Hmmm.... Jackson Pollock takes LSD in biology class....

Seriously, I think you've got talent and whatever you are doing, keep it up.

I should preface my comments by saying I'm not an art person. I think I understand Rockwell and Kincaid, the rest,  I sort of nod and say very nice...

Well, on to techniques. I've worked with paints and metals enough to throw out a few  comments for you to consider.  There are enough variables here that you could probably create more effects to play with. First, using metal as a substrate lets you do interesting  things with temperature, such as creaing hot spots underneath with sterno pots, cold spots with ice cubes, etc which will let the paints show more character as the edges flow.

See if vibration applied to the sheet will cause patterns to emerge in the paint flow.

Speaking of flow, Place objects on substrate, pour, lift object (rope, chain, rocks, rags...)
Pour a small amount of water and pour paint so it flows against it.  

Mist or dribble solvent in designs onto substrate, pour paint.  

Pour paint, then apply solvents.

Pour multiple wet layers, then apply solvent by dropping or from a spray bottle at close range to crater the layers. Stirring or mixing the layers is obviously passe' but you might get some interesting new effects this way.

Put alcohol in a freezer, then apply it.  

Mix waterbase and oil, apply, then heat it above 212f.

Pour paint, let it skin, then crack or orange peel the skin and flow a different color in the texture.


I think I'll quit here because everyone is going to think I'm as crazy as you are.

You think good.[:)]
I try not to let an "artmaking trick" (and I use alot) be what the work is about.
There are many artists out there who find a neat way to make paint do something, and look cool.  They then call it art.
I prefer to "use" the tricks as vocabulary, to say something else.
The technique, in and of itself, is not enough.

Be careful.  You write well, and obviously have your opinions, but here you show that you don't know what the word "Modernist" means.  "Modernist" refers to a very specific type of artwork that was done from the early to mid-20th Century.  Never confuse what is "new" with what is "Modernist".
Read a book on Art History, take a class.  GO TO A MUSEUM, AND NOTICE THE LINEAR DEVELOPEMENT OF ART -FROM CAVE PAINTINGS TO POLLACK (IT'S BEAUTIFUL IF YOU KEEP AN OPEN MIND). Develope your knowledge, so that you can more eloquently form your ideas. It will give your opinions more substance.

I take no offense.
I fully realize that most people NEED their art to be representational.  They need to know what it is.  Most people also need some sort of narrative to be present in art -that's why so many people prefer TV to a Museum.
Many people see art that they don't understand, and become hostile. They feel that there's something condescending about it, that there's a big joke being played on them.
They're right.

Fine Art has always been an Elitist's sport.  
I wouldn't have it any other way.

No.

[img]http://imageexchange.com/shop/media/2771.jpg[/img]

One of the classics Dramborleg was talking about. Real art, not that quasi surrealist  postmodern Frenchy foo-foo shit. You make me sick ? Stop smoking banana peels.

Most people prefer this type of work.
It's true.
Very comforting, requires nothing from the viewer, zero intellectual or emotional engagement.
People would rather not be challenged.
They just want something that's "nice" to look at, but can be easily ignored.

Looks like you've got too much cock and pussy on your mind.  Are you a switch hitter?

It's just housepaint poured on a surface, chief.
If that's what YOU see, that comes from YOU.

By the way, I'm flattered by your homosexual come-on, but I'm afraid your barking up the wrong tree.

(...and for God's sake, MrSpock PLEASE stop IMing all of those pictures of naked men!! I'm just not interested.)

Hi Cinc,

My bad if I mixed "modernist" schools of art with your neo-fascist anti-marxist minimalistic
organica-based amoebic art. There, are you happy now? One group of crap is just as bad as another Cinc, and in your stunted depraved "art", I see nothing redeeming.

Sorry.

The dogs are cute, but it is not art, risible yes, but not nearly so as your "art".

The media you placed before us is, revolting, in its portrayal of repellent organic based forms and shapes.

The development of art from cave paintings to Pollock, whose work is even more laughable than yours, just not as disgusting, is a joke.

Once Europe decended into the mental morass that produced impressionsists et al, ad nauseum, ad infinitum. It was downhill on a rocketsled from there. When you actually have to describe art and make up a story to comprehend it, YOU HAVE LEFT THE ARTWORLD AND ENTERED STORY TIME FOR KIDDIES. People who come up with this tripe have not only fooled themselves with their sophistry but created a culture who fall for this unadulterated lunacy. It is no less than a sign of the times in which we live that this and similar dreck are given the appellation, "art".

A paucity of talent on your part does not indicate a similar dearth on mine.

