Let me ask these questions . Can one write a masterful novel unconsciously? Can one create a Skyscraper by accident? Can one compose a symphony unintentionally? One may by accident or unconsciously be able to achieve partial result - like a person taking a multiple choice test can get some of the answers right. To be a Master Artist is to score high on your tests... over and over again --- removing chance from the equation and replacing it with purposefully thought and intentional execution.
But what about all that comes from the subconscious? What of all the ideas and logics that are already present? That only appear when the mind is relaxed? When I let go and draw there are stories and ideas that come through me that go well beyond what I know and what I can do. Little miracle that might well be called chance ... Does one abandon this path in order to find certainty? Should the pupil abandon his gardens and trust blindly in what the masters have found? And if so when is the pupil ready again to sail the sea of his subconscious and find what is true to him?
I know it's an old video but just stumbled on it. I have been an artist for nearly 40 years and found this way of looking at design very inspiring for future compositions. Thanks !
@Verbal Dk Robert Williams: I don't paint to decorate your Fu@#$n Walls. Richard Schmid : The rule of art is..I know what i like. I never said i was a " known" Artist. Outside my community . Direct me to some of your work?
@Verbal Dk any one can be an artist, if you can imagine art and turn that imagination or desire into something physical then you have created art and you have become an artist. Get your judge mental trolling ass out of here and read a dictionary since you don't know what an artist is or does.
@@kaczynski2333 agreed, but I believe art grows from creatively breaking rules. But to break them with control and intent , you must understand the visual concepts of balance. In other words, you must first learn the language before you can speak to your audience. Not putting your statement down at all , just expressing my beliefs on these types of concepts are not the end game, but a starting point. Cheers
The apple is the variety called Fireside. The illustrator is Roger Yepsen. If you are an apple lover, his collection “Apples” is a must-have reference.
Wow, this just blew my mind! Yes, im a newbie .... but the way he described this is amazing. I thought it was just random when I first saw it.....now I know and my interest is piqued
@BarnstoneStudios Just thought I would share. I have only recently (within the past 2 months) been developing a "serious" body of work and I admit, I start out using what I like to call, "Intuition" with lines, shapes, etc. I feel it empowers me to study my "accidents" and bestow them a destiny. When I work I, I feel VERY blissful but also, all I can think of is, "WHAT would give this (line, shape, what have you) PURPOSE?" I experience "creating": as an exercise in intention. Thnk U 4 this vid
The "illustration" of the apple evoked a great deal of emotion in me. A singular apple, suspended in space, alone in a vacuum of white nothingness - it brought me back to my childhood. My family used to call me "Apple Ashleigh" because I ate so many apples - I loved them. I relate so deeply to the lonely apple on the page - it brings me right back to the budding feelings of individualism that begin to arise as a child, realizing you are an entity unto your own, separate from your mother, with every passing year growing more distant from the time you were enveloped in the bliss of her womb. The apple - young, fresh, but slowly decomposing, just like all of us. With nothing else on the page, nothing else in the composition, we are forced to reckon with the stillness and singularity of the apple, representing the clash between the profundity and mundanity of our existence. Where did the apple come from? Why is it here? In a sense the apple represents our universe, and we, the viewers, can merely observe passively as the reality of the apple asks for no permission, it merely exists. Now is it art?
I completely agree. Defining art as technique can never work, even as you abstract. It misses the point that art as conversation must always be defined in relation to the observer. The most useful definition I found is: art is the abstract representation of human experience, which means that for any population X, the „artyness“ of any object is defined to be the average amount of new information gained by the members of X.
amazing description. but if you truly believe that about that "singular" apple, I think it is art fou you. successful art, on the other hand, it relates to many people. the more people it relates to, the more valuable the artwork is.
Don't feel like a fraud. Listen... there is a god named Cupid. He is the giver of passion and the giver of love. If you love Art - that's Great - you've been touched by Cupid! In Greek Mythology Cupid marriages Psyche. Psyche and Cupid have a daughter named Delight. So if you have Passion - seek out Psyche (knowledge) and make them one and you will have Delight... pleasure and bliss. - Myron teaches this lesson using Apollo and Bacchus to describe classical and romantic approaches to Art.
There are no boundaries ...you can put on Art "what is Art". Only an individual can decide for themselves "what is Art ". It comes down to one taste and nobody can dictate what ones taste should be ... that is for you to decide... :) ...the best you can do is "Art is Communication" ...!
Art is fun. But once you start introducing the rules people turn into a riot. For the people who don’t understand. He’s lightly introducing form and composition.
Of course you can design photos. Myron and his daughter are both photographers. And a lot of the people who buy our drawing & design course are photographers. Check out photographer Adam Marelli - he many in his community have studied with Myron. I upload just for you. Myron teaches a photographer to Draw ( aka Design ) with her camera. It's an amazing result. since I can not link the video do a RUclips search for "Photographer Designs - aka Learn to Draw with her camera"
It takes all kinds to teach Art and to interpret Art. This teacher is not for me but I see some of the viewers here enjoy his method of teaching and observations very much. So I say enjoy.
some thoughts that occured to me while watching: 1.Sample: The "illustration" could as well hang in the museum. But it would also work as an illustration in a book. The question is more: where do you encounter it? And who painted it? 2.Sample (Jardin): There was a time when a still life was something revolutionary, new and not at all seen as "art" in the first place, because the subject was much too mundane... And the illusion of space/dimension doesn't automatically make the painting "art" either. There are enough hobbyists that are very well able to replicate this effect and their paintings are NOT in any museum. Of course Jardin is today a famous artist - so he's sanctioned and not to be questioned. 3.Sample (Ellsworth Kelly): Observation and understanding what you see (in spacial dimensions) does not automatically mean that this deconstruction/reconstruction is needed or that the artist did all the design totally knowingly/on purpose. Knowledge and understanding allways helps though. But: A lot of stuff is trial and error - producing a lot and then selecting the best. Also important for beginners beside accumulating knowledge. Of course there are artists that construct every detail - I would not debate that. But it's just ONE way to do it beside a lot of other ways.
