Tracey Emin created a diverse body of work that feels like it comes from one mind, heart and life of experiences. She is always changing but in the change she remains true to a belief and point of view. It's not style or technique that has defined her work, it is her ideas. On the other hand, Frances Bacon is deeply rooted in his aesthetic and his iconography seems endless yet it has a distinction that's completely recognizable. There's no one way to find yourself in your work. It is part of the process of becoming an artist.
Spot on! Thank you for this great comment, with great examples. Emin was able to go from an unmade bed as an installation to traditional paintings. But she did it following a certain vision and consistency, hence her success with these versatile endeavours.
Please filter this “advice” heavily. The thesis or intention is positive but framed terribly. I understand the perspective is from an art marketer but the emphasis on serving the galleries’ or collector’s “investments” is horrible for an artist’s development. There is nothing more forgettable than an artist who is only known for a one-dimensional “consistent” body of work. The only advice needed is integrity to your work. And absolutely do explore and do not be ashamed to show your history and evolution of divergent experiments online, which is only proof of how profoundly deep and capable you are in expression, your fearlessness in failure. Art historians will only love you for it.
Hi Chico, thank you for tuning in and participating in the debate here in the comment section. Our first video concluded with "Be yourself, and do it radically." That's not advising to simply serve the galleries or collectors' investments. It's advising to follow your natural impulses as an artist but perfect them in a radical manner so you can stand out. However, radical shifts overnight are something to avoid. Yes, you can keep track of early works, but only is they were important or resonate with your 'mature' work. Early experiments that went nowhere have no additional value. As a result, having them publically accessible or online for everyone to see them is harmful without any doubt. When it comes to one-dimensional work, I believe you are interpreting our message wrong - or maybe we have failed to communicate it clearly. Versatility is always a plus for an artist. However, the overall story must be coherent. Think of Tracey Emin who goes on from showcasing an unmade bed as a readymade installation to traditional expressionist painting and drawing, yet remaining true and recognizable concerning her vision, methodology, and approach. Or what about Luc Tuymans, who is able to go on from painting Mickey Mouse to a gas-chamber of the Second World War, but remains recognizable due to his characteristic nervous brushwork, muted palette, and ambiguous undercurrent.
Yes, and what about Richter?? I understand his work is thematically consistent around investigating painting, but if Richter followed this 'rule' about consistency his best work wouldn't exist!
These are all directed at investments and fails to see how artists nurture themselves regardless of changing artistic styles and ideologies. These rules you impose sit uncomfortably with some of us whose methods do not rely on doing just ONE thing. If you’re breeding one trick ponies I don’t believe you respect artists or it’s creative community. You need to reset your standards, reposition your variables and beliefs. Hang out with artists more instead of gallerists. WE DICTATE OUR OWN AESTHETICS.
The only thing to avoid is copying other artists...if i let myself inspire it looks like me , but if i copy ... THEN i would be in big trouble. So how much i radically change my work and work from within, it will always be me ...so i allow myself to show how i feel, i don't care if people like that or not...that's artistic freedom i guess.
Greetings from Tuscany! We are out of office for two weeks at the moment, but the series continues :-) With one day delay however due to the terrible connection, my sincerest apologies! The lighting is a little bit dark as I am sitting in the shade and the background is sunny, but otherwise I would have melted while filming... Thank you so much for tuning in, feel free to share your most honest thoughts and questions in the comment section below! Chat soon. Ciao! All my best, Julien
I see nothing wrong with branching out and creating different genres of art. Prove what s talented artist you are! Keep learning, experimenting and progressing. It will keep your work fresh and alive. Picasso started with representational art and look where he got!!
Hi Karla, we'll be publishing a new video on this topic very soon, so stay tuned! Being consistent in terms of vision does not mean you have to do the same thing or subject over and over again. We'll illustrate with seem clear examples and advice how you can achieve recognizability and consistency in your oeuvre as well.
tell that to the IRS. when mozart was commissioned to make music for a birthday, he was paid. when an artists work is on the gallery wall he has no expectation to get paid until the piece is sold. that is called consignment work.
This is why I don't care about a career. I have more than one style I like to work in, and more than one idea I like to work on. I wouldn't be seen as having "vision and consistency." Trying to stick to those things to please potential buyers is a trap for me. I don't want to be formulaic and predictable, like a lot of artists become.
Yes, I agree; I get sick of doing the same stuff & produce some of my best work when playing & experimenting; those who don't do this are afraid to take artistic risks & are fearful of failure - which may cause failure (& dull predictable work), I think. Best to you.
But sooner or later you need a vision that's clear, that is if you want to actually make a career and a living so that you can continue to create art. It's not the same as making the same thing over and over, but it's growing within your vision and your materials
Agreed! Galleries want artists to be "consistent" so they can sell what sells. "Oh, well, if you do it slowly, we can bring the audience along!" None of it is true to the artist, the artist must play to the market. It seems to me that a change in attitude could go a long way. If the gallery is excited about a change in an artist's work, that communicates to the buyer, doesn't it? I think the art market is as mired in sameness as Disney in many ways.
@@cliffdariff74 i agree , it's only when you have seen the possibility of a material have you actually changed its essence . hence , we need to work consistently with one vision and say it in many ways
These CAI videos give a lot to think about and are very helpful in that respect. I am learning much from them. I am already well-advanced in my in my non-artist career, approaching retirement. I am enjoying right now the freedom to experiment and explore areas I am drawn towards without the pressure of needing to establish a first career as an artist. That is a double-edged sword, yes? Nevertheless I find the information from CAI material very informative in giving direction to my work. Thank-you!