Think as you will,your opinions are as meaningless to me as mine are incomprehensible to you, but to tell me to study art? See a museum? Flush out your headgear sir, it is apparent that you need the study far more than I.

Bah! I am through with this. Your work is revolting. I stand by the the effort/cinderblock commentary originally given.You have been panned.

Dram

You'll notice that I take no offense by your STRONG dislike of my work.  I appreciate such strong reactions.

Honestly, you really should try to READ a little about Art History.  It's interesting stuff.  That Impressionism came about at the same time as the developement of the camera is interesting, too.
Spouting one's ignorance with three dollar words is very sad.  That you demonstrate intelligence and ignorance at the same time is even sadder.

Denying the value of an entire Century's worth of Art is foolish. It's like saying you hate "history".
The same modernist beliefs that went into the art that you despise so much, are the same ideas that brought us modern architecture, and clean design.  Look at your rifle, it's an example of "form following function" (a principle of modernism). Remember when weapons were decorated with etchings and curly-cues?  

Children need images and narrative.  Adults should be able to grasp more complex ideas.  You demonstrate this ability, yet also show a reluctance to use it.  

Everyone has their own taste.  Their likes and dislikes.  To write off 120 years worth of creative thought, because you don't like it, and clearly don't understand it, isn't smart.  If you try to understand what you don't like, you might learn.

Scoffing at the suggestion that you might benefit from learning about the art that you so easily dismiss, does not reflect well upon the impression of you as a thinker.

Try not to let things that you don't understand intimidate you so much.

[size=3]Like a child who won't his eat vegetables, because they're "yucky"...[/size=3]

Bwahahahahahahaha!

Yes, Cincy, I would...will...and do write off 120 years of creative thought, the crap portions of it at least..... in a withering second. Just as I write off the 70 odd years of lunacy called communism, and in the same vein I completely disregard the centuries of religious, not Christian, dogma propagated by the catholic church and its rulers and adherents.

Need any more examples?

The same foul cretins that have created the schools of thought that allow this type of "art" to be called such, are in blatant fact the ultra left wing, drooling, vacuous tofu ingesting, tree hugging a$$holes that are WRECKING this country today. Every heroin injecting loser artist who ever snorted up a bottle of absinthe cries out as your brother. You fight and champion a cause of depravity and outright idiocy, in the name of provoking heated debate and commentary.

The same yardstick can be applied to a serial murderer as he decorates an apartment with some unfortunates innards. Why, he is just provoking thought and commentary and the world and his victims are both his easel and his medium. Voila! Another masterpiece is created!

Art history? I would rather read soup can labels than the history of modern "art", from the late 1800s and up. Do I understand it? You better bet your little kneepads I do. I could write a dissertation on any artist you care to name, with but a small amount of study.

DO I GET IT? BET YOUR A$$ I GET IT. Do I understand it? Ditto.

AND I HATE, LOATHE AND REPUDIATE IT TO THE UTMOST DEGREE. What does an effete, elitist like yourself not get? Verstanze? Comprende?

This quaint diatribe is directed not at yourself, but at the sickness the Western society has undergone in the modern age, and will ultimately lead to its demise. Your "art" and that which is like or even vaguely like it ( I lump all cretins in the same dumpster, so you will not feel in bad company, Picasso... and the rest are in there too. ) are merely symptoms of the disease.

Veggies? And you would dare to compare healthy nutritious food to the mental Ho Ho's and Old Moon Pies that you would proffer? If that is the yardstick by which you would measure mental stimulation then you and all the rest are at the level of a Stuckeys Pecan Log, perhaps lower, though how that could be is beyond me.

And by the way, I dont mind what you think of me as refers to my critical thought processes, but since you have no idea who I am, nor that which I know, it is the height and depth of folly to suggest otherwise, now isnt it?

I rail against that school of thought that your art represents..... debased, degraded, and anarchic. And if YOU know anything about art or history, you MIGHT know what I am talking about. But I seriously doubt it.

Three dollar words eh? I thought they were called 75 cent words, but it must be inflation creeping in on me. I normally dont speak this way, but I assure you that I think this way... and so from thought to the pen go the words, or in this case a keyboard.

Adieu, if you dont get it, or cant grasp the historical gestalt that I do and the place of Art in it... then you never will.

Dram out.

Well, I'd say say you also have a talent for engaging your critics. I noticed a comment about confusion. Confusion requires thought, and if an artist can stimulate  that , he is better than some teachers.

I have to limit myself to technique because, as I mentioned, I'm not an art person. For me to go there would be presumptuous.  You, the artist, would master the technique to bring out your vision.