I get where he is coming from with turning the two-dimensional into a 3-dimensional piece, but to suggest the intent of the contour line drawing as a series of intentional relationships is a bit hard to stomach. I get that there are correlations, but that does not mean they are intended. What is to say that he was not just playing with line quality and enjoyed a simplistic contour?
Everything is Art. Even Duchamp's toilet was. There it was the concept. And of course the "shock effect" Life is Art. Everything is. But what we humans mainly see as art is probably more cultural than natural. So something we created. Although in my view nature is art too! :D
@theartistsvlog BTW, I simply LOVE what you dais about artists making a tug for "reaction". That was the exact conversation that was had in the studio this past Friday. Synchronicity is superb, don't you think? :-) Thanks again for this upload!
What is art ? Context defines what is art. Artists use the visual world as material and medium to artistically communicate visually. An illustration of a tomato soup can at the grocery store is not art. An illustration of a tomato soup can in a fine art gallery can be art. When an artist has decided to take something and reframe the way we view something then there is the potential for art. It takes an artist to make art. It can also be bad art or uninteresting or boring or whatever you feel is unimaginative about this reframing. That doesnt make it NOT art. People forget this notion about art for some reason but dont forget it when they hear music they don't like or a film they hated watching. It was still music or film. Its like ART has so be the best ART to be considered as ART...LOL.. There is good art and bad art and boring art and really incredible art.
Okay, I should be more specific, I do agree that all items are relational and regardless of how they are intended there is a relationship which results in a tension and interplay, and Elsworth Kelly is known for minimalist design. What I disagree with is when he suggests that the relationship between the fruit giving it a weaving line, a series of transforming facings and a series of cascading facings as intentional. Quite possible, but presumptuous.
I think "art" people look to much into art. Most likely the artist was just bored and decided to draw some apples. Then you have Barnestone breaking it down from every angle saying he was doing something here. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Isn't the meaning that the artist has painted apples as he saw them? I agree with ASU DEVIL I can't imagine that the artist did any more than paint what he saw. I am speaking as someone who paints.
It's wrong to think of these as "rules" the way the word would be used today. An intuition-only artist can totally choose a subject or compose a image that obeys these principles just by following their sense of "feel"; but flailing about means you have lots of failures and some successes, but without many, many repetitions you won't have enough experience of success to derive the common element that appears in each - you won't know WHY your specific attempt was successful. Barnestone isn't really a gifted communicator either, so a lot of this theory is presented rather obliquely for some people which doesn't help. Not all artists are temperamentally suited to draw from design principles, and never will be; but having a good understanding of these principles takes a lot of the guesswork out of it. These principles are so fundamental and universal to how art is perceived by the brain that they end up being "the rules"; the rules you must learn, even if only in order break them intelligently. The successful pieces that keep these rules embody the fundamental truths about these relationships; the successful pieces that break these rules are successful BECAUSE they break these "rules" in a specific way that produces a specific effect.
I think if the first picture of the apple was by, say, Damien Hirst, it would belong in a museum and not in a book on horticulture. We shouldn’t bother attempting to ask or answer the questions, “what is art?” or “is this art?” Only ask yourself, “do I like this?” and “how much?” De gustibus non disputandum est. 🙂
@ble86n I would say subconsciously, not unconsciously. I can't say I've really gotten there myself, but certainly there's a point at which one is able to compose a design
I agree, the well rendered illustration of the apple isn't art, and the rough Ellsworth Kelly piece is great art. Were the person who illustrated the apple to arrange a group of them into a pleasing composition he'd create a piece of art. Masterful rendering skill isn't required to create art, but neither does it keep it's possessor from creating art. Art is something other than rendering skill. Art seems to be about the assembling of elements into mentally stimulating compositions.
I beg to argue that randomness can be a masterful tool in itself. If we say that purposeful composition makes for masterful art, then we can say that purposeful randomness is just as masterful in a different way. I personally believe that all meaning is subjective, and that no one person reserves the right to mislabel another's work as art or not art. Let us all raise our consciousness and transcend the mentality of trying to label and categorize everything and have respect for the fact that every individual has their own meanings of things and that it just isnt something that we can ever fully agree on. This by no means, though, implies that we should stop sharing our perspectives, because even the most closed minded perspective deserves to be heard, such as that of the ones who would go as far as to say that someone's work is not "good" art.