Good advice overall, my advice would also be to get all the experimentation and switch of styles and techniques out of your system while you’re still at art school/art academy. It’s a great place to just be free to do as you please while also narrowing down your vision and ideas, one thing to know is also that nothing is certain in being an artist, prepare for failure,disappointments and even anger. All part of this journey 😊
I think it would be extremely sad if artists stopped experimenting once out of school. You are barely an experienced artist by the time you leave, for one thing. To stop experimenting in your early 20s is a tragedy. Experimentation leads to better work and a more well-rounded artist. I'm not saying don't crystalise your vision either. You can do both. Also, I think experimentation is the life-blood of creativity. Otherwise you're just a little factory churning out the same work year after year. Experimentation keeps things fresh and keeps an artist on their toes.
@@kalilavalezina not sure about that, although I do agree to some extent. As a painter you have to in a certain sense be recognisable, even if you change your way of doing things a mark must remain. Otherwise you will never be taken seriously, and it’s a rough art world out there where you have to stand out to make it. If you are content with painting in your studio and changing your work every year, ok you can do that, but don’t get frustrated if you ain’t exhibiting or making sales cause the art world wants consistency 😊 cheers 🍻
@@stojanovich I’m not saying don’t be consistent. I’m saying experimentation is a good thing too. Artists can do both! It doesn’t have to be one thing or the other. Perhaps we have different ideas of what it means to experiment.
Terrific comment, couldn't agree more. Thank you for sharing. And if you would experiment in a later stage in your career, I would advise to do it behind closed doors first. Then, after some reflection, ask the opinion of a friend artist or your gallery first, before you make it an official part of your oeuvre. Great stuff, very good advice! Thank you Stojanovich
Thank you for your advice. A question. In regards to consistency, does a constant inconsistency like the one shown by Mauricio Catalan or Ryan Gander, with works that could not be recognizable at moments, is valid?
Hi there, thank you for tuning. Great question! Make sure to watch our more extensive video on this topic (especially strategy 6) and you'll question will be answered thoroughly: ruclips.net/video/A3kyKh44EbY/видео.html&lc=UgyxZtPE-GD2bdmc-ZR4AaABAg
Hi, thanks for the video, can I bother you with a question? On my website I have only my top works but on my Instagram I have everything, is that also wrong? Should my Instagram look like and have the same content as my website? Thanks in advance for your answer. Kr.
As an artist that works in different styles and mediums, this is one of the unwritten rules that I wish didn't exist. I agree with the thought that an artist shouldn't make a sudden, radical shift in their artwork. However, I wish collectors were more open to artists that have a little bit of variety. With my art, I am somewhat consistent, but that consistency covers both paint on canvas or ink on paper, and the subject matter is usually either geometric abstraction or neo-minimalism. I have known about this rule for a long time, but I continue to create artwork that I enjoy creating.
Hello. I haven't watched this yet. All the great artists experimented & changed their styles & techniques; in my opinion it is only those who can't be bothered to be creative & who are afraid to take risks (which often don't work, in my experience!) who stick to what is safe - & sells; I think this is dull & boring & their work becomes tired & predictable. I ignore this stupid unwritten rule (not only by choice: there's no way I could stick to doing only one or two things) - so can't/don't sell much at all sadly - exhibitions can be too difficult for me with my brain injury & other injuries too; but somewhere there are a few people who value our creativity & our personal visions - if they get to see our work, and with the right help we might each find our niche audiences/collectors; I believe that if we put our heart & soul & emotion into our work then others can see & feel this, too much work looks like it's been churned out by a factory or AI/software. All the best to you.
@@jennyhughes4474 I couldn’t agree more. This art channel isn’t the most exciting one. It shows a lot of artists that are recognizable brands. Yeah, cool for fashionable collectors who all seem to have the same taste, all the same opinion, and want something easy digestible. Without a critical eye for pretentiousness in the artworld. His advice is perhaps a good recipe for becoming successful, but it isn’t a recipe for becoming a good artist. In good science and philosophy you want to be intellectually honest, and let truth lead you wherever it takes you. Even though that implies changing your views and opinions regularly. I think in a similar fashion artists should go radically the way their artistic fascination takes them. Usually those fascinations are quite consistent in a person, but can be expressed in many ways. There are many ways to Rome, the shortest most consistent road is the least interesting. But to me there’s only one thing that should guide an artist: make what you really really want to make, and do that the best way you can. Picasso changed all the time, Sigmar Polke is very inconsistent, Picabia, but also writers like Nietzsche or Kierkegaard. Their inconsistency makes them so interesting, there’s always more to explore and dive into. Just like an actor plays many different characters I want to ‘play’ many different artists!
@@robertroest7619 I agree, thanks for writing it so well. 'His advice is perhaps a good recipe for becoming successful, but it isn’t a recipe for becoming a good artist' - you're obviously referring to financial, & maybe becoming 'known' & prestige, as 'success' whereas some of us (including you, I think) define it very differently - I had a discussion about this with my son quite a while ago; however: we all need to keep a roof over our heads, pay the bills and eat. I was a graphic designer before my terrible injuries and had to try to sneak in little bits of my own creativity whilst making paying clients' requirements & communicating what they wanted my foremost concern; they were The Boss and I had to please them - and try to argue my case when necessary; sometimes together we created quite interesting and attractive work, other times the client over-rode my ideas/experience/eye for no good reason & made printed matter less good for its purpose - why employ a graphic designer then?! How far are we willing, or forced by circumstances/others, to prostitute ourselves and our integrity/authenticity to make enough money to survive and/or attain personal goals of various kinds? You know...