Regarding the art world, I can make a couple of suggetions from my and my wifes experience. It's ironic that one or two of your pieces is hung in front of a stamped tin wall, because that was an ingredient in our work. She'd use antique ceiling tiles and walpapers to create decorative accessories. I'd come up with the techniques in wood and metal to create a quality product, and the exposure we got from ebay led to, in one case, an invitation to showcase our product in a national magazine, (not her first time) and sales to , among others, customers in the NY market that you are trying to reach. It's pretty cool to walk through a crowd and see designer labels that bought your work. ( Not to mention all the wannabee crafters  who start imitating you). I'm not saying put your stem cell collection up to sell for $300, but if you put up small pieces on a regular basis and include photo's with your work, you will be seen.

You have all the ingredients to go anywhere. you want. Do it long enough, well enough, and the right time and the right place will come together. Think about a professional photo shoot also. Good luck.

Holy shit, an art fundie !

[i]"I would not, could not, there nor here.
I could not, would not, with a pinko queer
I will not look at them with a Catholic priest.
I will not look at them in any Diocese.
I will not look at  them here or there.
I will not look at them anywhere.
I do not look at green eggs and ham.
Dram-I-Am"[/i]

Dramborleg I'm curious;  since you dismiss the Commie art  as repulsive crap, mind telling us what you find inspiring ? I'd really like to know what floats an art fundie's boat.

OK, what's a "fundie"?

Fundamentalist

The Communists and Stalinists outlawed art like mine.  The Nazis would, and did describe it as "depraved" and "degenerate", as do you.

Dram, the idea of Impressionism and Modernism as "depraved" is nothing new.  It's nothing that's hard to understand, either.  It's just a little boring, that's all.

What's more a threat to our society....
Impressionism and Modern Art, or religious fundamentalism?

I'm a little tired of Dali, but I like how he thinks. His writing about art is pretty crazy.
Escher and Dali both subscribe to my view that good art has to be "cool" to look at.
I know that "cool" isn't a fancy art word, but I think it works best.

Cincy,

Well, you twisted my analogy. Your art has nothing to do with Communism but is an example of a great deal of popular "thinking" that is indeed corrupt. It is an idea that is negatable, that while utopian thinking is neato, it is absolutely bankrupt. Just so, that is how I view your "art" heroes and their work.

Your "art" has more implications than a few of the intelligentsia standing around gassing about the latest glop glop art. It is indicative of a society in decay, which if you have read any history yourself, you would clearly see. As Rome died from within, so do we,and at our own hands. Yet, in our case it is at a much more rapid pace than Rome ever developed and crashed.

We no longer have the moral strength to turn away from the potential pitfalls of the freedoms that our forefathers gave us. Instead, sophists have perverted these self-same freedoms and used them to tear down this country, stone by stone.

Your "art" is not at fault, yet again, I say it is but an indicator.... a barometer if you will of the standards and mores currently in place in this country.

So, do you grasp the gestalt now? Or will you, as Nero, stand and fiddle while Rome burns around you... or like you, help with some more matches.

Dram

I twisted nothing. It's your precise words, when describing Impressionism, and the Modern Art that followed, which conjure up the memories of the NAZIs and the Stalinists.
The NAZIs used your EXACT words ("depraved", "corrupt"), as well well as your EXACT reasoning, to condemn and vilify those schools of Art.  It's uncanny, the similarity between the sentiments that you've expressed towards "Modern Art", and those of the NAZIs.
The ironic thing, is how aesthetically and contextually identical the NAZI-approved Art was to the Stalinist-approved Art.

Dram, do you approve of work like this?

[img]http://www.primenet.com/~byoder/nzfam.jpg[/img]

So did Hitler.

Try reading about the exhibition of "Degenerate Art" that the NAZIs put opened in 1937.
[url]http://nimbus.ocis.temple.edu/~jlockeno/150/hdk.html[/url]
The purpose of the exhibit was to expose the Jewish, "Degenerate Art" as "depraved" and "corrupt".

In no way, do I think that your view is therefore NAZI.  Just a little short sighted, and boring.  Lighten up, it's only paint.

“Fortune Favors the Brave” ?

My high school latin from a long time ago is really rusty.

Mike

I don't "get it". I guess I'm not sophisticated enough or my mind sees things different from other people. I do understand the work and effort part of your art Cincinnatus. I make wrought iron and know how much effort I go through to design something that will make people happy. You must agonize many hours over the colors and textures to put on your paintings. Keep on doing what you like and what makes people happy.

Dramborleg, I sure wish I could talk as purdy as you write! Dang! Everybody in the trailer park would want to be me!