Illustration is art or, at least an artform. Ancient Egyptian art was largely illustrative. However for the most part I agree and appreciate the teaching style. I think a more appropriate title for the video would be is it fine art/traditional art. However the creative process behind the title of the video itself could be considered art as well. It is far catchier than my title suggestions and will therefore create more traffic. Marketing is an artform as well. That being said art is the foundation of everything observation and immitation and innovation is how we learned from the begining as a species and everything has it's root origins in art. I think art is more perspective nowadays and I think a lot of people agree. Art is reflective of society and society largely defines what is art. As an artist it is always valuable to learn the traditional techniques and principals. Which is why I do appreciate the style of teaching it is very straight forward and direct/concise.
Sorry, I have to comment! that apple is a work of art - the moment you create the object and isolate it from its obvious definition it becomes an object of art - Magritte demonstrated this in some of his work - the apple is only then an illustration if it is used to illustrate - in this case, it is an illustration of an apple as an illustration of a piece of art becoming either art or an illustration, so it actually up to the person defining it to be the one or the other - so if you are not sure what it is it is always going to be in favor of art. This is so true when looking at abstract art - if it needs definition it will never be art it will always be a random conglomeration of form and color at it's best a piece of decoration but from the point of creation it is art
That's fascinating, but with a gap or two. What about Warhol's Campbell soup? It's an illustration, not unlike the one seen in the first picture. It's still displayed in a museum. Art is more about communicating an idea than about whether or not it also serves a commercial purpose.
I think if Ellsworth Kelly saw this analysis of his apples drawing, he would indeed have a good sense of humor and have a good laugh. When Art goes into the museum direction, it really goes into BS mode sometimes. (aka overanalysing)
Since you touched on BS and humour in art, I once had a knee jerk reaction to modern art. Ran with the idea of bullshit and did a huge piece called The deluge aftermath the art of bullshit. Done entirely in cow manure. Sealed with multiple layers of polyurethane. I even whipped the frame with a chain before staining it with manure. Lol I love it, especially since its a portrait of my ex husband.
I can define "What is art?" in only five (5) words. My definition excludes nonsense such as elephants or chimpanzees wielding paint brushes. It also removes commercial graphics as any relation to art, no matter how expertly it is executed. My definition includes all art forms; painting, sculpture, music, dance, architecture, literature, etc. It is a requisite of human nature. I don't need a video and endless verbiage that ultimately muddles the concept of what art is. I developed this definition longer than thirty years ago, and yet no one has developed anything precisely to the truth, in my experience. Mr. Barnstone is a wonderful artist and masterful teacher. He has the gift of desire to pass on his experience and skills, yet could also need inspiration and understanding of even more concerning his field of study. I wish him success!
Wonderful Vid. Took me back to art school. But i would have to argue that the illustration could be a work of art, simply because what if it were placed there to disrupt. Stay with me. it's by someone who knows the form and how to translate it similar to a way that would be accepted into a "high art" gallery. So simply he decided to break the norn and paint it "recognizable" to break convention and say "there should be no rules in art" It's just something to think about. I dont know who painted the first apple in this vid, nor do I know why. i'm just thinking...
...? Why is video titled "What is art"? Are you saying it has to be an "important" doodle-scrawling that's what art is? and that illustration somehow in your opinion is not art? Please change the title since you dodged the question. Pompous Rambling would be a more accurate title.
You are ASKING the question, that is what i did not understand at first. Thank you for agitating me w/ your implied answer, now i see you are asking the question for us to make up our own opinion on the question which is pretty great. Thanks.
***** Thanks, i appreciate your thoughts but sounds like regurgitated nonsense to me. High art is a synonym for pretentious art. My take away from this guy's video: he simply asks "what is art?" to form our own opinion. Art is a broad term."High" art is defined by art dealers selling the emperor's new clothes.
Peter Chorao I see , illustrations serving a different function then "art". It focuses on clearly communicating an idea in a very short among of time. It has to quickly transfer it's purpose. Art on the other hand, has the luxury of time. Art has time to design the subtle and nuanced elements of its composition that communicates an idea at a much deeper level. It also has the luxury of time, for the audience can sit and observe, explore and consume it over a longer period of time. One could say, an illustration is designed for the sprint and "art" is designed for the marathon. Saying all that, sometimes, illustrations can be both. I can think of a few illustration that are also great works of Art - because they communicate an idea quickly yet also can be appreciated and pealed back over a longer period of time. - That's how I see it.
Art is what is acknowledged as being art, an artist is someone who is compelled to communicate and does it through a medium of their choice If the apple drawing had " what a grape picture written above it would that make it art or is comedy not an art form?
Interesting, I think even if one tries to randomize results there is always intention in human behavior, we are creatures of false order, it's how we perceive reality. If you have intention to find something you probably will find it in some form, I think this is what science and art have in common. I should make an effort to back this up but I don't want to bruise all my apples :P
I don't see this as being a definition of art at all. Not even Fine art. More an explanation of some compositional techniques similar to those used by Cezanne.
I just watched the most mind-numbing (and least enlightening) lecture about something that is supposed to be fascinating. The more he explains it, the less interesting it becomes. I understand the need for structure and formality, but surely there must be a better way to incorporate that into teaching art without overly complicating the pretty damn obvious. This guy's method is not only foolishly outdated, it's also utterly joyless.
What is art? This is to much science. Im not a teacher or a scienetist so what the professor is saying could be true, What is art?. My version of art is a a human being with a vision that is able to turn that vision in to reality, good or bad its still is art
Hi, really enjoyed the explanations. I was wondering if you had any thoughts on the origin of the symbol known as the Yin Yang? Was it consciously created or intuitively percieved. Assuming it is a work of Art.