@@jennyhughes4474 fair points. Later I realized some of my own struggles and frustrations seeped into my comment. Actually his advice is more nuanced as I thought at first sight. I heard that before from graphic designers.. they often are very much in that dynamic between personal artistic ambition, and the clients wishes which may sometimes even go against all your expertise. I mean please client trust the designer! I think as an artist or writer, any artistic maker, we do have to consider our audience. Without being conformist though. If the only one who can get what the artist is doing is the artist himself, and it’s impossible for an (informed) audience to keep up, he’s not doing a good job, he’s not a good artist. Also the whole thinking and effort an artist undertakes to reach the mind of his audience could contribute to his work. Staying true to yourself, and/or making something with having in mind that it is for an audience, you want to serve them something good, seem to contradict each other. There’s probably not one recipe, entertaining all these contrasting perspectives enriches I think. Making a living and staying true to your artistic calling is a good point. I have a side job from which I live, which enables me to be completely free in my art. I hope that that is a good way to succes. It still slowly, steadily grows. We’ll see.
@@robertroest7619 Good comments, thanks. Yes: about our art being accessible to an audience is a tricky one; how 'informed' (& how, by whom & about what?) should we expect them to be?! My art is in loads of different styles, I experiment lots (as I wrote before) & some is far more 'representational' (it looks like things/people that may sort of exist - even as recognisable symbols of) which many people find more understandable - me too often; but I also do far more abstract stuff using colours, shapes &/or textures, it's can be less stressful than trying to create representational stuff - but certainly not always - moving things 1mm can make lots of difference! I see faces appear in some of my abstract work (e.g. within dots patterns, not everyone sees all these) which really please me for some strange reason; sometimes I make them more obvious so any audience can't really miss them; there are infinite shades between 'abstract' & 'representational' - same as between 2D and 3D work; you know. In other words: by creating (mostly) what I want to or what I can do (these often aren't the same!) I expect some of my work may appeal to some people; a great variety of styles/techniques may not be considered 'good' by galleries & The Establishment but I really have no choice so do the best I can with what I can do and push myself to experiment and try to improve - often not a straight tajectory and sliding backwards (& in every direction - ends up like fractels: too many paths of interest, too many different works in progress and how to choose which to complete or dump? All jolly tricky - especially for me with my brain injury (probs with memory & making decisions!) and other injuries/pain that inhibit what I can do. We all follow our own unique path the best we can - constantly influenced by everyone and everything; thinking when and how much to compromise our 'vision' is a never-ending dilemma - more so for those who have a greater choice of what they are able to do - or not?! Some of my work may be more 'commercial' than others - not a bad thing maybe? I'm too scrambled now, must stop.
Hi, Some how l tend to like ur videos. Please can U also enlighten us on of some people/persons involved in the area of visual arts (stake holders). Thank U.
Could you make a video about how to write our artist statement? It would be very useful. Also, you say that we shouldn’t put any statement on our website. But what about works that are not self-explanatory?
Hi there, great question(s). Concerning the artist statement, we recently published a video about writing an artist biography (this can and arguably should be published on your artist website), a video and template to create your artist statement is something for the foreseeable future-so feel free to stay tuned. :-) Concerning your second question, we don't want to overload, impose ourselves, or bombard people with too much information. It comes across as desperate or "trying too hard." Interviews, articles, press releases, or talks at exhibitions are the ideal moments to give away all your secrets. First, we want to intrigue them but also leave them longing for more.
I have joined CAI with a friend membership. I am older and see the importance in the development younger artist. That a documented history. Is key to selling the artist mature oeuvre. That the gallery must manage that. A repatriable gallery is fundamental to achieving success in the art market. I think younger artist need this information more then I do. If they can afford it. I hope they take your top tier membership. In this way they can be coached properly. Most galleries (there are many as you mentioned) don’t do this. I was in one gallery and they suggested I blur the faces of my subjects. Reason being people didn’t want someone they didn’t know in their living room. I get it but things evolve one doesn’t just start doing that to their work! Needless to say I made an exit. They knew I was going and asked me to paint a copy of one of their high priced selling artist. Lauren said she couldn’t afford to buy one herself. I liked Lauren gladly doing that for her, to show my appreciation in taking me on. She left me in the gallery for serval hours upon returning she was very much pleased. I am glad to give some support to CAI (however merger) and not seen as taking advantage of it’s content. Thank you Julien ~you guys are helpful in my current space and practice. Maybe I should have blurred those faces- coulda, shoulda, woulda. Probably be making a lot of money now. I take refuge in your comment as to not compromising. Good stuff all around you guys are great keep it coming!
Dear Daniel, thank you so much for joining CAI Friends! Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experiences. Your support means a great deal to me; I really appreciate the thought, effort, and appreciation for what we're doing here. Stay in touch! All my best, Julien
I’m confused by this in a way. I understand “branding” and “stylizing” which create an artist’s “identity” but can’t an artist do multiple collections in different “genres” of art, like a collection of Fine Art then a collection of Contemporary Art? And as artists, we grow and get into a different groove after we feel we’ve said what we needed to say in a specific style. So I’m wondering if an artist’s career has to evidence a distinct linear progression in personal evolution versus any concurrent sideways explorations and development?
Hi Sevi, thank you for tuning in and a great question. In fact, I will be creating a new video on this topic very soon to expand on this. Yes, artists can have different genres, different styles, and even different media in their practice, yet maintaining consistent when it comes to their vision and the overall oeuvre still being coherent. Think of artists such as Tracey Emin, Gerhard Richter, or Louise Bourgeois and their versatile, yet recognizable, practice. So stay tuned!
