suppose, it's realism where all the artist did was choose a photo, then the composition, or sometimes not even that, and then rendered it. you can still the artist's style, but no ideas, and i think that the ideas is what makes someone a great artist.

Shanna Muston
Fri 14th Dec, 2007

I can see what your getting at, sometimes realism frustrates me, mainly because i can't do it, im so jealous of those that can go to such detail, because i can't draw 'things' when i tell people that they dont get it, but painting a portrait that looks half decent is so hard - i'll just stick to my blending colours.

When you say that doing something realistic doesn't let the artist leave their own style, i think it does. Every artist paints a picture for a reason, it means something to them, and it helps put across emotions. Just because it looks realistic, it doesn't mean the artistic doesn't go through the journey that an artwork usually has. In my opinion no matter how realistic something looks, you can always look into it and find something more.

You must log-in to vote or post a comment