I can't find the picture used could someone tell me its name or the name of the artist I was not able to understand it I'm not a native speaker and would appreciate any help.
Now, GO FORTH AND SCATTER APPLES... and take a picture and/or make drawing exactly as they came to rest, and see if it is not possible these geometries are not sought by the human mind, and not always necessarily intentional ? I'm merely suggesting this.
hahahaha!!! you made me go back and check. hahahha!!! It's possible. it wouldn't be the first time that has happen to people. But in all honestly I think it was him twisting the marker cap back onto the marker. But again - who knows. funny none the less.
great video DUDE ... u've opened my eyes ... im very gratefull !!! ... wish u only the best ... and yes there is humur in those puppies :) or atleast playfullness ty vm
but what if this draft show something that no longer exists? Like drawing a lake that is dried out and is now a baseball playground. But a tree near the lake is still there? Is that art? Or Art is just something that makes an emotional dialogue?
The problem is we all have our own definition and opinion about what is art. If we had just one most likely we wouldn't have a confusion in a first place.
How is any of this an explanation of what art is? Rather than ask "what is art?" ask: What are the primary functions of an activity called art throughout history? Historians say there are 4 primary functions of art found in all cultures around the world. The primary functions are all social functions. They have real world value and are directly linked to us as evidenced by all cultures performing art. The result is that not only is art what you find in galleries, but it's found in movies, television, advertising, comic books, computer games, illustration, and political cartoons. It's everywhere. High Art, Low Art and Fine Art were the three divisions, the least valuable to the public is Fine Art, usually created for the wealthy and intellectual class. High Art was for everyone and Low Art was for the masses, thus Low Art became referred to as Mass Art and then Popular Art. Popular Art performs all of the traditional functions, can even employ Fine Art at times, and can at times become High Art, art that not only performs the 4 primary functions of art, but all the classical tenets of art as well: Beauty, Morality, Democracy, Human Commonalities, Human Continuity and Variety. Classical Art is a humanist system based on Nature. You can't have Beauty without Morality. You can't have an effective Morality for a large population without Democracy. You can't have Democracy without defending Human Commonalities for all. You can't have Human Commonalities unless they are sustained over time and defended by free association of groups who are free to develop and maintain their own cultures. And here's the big Modern addition to Classical Art: You can't have any of this without Variety. Variety states that you can have different kinds of Beauty, Moralities, and Democracies while the Human Commonalities stay the same (Continuity) expressed through chosen cultures over varying lengths of time. The primary functions of art share what is human, share what humans need for survival. Anyway. Myron gives a not very practical lesson, but it doesn't answer anything much.
Let me ask these questions .
Can one write a masterful novel unconsciously?
Can one create a Skyscraper by accident?
Can one compose a symphony unintentionally?
One may by accident or unconsciously be able to achieve partial result - like a person taking a multiple choice test can get some of the answers right. To be a Master Artist is to score high on your tests... over and over again --- removing chance from the equation and replacing it with purposefully thought and intentional execution.
You can construe them subconsciously.
they say .. a good book writes itself in a sense. But through a skillful person that has dropped effort in doing.
Myron Barnstone bravo
Duchamps would disagree with your statement - to eliminate chance from the equation to produce a good work of art
But what about all that comes from the subconscious? What of all the ideas and logics that are already present? That only appear when the mind is relaxed? When I let go and draw there are stories and ideas that come through me that go well beyond what I know and what I can do. Little miracle that might well be called chance ... Does one abandon this path in order to find certainty? Should the pupil abandon his gardens and trust blindly in what the masters have found? And if so when is the pupil ready again to sail the sea of his subconscious and find what is true to him?
I know it's an old video but just stumbled on it. I have been an artist for nearly 40 years and found this way of looking at design very inspiring for future compositions. Thanks !
@Verbal Dk Robert Williams: I don't paint to decorate your Fu@#$n Walls. Richard Schmid : The rule of art is..I know what i like. I never said i was a " known" Artist. Outside my community . Direct me to some of your work?
@Verbal Dk any one can be an artist, if you can imagine art and turn that imagination or desire into something physical then you have created art and you have become an artist. Get your judge mental trolling ass out of here and read a dictionary since you don't know what an artist is or does.
All I see is photographers talking about rules of composition for eternity.
This is not what defines art.
@@kaczynski2333 agreed, but I believe art grows from creatively breaking rules. But to break them with control and intent , you must understand the visual concepts of balance. In other words, you must first learn the language before you can speak to your audience. Not putting your statement down at all , just expressing my beliefs on these types of concepts are not the end game, but a starting point. Cheers
The apple is the variety called Fireside. The illustrator is Roger Yepsen. If you are an apple lover, his collection “Apples” is a must-have reference.
Art is the link between reality and spirituality.
Wow, this just blew my mind! Yes, im a newbie .... but the way he described this is amazing. I thought it was just random when I first saw it.....now I know and my interest is piqued
@BarnstoneStudios
Just thought I would share. I have only recently (within the past 2 months) been developing a "serious" body of work and I admit, I start out using what I like to call, "Intuition" with lines, shapes, etc. I feel it empowers me to study my "accidents" and bestow them a destiny. When I work I, I feel VERY blissful but also, all I can think of is, "WHAT would give this (line, shape, what have you) PURPOSE?" I experience "creating": as an exercise in intention. Thnk U 4 this vid
that was a very intersting way of perceiving a piece of art!