Say Cincy ole bud. How much would you charge me for some Elvises on black velvet? I want the young thin Elvis, not the old fat one.LOL

Looks like my dinner after a hard night drinking.

Very interesting.

Roughly.
It was "Fortune Favors the Bold", when I was told.
...even though it doesn't seem to translate as that.

I only do Fat Elvis's.

You needn't "understand" the art, any more than you need to understand the catchy melody of a good pop-tune.
Either it looks cool, or it bores you completely. Or in some cases, intimidates and enrages you.
Keep in mind, it IS abstract.  It may look LIKE a "thing", or like "stuff", but it's still just blobs of paint.

Yep!

Cincy,

I am pleased you dont think I am a goose-stepper, no matter how much my ideas on Art coincide with those of the Nazi party. I had heard of their general views on art but I assure you that mine have to do with the downfall of Western society as a whole, and at the hands of Many. Regardless of whether they are Jew or Greek or Lithuanians who are Zaroastrian.

Do I approve of the painting? What, like I am an art Czar? I dont mind it, a family study in rather a dark color scheme.....very sombre in tone...... obviously Germanic dress and looks from the 30's-40's. Geeze, Hitlerian art perhaps? Not my thing, maybe an old German perhaps but not me. Perhaps a Germanic Norman Rockwell?

So, basically, whoop de doo. I am perhaps boring as compared to your taste in squarish or blobbish art. All the hep cats would call me a square man, like he dont dig the total grooviness of the whole scene, you dig?
Yes, classically trained artists are boring to you, but then again... that stuff takes talent.

Just because vast amounts of effort are expended does not guarantee anything of value... no, not in the least. That is why you get an A for effort, but the results are .... ummm .... lacking.

Dram ( the stodgy and boring to some )

What makes you think I am bored by, or don't "dig" classical or traditional Art? Certainly nothing I'VE said.  Don't make assumptions.
I love traditional work.  Study it, enjoy it, seek it out often.
And yes, MOST contemporary art IS indeed crap.
There is a big difference, however between MOST and ALL.  
Most of it is lacking in skill, effort, and/or concept.  The biggest flaw of most contemporary art is that it pretends to rebel against traditional art (today, that means Modern art, the work YOU find distasteful). Their flaw is that they don't know about that which they claim to depart from.  It leaves alot to be desired.

Just because an artist rebels against or departs from a certain type of Art, doesn't mean he hates or even dislikes that art.  It often times is just a way to wrap one's thoughts around a work of art, and even appreciate it.  At least this is so of good art.


Here is an artist whose work I sometimes enjoy (John Currin).  He is "rebelling" against Modern art, specifically abstraction...
[img]http://www.andrearosengallery.com/artists/img/artworks/047.jpg[/img]

...He has an undeniable talent, and also a sense of humor.

Because of the camera, artists just aren't satisfied being illustrators of literature, or examples of extreme hand-eye coordination.
Picasso (I can't stand his work BTW), was an expert draftsman and renderer.  For him, however, that wasn't enough. He wanted to make pictures that a camera couldn't.
In a way, I feel the same way.  I could, if I chose to, paint a portrait that could be mistaken for a photograph.  Big deal.  Talent like THAT comes dime a dozen.  Ideas are what separates the artists from the illustrators.  

I am curious to see an example of painting or sculpture that you enjoy.  Please.

An artist I enjoy is Frank Frazetta and his ability to create incredible action art. My fave are the pics of Conan on the original 10 or eleven books.

I am a big fan of those who can bring art to life on the screen also. The old cartoonists from the 30s-40s were incredible artists.

How about Charge of the Scots Greys ? The Pieta by Michaelangelo is likely the ultimate in sculpture....... almost alive.

I am rather rambling across time but I love action poses or scenes. Some of the great landscape artists of the 1800s are great too.

The light flowing through Tiffanys glass perhaps? A few of the Japanese block print artists... I have several of the 47 Ronin by Kuniyoshi I think..... great stuff.

For art in steel, I own Nihonto... the penultimate in sword making art. My prize is a Masao, the elder brother of Kiyomaro... the finest shin-shinto swordsmith, whom Masao taught.

So there are a few of mine.

Dram

I figured from your screen name that you were a fan of fantasy art.  

The Pieta is amazing, however, a figurative sculptor friend of mine insists that the "Laocoon" (Greek)is the greatest sculpture of all time.
[img]http://www.uba.uva.nl/apm/images/laocoon.jpg[/img]
I can't say that I disagree.

19th Century Landscapes?
I like Albert Bierstadt...
[img]http://www.hometaught.com/images/The%20Sierra%20Nevada%20in%20California%20by%20Albert%20Bierstadt.jpg[/img]