A gallery is nothing more than a consignment shop. They make little or no investment in the artist. That is to say, the gallery does not buy the work and then sell it. They put it on the wall, call it new, as in look, trending ideas, and exciting. Picasso changed many times over the years. Degas painted ballet dancers then painted horse racing. Is the artist a creative person or a craftsman? The galleries' contacts and ability to bring in the "right people" is where they help. My relationships with galleries has always been "the winds of change". A new england gallery i showed in was all about new england then they happened to see my work in another gallery that sold my italian paintings. The gallery then wanted my italian paintings. A few years later their direction changed again. I got a letter stating among other things all work shown should be of a specific area in a particular state. The gallery changed twice. Were they consistent? No of course not. I appreciate galleries and successful ones do put your work in a good light and show it to the right people. But, they change and blame the artist for changing his/her work. Artists are praised for their talent and ability to make beautiful objects. But, galleries are businesses and when people want "mid-century work" the gallery changes and then says we can't sell your work. The artists are then told, impressionism, a mid-century look, Fauvism, cubism are trending. So much for consistency. The artist is called creative, new, fresh, colorful, dark, etc., but in the end, their work is called "decorative arts". Today people don't die from consumption at 35. Most of us live a good 75 years. In this climate, if an artist paints barns, he can either paint barns his entire life or he can change when the barn market dries up. The consignment shop gallery can say at any time, your work isn't selling. They usually say that when they have had success with another artist and feel safe to let you go.
Hi there, thank you for tuning in and for bringing up this interesting discussion. I strongly disagree a gallery does not invest in an artist. If they invite you to a show, they will invest much time and money in you. If they have their gallery in a major art city such as for instance Paris, they invest between €3.000 and €8.000 in rent only. So without taking into account all the other costs, they would have to sell €6.000 up to €16.000 if they have a 50% commission on sales to pay rent... When it comes to your experience with the inconsistency of what galleries want-this turn of events is not representative of most art galleries. On the other hand, if they invested in your work and you make a sudden change, their collectors won't be happy, so neither will your gallery. You can develop, but it has to make sense. I will expand on this topic of style and consistency in the foreseeable future, so feel free to stay tuned!
@@contemporaryartissue read my comment again. Everyone has costs. that is the cost of business. a consignment shop has costs. a retail seller has costs and the artist has costs. "but it has to make sense". The whole point of making art, especially abstract and surreal and fauvist, cubist, and many other styles of art is that art doesn't have to make sense. It just needs a buyer.
@@ronjohnson4566 I have read your comments carefully. Yes, everyone has costs-and galleries have tremendous costs and, thus tremendous risks when offering new artists a platform to showcase and sell their work. So it is unfair to state make no investment in the artist. Simply because they don't buy your work straight away, doesn't mean they don't invest time and money in you. When it comes to "making sense"; the art does not have to make sense, but the artist's oeuvre does. At least, an oeuvre that makes sense and is exciting to follow will have better chances a finding numerous buyers.
@@contemporaryartissue If you don’t know what a consignment shop is, that’s fine. Look up retail, discount, used, and consignment. You may fine this enlightening. Are you saying your definition only includes new artists. At what point does the gallery decide to buy the work from the artist because they are a great investment. I have heard gallery owners say, they bought/own the artist’s work. There are galleries that buy estates or entire collections of artists work. Usually this happens after the artist or the collectors of that work die. The family then sells the estate. Those galleries also sell living artist work on a consignment basis. Most galleries are consignment only. It would be foolish to invest more than you have to. So, how much the gallery invests is their business and how much the artist invests is his business. Seems to me if a gallery is wasting their money on a bad idea, the artist should look at another gallery. In addition, people live much longer these days than they did just 60 years ago. So, oil painters became acrylic artists, printmakers, neon artists, conceptual artists, because the world changes and people want different things. An artist would be foolish not to change with the times. Impressionism is not selling so make mid century paintings. The overview of their work can not make sense to you but it can make sense to others. Mozart made beautiful music but at some point the king got tired of it and wanted something new. Before mozart could create a new exciting sound he died. I think he died at 35 or so. Marcel Duchamp was a painter and at somepoint he decided to make a completely new type of art i.e., The bride stripped bare… he lived to a ripe old age. He said he quit making art but I believe in 1960 or so he showed another different type of work. I.e., Given, the waterfall and the illuminated gas. So much for oeuvre.
Damien Hirst follows a very clear and consistent vision, with recurring themes such as life, death, science, religion, and art itself. With David Hockney, there is also this very consistent investigation of perceiving reality and transforming it into painting, ranging from his LA pool paintings up to his multicamera video works or inversed perspective paintings. They are versatile artists, but their vision and works are consistent.
@@contemporaryartissue so clearly, look and style of an artwork is not needed to be "painted" by the same artist. But if an artist is known to be eccentric and unrecognisable then it can also be considered as consistency. Lia an artistic personality brand.
@@contemporaryartissue great channel and content by the way. Very much appreciate your efforts to help artists understand the system. I have not watched all of your content but I hope you are able to uncover the "money laundering" myths of the art world in some way.
@@danrazART There are indeed artists with an intentional 'no-style style', think of Ryan Gander or Maurizio Cattelan. Happy to hear you enjoy the content. We are very happy to share our kaleidoscopic perspective on contemporary art, and are always in search for new perspectives. Have a great day!
Feel free to watch our more extensive take on this topic and feel free to comment if you still think the same; ruclips.net/video/A3kyKh44EbY/видео.html
Yes indeed it is really important to be consistent in the vision and the story you tell - and to Express it it a clear and strong artist statement. And I love the question: why is your Art important today? And thankyou you for the examples of artist keeping the story but somehow developing the way they express it through technique and style. 🎵❤️🎶
I love your channel! Please take a video lighting course. The light behind you needs to be less bright then the light in front of you. You should have the sun or light pointing at your face, with dark behind you. Again your content is fabulous but hard to watch. - a photographer/videographer.
I wonder whether there is a difference between the U.S. and the Europe when it comes to having an artist statement on one’s website. It seems like it’s expected for it to be on your site in the U.S. ??
I don't believe there is necessarily a difference for the high-end art world. Generally speaking, I advise to always have your CV on your website and possibly also a short artist biography/info text in the third person. An artist statement in the first person is more extensive and not necessarily a public text, but a personal tool for the artist.