BEAUTIFUL
This is an eye opener..
Salute to the master..
The "illustration" of the apple evoked a great deal of emotion in me. A singular apple, suspended in space, alone in a vacuum of white nothingness - it brought me back to my childhood. My family used to call me "Apple Ashleigh" because I ate so many apples - I loved them. I relate so deeply to the lonely apple on the page - it brings me right back to the budding feelings of individualism that begin to arise as a child, realizing you are an entity unto your own, separate from your mother, with every passing year growing more distant from the time you were enveloped in the bliss of her womb. The apple - young, fresh, but slowly decomposing, just like all of us. With nothing else on the page, nothing else in the composition, we are forced to reckon with the stillness and singularity of the apple, representing the clash between the profundity and mundanity of our existence. Where did the apple come from? Why is it here? In a sense the apple represents our universe, and we, the viewers, can merely observe passively as the reality of the apple asks for no permission, it merely exists.
Now is it art?
*sobs quietly*
I'm sorry for not giving that lonely apple the respect it deserves 🍎🙏
I completely agree. Defining art as technique can never work, even as you abstract. It misses the point that art as conversation must always be defined in relation to the observer.
The most useful definition I found is: art is the abstract representation of human experience, which means that for any population X, the „artyness“ of any object is defined to be the average amount of new information gained by the members of X.
amazing description. but if you truly believe that about that "singular" apple, I think it is art fou you. successful art, on the other hand, it relates to many people. the more people it relates to, the more valuable the artwork is.
Don't feel like a fraud.
Listen... there is a god named Cupid. He is the giver of passion and the giver of love. If you love Art - that's Great - you've been touched by Cupid! In Greek Mythology Cupid marriages Psyche. Psyche and Cupid have a daughter named Delight. So if you have Passion - seek out Psyche (knowledge) and make them one and you will have Delight... pleasure and bliss.
- Myron teaches this lesson using Apollo and Bacchus to describe classical and romantic approaches to Art.
And God is in the details.
Thank you for your insight.
There are no boundaries ...you can put on Art "what is Art". Only an individual can decide for themselves "what is Art ". It comes down to one taste and nobody can dictate what ones taste should be ... that is for you to decide... :)
...the best you can do is "Art is Communication" ...!
This is a marvelous description of space and unseen 'lines & curves'
Extraordinary lecture,
A born teacher that has profound knowledge of his subject…
Wow
Art is fun. But once you start introducing the rules people turn into a riot.
For the people who don’t understand. He’s lightly introducing form and composition.
11 years ago?! Sun Nov 10 2019.
11 11 11years ago
@@kdcruz75 ikr ?
I was 11 minutes short for Monday 11-11-2019.
@@tomadams3528
Sync or design...
Or both...
Fan of back to the future decoded.?
Check out merovee blog...
Of course you can design photos. Myron and his daughter are both photographers. And a lot of the people who buy our drawing & design course are photographers. Check out photographer Adam Marelli - he many in his community have studied with Myron.
I upload just for you. Myron teaches a photographer to Draw ( aka Design ) with her camera. It's an amazing result. since I can not link the video do a RUclips search for "Photographer Designs - aka Learn to Draw with her camera"
7:05 "... this is no accident.. ", Bob Ross : " yes, it is..just a happy little accident.. ", RIP.
I wish he would have been my art teacher!
It takes all kinds to teach Art and to interpret Art. This teacher is not for me but I see some of the viewers here enjoy his method of teaching and observations very much. So I say enjoy.
Art is beautiful.. according to me ART can never be definite it's on one's understanding & knowledge of how one can see Art
Subjective but beautifully and objectively principled at times
@@justinwithfield689 depends..
this is the most brilliant thing i have ever seen!
some thoughts that occured to me while watching:
1.Sample: The "illustration" could as well hang in the museum. But it would also work as an illustration in a book. The question is more: where do you encounter it? And who painted it?
2.Sample (Jardin): There was a time when a still life was something revolutionary, new and not at all seen as "art" in the first place, because the subject was much too mundane... And the illusion of space/dimension doesn't automatically make the painting "art" either. There are enough hobbyists that are very well able to replicate this effect and their paintings are NOT in any museum. Of course Jardin is today a famous artist - so he's sanctioned and not to be questioned.
3.Sample (Ellsworth Kelly): Observation and understanding what you see (in spacial dimensions) does not automatically mean that this deconstruction/reconstruction is needed or that the artist did all the design totally knowingly/on purpose. Knowledge and understanding allways helps though. But: A lot of stuff is trial and error - producing a lot and then selecting the best. Also important for beginners beside accumulating knowledge.
Of course there are artists that construct every detail - I would not debate that. But it's just ONE way to do it beside a lot of other ways.
This guy is great..
I get where he is coming from with turning the two-dimensional into a 3-dimensional piece, but to suggest the intent of the contour line drawing as a series of intentional relationships is a bit hard to stomach. I get that there are correlations, but that does not mean they are intended. What is to say that he was not just playing with line quality and enjoyed a simplistic contour?
That's composition. It's not a new thing.
Art solicits an emotional response.
SO DOES A STEAMING PILE OF DOG SHIT!!!
Maybe the title of this video should be, "how did the old artist did it?" instead of "what is art?" Because it's not answering anything.
He's very good with lines and language
Gracias
I call it Design Centric Drawing - the masters call it Design or the science of line drawing.
Everything is Art. Even Duchamp's toilet was. There it was the concept. And of course the "shock effect"
Life is Art. Everything is.
But what we humans mainly see as art is probably more cultural than natural. So something we created.
Although in my view nature is art too! :D
What an insightful and interesting analysis. Thank you.
your all videos are fine love your videos .. very useful to understanding art
@theartistsvlog BTW, I simply LOVE what you dais about artists making a tug for "reaction". That was the exact conversation that was had in the studio this past Friday. Synchronicity is superb, don't you think? :-) Thanks again for this upload!
That first apple was art.
No, it wasn't.
I agree
was you hungry, ??
I don't think so but ok
Of course the first apple is art ... it is though this bright old man never learned that the application of rules do not in any way define art ...
What is art ? Context defines what is art. Artists use the visual world as material and medium to artistically communicate visually. An illustration of a tomato soup can at the grocery store is not art. An illustration of a tomato soup can in a fine art gallery can be art. When an artist has decided to take something and reframe the way we view something then there is the potential for art. It takes an artist to make art. It can also be bad art or uninteresting or boring or whatever you feel is unimaginative about this reframing. That doesnt make it NOT art. People forget this notion about art for some reason but dont forget it when they hear music they don't like or a film they hated watching. It was still music or film. Its like ART has so be the best ART to be considered as ART...LOL.. There is good art and bad art and boring art and really incredible art.
You are very nice work shops
Okay, I should be more specific, I do agree that all items are relational and regardless of how they are intended there is a relationship which results in a tension and interplay, and Elsworth Kelly is known for minimalist design. What I disagree with is when he suggests that the relationship between the fruit giving it a weaving line, a series of transforming facings and a series of cascading facings as intentional. Quite possible, but presumptuous.
I think "art" people look to much into art. Most likely the artist was just bored and decided to draw some apples. Then you have Barnestone breaking it down from every angle saying he was doing something here. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Isn't the meaning that the artist has painted apples as he saw them? I agree with ASU DEVIL I can't imagine that the artist did any more than paint what he saw. I am speaking as someone who paints.
I hope I manage to capture the beauty things.
@Linn Viktoria Nilsen I think if you see meaning in art then it is not art you are seeing.
There are three types of people.
a) those that can see
b) those that can see when shown
c) those that will never see
Have a nice day...
It's wrong to think of these as "rules" the way the word would be used today. An intuition-only artist can totally choose a subject or compose a image that obeys these principles just by following their sense of "feel"; but flailing about means you have lots of failures and some successes, but without many, many repetitions you won't have enough experience of success to derive the common element that appears in each - you won't know WHY your specific attempt was successful.
Barnestone isn't really a gifted communicator either, so a lot of this theory is presented rather obliquely for some people which doesn't help. Not all artists are temperamentally suited to draw from design principles, and never will be; but having a good understanding of these principles takes a lot of the guesswork out of it. These principles are so fundamental and universal to how art is perceived by the brain that they end up being "the rules"; the rules you must learn, even if only in order break them intelligently. The successful pieces that keep these rules embody the fundamental truths about these relationships; the successful pieces that break these rules are successful BECAUSE they break these "rules" in a specific way that produces a specific effect.
What a great teacher!
I think if the first picture of the apple was by, say, Damien Hirst, it would belong in a museum and not in a book on horticulture.
We shouldn’t bother attempting to ask or answer the questions, “what is art?” or “is this art?” Only ask yourself, “do I like this?” and “how much?”
De gustibus non disputandum est. 🙂
@ble86n
I would say subconsciously, not unconsciously. I can't say I've really gotten there myself, but certainly there's a point at which one is able to compose a design
If this is art, then I don’t want to be an artist.
It is a work of art from the planet. Not one is the same.
no problem.
I agree, the well rendered illustration of the apple isn't art, and the rough Ellsworth Kelly piece is great art.
Were the person who illustrated the apple to arrange a group of them into a pleasing composition he'd create a piece of art. Masterful rendering skill isn't required to create art, but neither does it keep it's possessor from creating art. Art is something other than rendering skill. Art seems to be about the assembling of elements into mentally stimulating compositions.
Art Is Cool
I beg to argue that randomness can be a masterful tool in itself. If we say that purposeful composition makes for masterful art, then we can say that purposeful randomness is just as masterful in a different way. I personally believe that all meaning is subjective, and that no one person reserves the right to mislabel another's work as art or not art. Let us all raise our consciousness and transcend the mentality of trying to label and categorize everything and have respect for the fact that every individual has their own meanings of things and that it just isnt something that we can ever fully agree on. This by no means, though, implies that we should stop sharing our perspectives, because even the most closed minded perspective deserves to be heard, such as that of the ones who would go as far as to say that someone's work is not "good" art.
How many twists and turns in the arabisk flow must one achieve in a piece for a masterpiece outcome?
Illustration is art or, at least an artform. Ancient Egyptian art was largely illustrative. However for the most part I agree and appreciate the teaching style. I think a more appropriate title for the video would be is it fine art/traditional art. However the creative process behind the title of the video itself could be considered art as well. It is far catchier than my title suggestions and will therefore create more traffic. Marketing is an artform as well.