Vision & Consistency is key - and do not get this mixed up with something formulaic - you can have Vision & Consistency while keeping it exciting- look at how Salvador Dali always had the same style but it was wild stuff. be smart- your not going to be good at everything - do what you were meant to do.
Artist statements can be published online, but I would recommend not to publish it written in the first person, and go for a summarized version of the artist statement. We don't want to share all the information at once, nor do we want to come across as too eager to promote or talk about our works. Even more, we don't want to bombard the website visitor with a tremendous amount of information, this mind be rather overwhelming. On our website we aim to intrigue and incite the visitor, with a hint a mystery. Thank you for tuning in!
If they are relevant to your work today, you should not destroy them. But if they are not very good, or don't have anything to do with your work today, it is better to 'hide' them from the art world and only to present your very best works
wow all the comments- just change slowly...and honestly if you were deeply involved your work WOULDN'T change drastically overnight, it just wouldn't...you can evolve...Think in say a writer...does a science fiction writer suddenly write love poems. NO. Or you write historical ficiton then suddenly you'll write non-fiction....not unless there is a connecting thread- THEN it can work.
Hi sorry but the sound quality is bad and I couldn't listen to the video because it was too distracting. If you could address that id really appreciate it.
Yes, you should be creative. But do it in a coherent manner, otherwise 'creative' seems to become 'random'. Think of Tracey Emin who goes on from showcasing an unmade bed as a readymade installation to traditional expressionist painting and drawing, yet remaining true and recognizable concerning her vision, methodology, and approach. Or what about Luc Tuymans, who is able to go on from painting Mickey Mouse to a gas-chamber of the Second World War, but remains recognizable due to his characteristic nervous brushwork, muted palette, and ambiguous undercurrent.
What about artists like Damien Hirst, Ai Weiwei, Tracey Emin, they've all changed so many mediums and forms and meanings. Damien Hirst is probably one of the best examples that you can do something completely different and still be hugely successful. And there are many more. Being an artist that becomes a brand by doing the same paintings or photographs or sculptures just in different colours over and over for decades, is not an artist in my eyes.
thanks for the info I am writing a statement about my art, but I just want to add who is the artist consistently making the most money for his artwork because he could change his style Picasso. Collectors are not artists a lot of people want to pigeon hole artists. When I finish with my artist statement I will send you a copy if you are interested. keep up the good work
Always interesting but still a very "top down approach " . The basic " Kierkegaardian " committment is missing . All this too often leads to soulless competence . The necessary drive starts from infancy , whether one recognises it earlier or later doesn't matter !
This is the second video of yours that I have watched. Both of them are easy to listen to but dizzying to watch. The camera consistently closes in to the subject and then goes back to the first setting. This zoom and unzoom happens while you breathe. It makes watching a jarring experience. I understand that this technique is supposed to provide visual interest, but instead, it is visually distracting.
Thank you so much for the constructive feedback, you are absolutely right. We have adapted our editing to avoid this over-dynamic panning and keep it more simple. Thank you!
I’m sure this is sound business advice, but what you’re describing sounds like a recipe for lifelong misery to me. I’d hate, hate to be pigeonholed like that. It’s like you’re talking about art as just another product, like say soap, where the consumer will pitch a fit if you change the formula. This makes me more convinced than ever-either you’re a business person who happens to sell “art”, or you’re an actual artist.
predictability becomes boring, Damien Hirst does completely different things all the time but you can see his DNA in his work. Artists should not restrict themselves to one distinctual style, that will kill the artist's creativity. The work will show your DNA if you're consistently being "you" even if you do different styles.
Hi Natsu, thank you for tuning in. Predictability and consistency are indeed two different things. Damien Hirst is indeed a great example of a more versatile oeuvre that follows a clear vision and is consistent throughout. Other great examples are Tracey Emin, Louise Bourgeois, Maurizio Cattelan, and even Luc Tuymans.
We are very individualistic and narcissistic. We all want to be unique and different. This is the era that we live in and art is following the trends in society. Actually it should be the other way around. That’s why contemporary art is mostly crap. Crap society crap art.
Art is not a career but a lifelong study. Picasso would find you materialistic trap as blasphemy. Investment? Really? You are definitely the product of the left turn the art world took after fashion invaded it with the appearance of Pop and Gloria Vanderbilt jeans.
art is 🔮 science is alchemy is a visionary 🎨🧙♂ art. However, when ignorance is strength and war is peace art is put aside and commerce 👜 and economy ✍ become the merchants of Venice art the naufrage ship and the artiste a future victim on the crucifix✝🕎 leading to an enslaved population rather than freedom that the artist hoped for the population. 🐕🦺
Hi, Some how l tend to like ur videos. Please can U also enlighten us on of some people/persons involved in the area of visual arts (stake holders). Thank U.❤
Tracey Emin created a diverse body of work that feels like it comes from one mind, heart and life of experiences. She is always changing but in the change she remains true to a belief and point of view. It's not style or technique that has defined her work, it is her ideas. On the other hand, Frances Bacon is deeply rooted in his aesthetic and his iconography seems endless yet it has a distinction that's completely recognizable. There's no one way to find yourself in your work. It is part of the process of becoming an artist.
Spot on! Thank you for this great comment, with great examples. Emin was able to go from an unmade bed as an installation to traditional paintings. But she did it following a certain vision and consistency, hence her success with these versatile endeavours.
Please filter this “advice” heavily. The thesis or intention is positive but framed terribly. I understand the perspective is from an art marketer but the emphasis on serving the galleries’ or collector’s “investments” is horrible for an artist’s development. There is nothing more forgettable than an artist who is only known for a one-dimensional “consistent” body of work. The only advice needed is integrity to your work. And absolutely do explore and do not be ashamed to show your history and evolution of divergent experiments online, which is only proof of how profoundly deep and capable you are in expression, your fearlessness in failure. Art historians will only love you for it.
Hi Chico, thank you for tuning in and participating in the debate here in the comment section. Our first video concluded with "Be yourself, and do it radically." That's not advising to simply serve the galleries or collectors' investments. It's advising to follow your natural impulses as an artist but perfect them in a radical manner so you can stand out. However, radical shifts overnight are something to avoid. Yes, you can keep track of early works, but only is they were important or resonate with your 'mature' work. Early experiments that went nowhere have no additional value. As a result, having them publically accessible or online for everyone to see them is harmful without any doubt. When it comes to one-dimensional work, I believe you are interpreting our message wrong - or maybe we have failed to communicate it clearly. Versatility is always a plus for an artist. However, the overall story must be coherent. Think of Tracey Emin who goes on from showcasing an unmade bed as a readymade installation to traditional expressionist painting and drawing, yet remaining true and recognizable concerning her vision, methodology, and approach. Or what about Luc Tuymans, who is able to go on from painting Mickey Mouse to a gas-chamber of the Second World War, but remains recognizable due to his characteristic nervous brushwork, muted palette, and ambiguous undercurrent.
Yes, and what about Richter?? I understand his work is thematically consistent around investigating painting, but if Richter followed this 'rule' about consistency his best work wouldn't exist!
These are all directed at investments and fails to see how artists nurture themselves regardless of changing artistic styles and ideologies. These rules you impose sit uncomfortably with some of us whose methods do not rely on doing just ONE thing. If you’re breeding one trick ponies I don’t believe you respect artists or it’s creative community. You need to reset your standards, reposition your variables and beliefs. Hang out with artists more instead of gallerists. WE DICTATE OUR OWN AESTHETICS.
The only thing to avoid is copying other artists...if i let myself inspire it looks like me , but if i copy ...
THEN i would be in big trouble. So how much i radically change my work and work from within, it will always be me ...so i allow myself to show how i feel, i don't care if people like that or not...that's artistic freedom i guess.
Agree.
Greetings from Tuscany! We are out of office for two weeks at the moment, but the series continues :-) With one day delay however due to the terrible connection, my sincerest apologies! The lighting is a little bit dark as I am sitting in the shade and the background is sunny, but otherwise I would have melted while filming... Thank you so much for tuning in, feel free to share your most honest thoughts and questions in the comment section below! Chat soon. Ciao! All my best, Julien
Following this advice would suffocate me and take the joy out of creating art. Different strokes for different folks though.
Dont listen shit like this ..if he follow this instructions there Is a reason why his art looks like shit and thats all
I see nothing wrong with branching out and creating different genres of art. Prove what s talented artist you are! Keep learning, experimenting and progressing. It will keep your work fresh and alive. Picasso started with representational art and look where he got!!
Hi Karla, we'll be publishing a new video on this topic very soon, so stay tuned! Being consistent in terms of vision does not mean you have to do the same thing or subject over and over again. We'll illustrate with seem clear examples and advice how you can achieve recognizability and consistency in your oeuvre as well.
In Art there are no rules. Art world is different.
Thank you for everything and especially this
Dear Roc, the pleasure is all mine! Thank you so much for tuning in and wishing you all the best!
tell that to the IRS. when mozart was commissioned to make music for a birthday, he was paid. when an artists work is on the gallery wall he has no expectation to get paid until the piece is sold. that is called consignment work.
@@ronjohnson4566 prove it. Whatever
@@roc1761 revetahw ti evorp.
I’m a music artist and stumbled on this. It’s interesting to hear this from a visual art side. It gives me ideas and new understanding! Thank you!!
Interesting parallel, thank you for sharing!
This is why I don't care about a career. I have more than one style I like to work in, and more than one idea I like to work on. I wouldn't be seen as having "vision and consistency." Trying to stick to those things to please potential buyers is a trap for me. I don't want to be formulaic and predictable, like a lot of artists become.
Yes, I agree; I get sick of doing the same stuff & produce some of my best work when playing & experimenting; those who don't do this are afraid to take artistic risks & are fearful of failure - which may cause failure (& dull predictable work), I think. Best to you.
But sooner or later you need a vision that's clear, that is if you want to actually make a career and a living so that you can continue to create art. It's not the same as making the same thing over and over, but it's growing within your vision and your materials
Agreed! Galleries want artists to be "consistent" so they can sell what sells. "Oh, well, if you do it slowly, we can bring the audience along!" None of it is true to the artist, the artist must play to the market. It seems to me that a change in attitude could go a long way. If the gallery is excited about a change in an artist's work, that communicates to the buyer, doesn't it? I think the art market is as mired in sameness as Disney in many ways.
You could create art for yourself and art for the public.
@@cliffdariff74 i agree , it's only when you have seen the possibility of a material have you actually changed its essence .
hence , we need to work consistently with one vision and say it in many ways
These CAI videos give a lot to think about and are very helpful in that respect. I am learning much from them. I am already well-advanced in my in my non-artist career, approaching retirement. I am enjoying right now the freedom to experiment and explore areas I am drawn towards without the pressure of needing to establish a first career as an artist. That is a double-edged sword, yes? Nevertheless I find the information from CAI material very informative in giving direction to my work. Thank-you!
Good advice overall, my advice would also be to get all the experimentation and switch of styles and techniques out of your system while you’re still at art school/art academy. It’s a great place to just be free to do as you please while also narrowing down your vision and ideas, one thing to know is also that nothing is certain in being an artist, prepare for failure,disappointments and even anger. All part of this journey 😊
I think it would be extremely sad if artists stopped experimenting once out of school. You are barely an experienced artist by the time you leave, for one thing. To stop experimenting in your early 20s is a tragedy. Experimentation leads to better work and a more well-rounded artist. I'm not saying don't crystalise your vision either. You can do both. Also, I think experimentation is the life-blood of creativity. Otherwise you're just a little factory churning out the same work year after year. Experimentation keeps things fresh and keeps an artist on their toes.