That being said art is the foundation of everything observation and immitation and innovation is how we learned from the begining as a species and everything has it's root origins in art. I think art is more perspective nowadays and I think a lot of people agree. Art is reflective of society and society largely defines what is art. As an artist it is always valuable to learn the traditional techniques and principals. Which is why I do appreciate the style of teaching it is very straight forward and direct/concise.
Sorry, I have to comment! that apple is a work of art - the moment you create the object and isolate it from its obvious definition it becomes an object of art - Magritte demonstrated this in some of his work - the apple is only then an illustration if it is used to illustrate - in this case, it is an illustration of an apple as an illustration of a piece of art becoming either art or an illustration, so it actually up to the person defining it to be the one or the other - so if you are not sure what it is it is always going to be in favor of art. This is so true when looking at abstract art - if it needs definition it will never be art it will always be a random conglomeration of form and color at it's best a piece of decoration but from the point of creation it is art
That's fascinating, but with a gap or two. What about Warhol's Campbell soup? It's an illustration, not unlike the one seen in the first picture. It's still displayed in a museum.
Art is more about communicating an idea than about whether or not it also serves a commercial purpose.
I think if Ellsworth Kelly saw this analysis of his apples drawing, he would indeed have a good sense of humor and have a good laugh.
When Art goes into the museum direction, it really goes into BS mode sometimes. (aka overanalysing)
artzy people lol real artists are too busy creating their visions not analysing other peoples sketches
completely agree
Since you touched on BS and humour in art, I once had a knee jerk reaction to modern art. Ran with the idea of bullshit and did a huge piece called The deluge aftermath the art of bullshit. Done entirely in cow manure. Sealed with multiple layers of polyurethane. I even whipped the frame with a chain before staining it with manure. Lol
I love it, especially since its a portrait of my ex husband.
Art is the byproduct of a creative mind. There is no meaning until a less creative mind views that art.
I hope I can find a complete set of your videos you speak my language.👍😎🇬🇧
❤❤❤❤❤
I love this so beautiful;
You are a great teacher..this is the best I've ever heard.. just loved it.
Wow! just wow!
drink every time he says truncated
@JiubTheSaint science is merely a tool used in the construction of artistic visions.
Nothing is accidental.
I can define "What is art?" in only five (5) words.
My definition excludes nonsense such as elephants or chimpanzees wielding paint brushes. It also removes commercial graphics as any relation to art, no matter how expertly it is executed.
My definition includes all art forms; painting, sculpture, music, dance, architecture, literature, etc. It is a requisite of human nature.
I don't need a video and endless verbiage that ultimately muddles the concept of what art is.
I developed this definition longer than thirty years ago, and yet no one has developed anything precisely to the truth, in my experience.
Mr. Barnstone is a wonderful artist and masterful teacher. He has the gift of desire to pass on his experience and skills, yet could also need inspiration and understanding of even more concerning his field of study. I wish him success!
comercial graphics absolutely is art...have you seen hand painted signs in Africa and the trucks in India? how about screen printed poster designs?
so hat is your defination ?
Washing Machine Ka Bhoot lol I read the typo as intentional lol and was very confused 😉
Felicia Follum lol...it shows you open to alternative realities ...art does that to people ☺
Washing Machine Ka Bhoot i like your response 😉 lol
love this guy he reminds me of old art teachers that aren't round anymore
Wonderful Vid. Took me back to art school.
But i would have to argue that the illustration could be a work of art, simply because what if it were placed there to disrupt. Stay with me. it's by someone who knows the form and how to translate it similar to a way that would be accepted into a "high art" gallery. So simply he decided to break the norn and paint it "recognizable" to break convention and say "there should be no rules in art"
It's just something to think about. I dont know who painted the first apple in this vid, nor do I know why.
i'm just thinking...
@BarnstoneStudios very good..I totally agree :)
...? Why is video titled "What is art"? Are you saying it has to be an "important" doodle-scrawling that's what art is? and that illustration somehow in your opinion is not art? Please change the title since you dodged the question. Pompous Rambling would be a more accurate title.
You are ASKING the question, that is what i did not understand at first. Thank you for agitating me w/ your implied answer, now i see you are asking the question for us to make up our own opinion on the question which is pretty great. Thanks.
***** Thanks, i appreciate your thoughts but sounds like regurgitated nonsense to me. High art is a synonym for pretentious art. My take away from this guy's video: he simply asks "what is art?" to form our own opinion. Art is a broad term."High" art is defined by art dealers selling the emperor's new clothes.
Peter Chorao
I see , illustrations serving a different function then "art". It focuses on clearly communicating an idea in a very short among of time. It has to quickly transfer it's purpose.
Art on the other hand, has the luxury of time. Art has time to design the subtle and nuanced elements of its composition that communicates an idea at a much deeper level. It also has the luxury of time, for the audience can sit and observe, explore and consume it over a longer period of time.
One could say, an illustration is designed for the sprint and "art" is designed for the marathon.
Saying all that, sometimes, illustrations can be both. I can think of a few illustration that are also great works of Art - because they communicate an idea quickly yet also can be appreciated and pealed back over a longer period of time. - That's how I see it.
@theJacobPatterson I agree with you. At least I wouldn't go as far as to say that it is not art without a doubt.
Art is what is acknowledged as being art, an artist is someone who is compelled to communicate and does it through a medium of their choice
If the apple drawing had " what a grape picture written above it would that make it art or is comedy not an art form?