@@kalilavalezina not sure about that, although I do agree to some extent. As a painter you have to in a certain sense be recognisable, even if you change your way of doing things a mark must remain. Otherwise you will never be taken seriously, and it’s a rough art world out there where you have to stand out to make it. If you are content with painting in your studio and changing your work every year, ok you can do that, but don’t get frustrated if you ain’t exhibiting or making sales cause the art world wants consistency 😊 cheers 🍻
@@stojanovich I’m not saying don’t be consistent. I’m saying experimentation is a good thing too. Artists can do both! It doesn’t have to be one thing or the other. Perhaps we have different ideas of what it means to experiment.
Terrific comment, couldn't agree more. Thank you for sharing. And if you would experiment in a later stage in your career, I would advise to do it behind closed doors first. Then, after some reflection, ask the opinion of a friend artist or your gallery first, before you make it an official part of your oeuvre. Great stuff, very good advice! Thank you Stojanovich
Discovering and formulating an Artist’s vision simply takes a lot of consistent work like a miner digging for a vein of gold.
Couldn't agree more!
Yup! You’ve got to do the work consistently. Even if it’s 1 hr/day, getting into the studio is key.
Thank you for your advice. A question. In regards to consistency, does a constant inconsistency like the one shown by Mauricio Catalan or Ryan Gander, with works that could not be recognizable at moments, is valid?
Hi there, thank you for tuning. Great question! Make sure to watch our more extensive video on this topic (especially strategy 6) and you'll question will be answered thoroughly: ruclips.net/video/A3kyKh44EbY/видео.html&lc=UgyxZtPE-GD2bdmc-ZR4AaABAg
Valeu!
Thank you so much Vicente, you are the best!
Hi, thanks for the video, can I bother you with a question? On my website I have only my top works but on my Instagram I have everything, is that also wrong? Should my Instagram look like and have the same content as my website? Thanks in advance for your answer. Kr.
Fantastic video. Maybe in the future you could use case studies of artists. 👏👏👏
That's an excellent idea. I believe especially with this video it would have made things much more clear to discuss a few case studies. Thank you!
Lucky for me finding this channel❤️
You are too kind! Thank you for watching and stay tuned for more ;-)
As an artist that works in different styles and mediums, this is one of the unwritten rules that I wish didn't exist. I agree with the thought that an artist shouldn't make a sudden, radical shift in their artwork. However, I wish collectors were more open to artists that have a little bit of variety. With my art, I am somewhat consistent, but that consistency covers both paint on canvas or ink on paper, and the subject matter is usually either geometric abstraction or neo-minimalism. I have known about this rule for a long time, but I continue to create artwork that I enjoy creating.
Hello. I haven't watched this yet. All the great artists experimented & changed their styles & techniques; in my opinion it is only those who can't be bothered to be creative & who are afraid to take risks (which often don't work, in my experience!) who stick to what is safe - & sells; I think this is dull & boring & their work becomes tired & predictable. I ignore this stupid unwritten rule (not only by choice: there's no way I could stick to doing only one or two things) - so can't/don't sell much at all sadly - exhibitions can be too difficult for me with my brain injury & other injuries too; but somewhere there are a few people who value our creativity & our personal visions - if they get to see our work, and with the right help we might each find our niche audiences/collectors; I believe that if we put our heart & soul & emotion into our work then others can see & feel this, too much work looks like it's been churned out by a factory or AI/software. All the best to you.
@@jennyhughes4474 I couldn’t agree more. This art channel isn’t the most exciting one. It shows a lot of artists that are recognizable brands. Yeah, cool for fashionable collectors who all seem to have the same taste, all the same opinion, and want something easy digestible. Without a critical eye for pretentiousness in the artworld.
His advice is perhaps a good recipe for becoming successful, but it isn’t a recipe for becoming a good artist. In good science and philosophy you want to be intellectually honest, and let truth lead you wherever it takes you. Even though that implies changing your views and opinions regularly. I think in a similar fashion artists should go radically the way their artistic fascination takes them. Usually those fascinations are quite consistent in a person, but can be expressed in many ways. There are many ways to Rome, the shortest most consistent road is the least interesting. But to me there’s only one thing that should guide an artist: make what you really really want to make, and do that the best way you can.
Picasso changed all the time, Sigmar Polke is very inconsistent, Picabia, but also writers like Nietzsche or Kierkegaard. Their inconsistency makes them so interesting, there’s always more to explore and dive into.
Just like an actor plays many different characters I want to ‘play’ many different artists!
@@robertroest7619 I agree, thanks for writing it so well.
'His advice is perhaps a good recipe for becoming successful, but it isn’t a recipe for becoming a good artist' - you're obviously referring to financial, & maybe becoming 'known' & prestige, as 'success' whereas some of us (including you, I think) define it very differently - I had a discussion about this with my son quite a while ago; however: we all need to keep a roof over our heads, pay the bills and eat.
I was a graphic designer before my terrible injuries and had to try to sneak in little bits of my own creativity whilst making paying clients' requirements & communicating what they wanted my foremost concern; they were The Boss and I had to please them - and try to argue my case when necessary; sometimes together we created quite interesting and attractive work, other times the client over-rode my ideas/experience/eye for no good reason & made printed matter less good for its purpose - why employ a graphic designer then?!
How far are we willing, or forced by circumstances/others, to prostitute ourselves and our integrity/authenticity to make enough money to survive and/or attain personal goals of various kinds? You know...
@@jennyhughes4474 fair points. Later I realized some of my own struggles and frustrations seeped into my comment. Actually his advice is more nuanced as I thought at first sight.