Interesting, I think even if one tries to randomize results there is always intention in human behavior, we are creatures of false order, it's how we perceive reality. If you have intention to find something you probably will find it in some form, I think this is what science and art have in common. I should make an effort to back this up but I don't want to bruise all my apples :P
thank you
What would you call this approach ?
If the person who makes the work intends it to be art, then it is art.
Annonomys Person totally agree.
I don't see this as being a definition of art at all. Not even Fine art. More an explanation of some compositional techniques similar to those used by Cezanne.
@Late to the Game amen
Ok. Produce one. Dickface.
@Late to the Game are you unfamiliar with the techniques of " the master of us all" Cezanne.
thanks
I just watched the most mind-numbing (and least enlightening) lecture about something that is supposed to be fascinating. The more he explains it, the less interesting it becomes. I understand the need for structure and formality, but surely there must be a better way to incorporate that into teaching art without overly complicating the pretty damn obvious. This guy's method is not only foolishly outdated, it's also utterly joyless.
hi guys, the drawing of the "playing" apples, who made it? i cant quite make out what he is saying?
Ellsworth Kelly
@HarrietFoom or there is a way of operation that you are unaware of.
this is the guy who watched me throw a bucket of apples on a table and then said i has spent hours arranging them.....nutjob!
What is art? This is to much science. Im not a teacher or a scienetist so what the professor is saying could be true, What is art?. My version of art is a a human being with a vision that is able to turn that vision in to reality, good or bad its still is art
Hi, really enjoyed the explanations. I was wondering if you had any thoughts on the origin of the symbol known as the Yin Yang? Was it consciously created or intuitively percieved. Assuming it is a work of Art.
It maps the lunar movement and the shadow the moon casts in two poles...
What if Ansel Adams photographed this apple instead of snacking on it ?
I can't find the picture used could someone tell me its name or the name of the artist I was not able to understand it I'm not a native speaker and would appreciate any help.
Elsworth Kelly.
Now, GO FORTH AND SCATTER APPLES... and take a picture and/or make drawing exactly as they came to rest, and see if it is not possible these geometries are not sought by the human mind, and not always necessarily intentional ? I'm merely suggesting this.
hahahaha!!! you made me go back and check. hahahha!!! It's possible. it wouldn't be the first time that has happen to people. But in all honestly I think it was him twisting the marker cap back onto the marker. But again - who knows. funny none the less.
I saw a bunch of satisfying videos in the recommended side thing
great video DUDE ... u've opened my eyes ... im very gratefull !!! ... wish u only the best ... and yes there is humur in those puppies :) or atleast playfullness ty vm
wow! very interesting. great class.
So what about impressionism?! I don't understand .... could somebody explains that to me?
but what if this draft show something that no longer exists? Like drawing a lake that is dried out and is now a baseball playground. But a tree near the lake is still there? Is that art? Or Art is just something that makes an emotional dialogue?
Could you tell me, please, what's the name of the classical song from the beginning? :)
"Art is shit.Art galleries are toilets. Curators are toilets attendants. Artists are bullshitters." Martin Creed.
If a piece of paper had only two dimensions , you could not hold it!
alphotheone the 3rd is very thin
alphotheone FACT!
WOW!
Why do I find his descripton of the apples by Kelly creepy?!
All I could think was what would my art teacher say if I handed in that if I were still in school
😆
Hahaha so true. Hand in the outline of some apples. My teacher would have said I am lazy and asked why I did not complete the assignment.
Lol, nailed it! )))
The problem is we all have our own definition and opinion about what is art. If we had just one most likely we wouldn't have a confusion in a first place.
I'd pick the confusion over one persons definition...
indeed. that does sound so funny when he / we say it.
This video was very informative, thanks.
How is any of this an explanation of what art is? Rather than ask "what is art?" ask: What are the primary functions of an activity called art throughout history? Historians say there are 4 primary functions of art found in all cultures around the world. The primary functions are all social functions. They have real world value and are directly linked to us as evidenced by all cultures performing art. The result is that not only is art what you find in galleries, but it's found in movies, television, advertising, comic books, computer games, illustration, and political cartoons. It's everywhere. High Art, Low Art and Fine Art were the three divisions, the least valuable to the public is Fine Art, usually created for the wealthy and intellectual class. High Art was for everyone and Low Art was for the masses, thus Low Art became referred to as Mass Art and then Popular Art. Popular Art performs all of the traditional functions, can even employ Fine Art at times, and can at times become High Art, art that not only performs the 4 primary functions of art, but all the classical tenets of art as well: Beauty, Morality, Democracy, Human Commonalities, Human Continuity and Variety. Classical Art is a humanist system based on Nature. You can't have Beauty without Morality. You can't have an effective Morality for a large population without Democracy. You can't have Democracy without defending Human Commonalities for all. You can't have Human Commonalities unless they are sustained over time and defended by free association of groups who are free to develop and maintain their own cultures. And here's the big Modern addition to Classical Art: You can't have any of this without Variety. Variety states that you can have different kinds of Beauty, Moralities, and Democracies while the Human Commonalities stay the same (Continuity) expressed through chosen cultures over varying lengths of time. The primary functions of art share what is human, share what humans need for survival. Anyway. Myron gives a not very practical lesson, but it doesn't answer anything much.
dogs playing poker!!!
According to this video, photographs can't be considered art.
Yes, they can, when the images are composed in such a way as to create an aesthetic effect.