I heard that before from graphic designers.. they often are very much in that dynamic between personal
artistic ambition, and the clients wishes which may sometimes even go against all your expertise. I mean please client trust the designer!
I think as an artist or writer, any artistic maker, we do have to consider our audience. Without being conformist though. If the only one who can get what the artist is doing is the artist himself, and it’s impossible for an (informed) audience to keep up, he’s not doing a good job, he’s not a good artist. Also the whole thinking and effort an artist undertakes to reach the mind of his audience could contribute to his work. Staying true to yourself, and/or making something with having in mind that it is for an audience, you want to serve them something good, seem to contradict each other. There’s probably not one recipe, entertaining all these contrasting perspectives enriches I think.
Making a living and staying true to your artistic calling is a good point. I have a side job from which I live, which enables me to be completely free in my art. I hope that that is a good way to succes. It still slowly, steadily grows. We’ll see.
@@robertroest7619 Good comments, thanks.
Yes: about our art being accessible to an audience is a tricky one; how 'informed' (& how, by whom & about what?) should we expect them to be?!
My art is in loads of different styles, I experiment lots (as I wrote before) & some is far more 'representational' (it looks like things/people that may sort of exist - even as recognisable symbols of) which many people find more understandable - me too often; but I also do far more abstract stuff using colours, shapes &/or textures, it's can be less stressful than trying to create representational stuff - but certainly not always - moving things 1mm can make lots of difference! I see faces appear in some of my abstract work (e.g. within dots patterns, not everyone sees all these) which really please me for some strange reason; sometimes I make them more obvious so any audience can't really miss them; there are infinite shades between 'abstract' & 'representational' - same as between 2D and 3D work; you know.
In other words: by creating (mostly) what I want to or what I can do (these often aren't the same!) I expect some of my work may appeal to some people; a great variety of styles/techniques may not be considered 'good' by galleries & The Establishment but I really have no choice so do the best I can with what I can do and push myself to experiment and try to improve - often not a straight tajectory and sliding backwards (& in every direction - ends up like fractels: too many paths of interest, too many different works in progress and how to choose which to complete or dump? All jolly tricky - especially for me with my brain injury (probs with memory & making decisions!) and other injuries/pain that inhibit what I can do.
We all follow our own unique path the best we can - constantly influenced by everyone and everything; thinking when and how much to compromise our 'vision' is a never-ending dilemma - more so for those who have a greater choice of what they are able to do - or not?! Some of my work may be more 'commercial' than others - not a bad thing maybe? I'm too scrambled now, must stop.
Hi,
Some how l tend to like ur videos. Please can U also enlighten us on of some people/persons involved in the area of visual arts (stake holders). Thank U.
Thank you for sharing this priceless information,
The pleasure is all mine! Thank you for tuning in
Could you make a video about how to write our artist statement? It would be very useful.
Also, you say that we shouldn’t put any statement on our website. But what about works that are not self-explanatory?
Hi there, great question(s). Concerning the artist statement, we recently published a video about writing an artist biography (this can and arguably should be published on your artist website), a video and template to create your artist statement is something for the foreseeable future-so feel free to stay tuned. :-) Concerning your second question, we don't want to overload, impose ourselves, or bombard people with too much information. It comes across as desperate or "trying too hard." Interviews, articles, press releases, or talks at exhibitions are the ideal moments to give away all your secrets. First, we want to intrigue them but also leave them longing for more.
Thank you. Excellent !
Brilliant advice !
"I mistrust all systematizers and avoid them. the will to a system is a lack of integrity."
Friedrich Nietzsche
Amen. The views expressed in this video series I find too dogmatic.
This most definitely makes sense
Thank you Cliff!
I have joined CAI with a friend membership. I am older and see the importance in the development younger artist. That a documented history. Is key to selling the artist mature oeuvre. That the gallery must manage that. A repatriable gallery is fundamental to achieving success in the art market. I think younger artist need this information more then I do. If they can afford it. I hope they take your top tier membership. In this way they can be coached properly. Most galleries (there are many as you mentioned) don’t do this. I was in one gallery and they suggested I blur the faces of my subjects. Reason being people didn’t want someone they didn’t know in their living room. I get it but things evolve one doesn’t just start doing that to their work! Needless to say I made an exit. They knew I was going and asked me to paint a copy of one of their high priced selling artist. Lauren said she couldn’t afford to buy one herself. I liked Lauren gladly doing that for her, to show my appreciation in taking me on. She left me in the gallery for serval hours upon returning she was very much pleased. I am glad to give some support to CAI (however merger) and not seen as taking advantage of it’s content. Thank you Julien ~you guys are helpful in my current space and practice. Maybe I should have blurred those faces- coulda, shoulda, woulda. Probably be making a lot of money now. I take refuge in your comment as to not compromising. Good stuff all around you guys are great keep it coming!
Dear Daniel, thank you so much for joining CAI Friends! Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experiences. Your support means a great deal to me; I really appreciate the thought, effort, and appreciation for what we're doing here. Stay in touch! All my best, Julien
Such great information thank you!
Thank you so much, the pleasure is all mine!
Philip Guston Restrospective in Boston
And Picasso, and Richter, to name a few.
I’m confused by this in a way. I understand “branding” and “stylizing” which create an artist’s “identity” but can’t an artist do multiple collections in different “genres” of art, like a collection of Fine Art then a collection of Contemporary Art? And as artists, we grow and get into a different groove after we feel we’ve said what we needed to say in a specific style. So I’m wondering if an artist’s career has to evidence a distinct linear progression in personal evolution versus any concurrent sideways explorations and development?
Hi Sevi, thank you for tuning in and a great question. In fact, I will be creating a new video on this topic very soon to expand on this. Yes, artists can have different genres, different styles, and even different media in their practice, yet maintaining consistent when it comes to their vision and the overall oeuvre still being coherent. Think of artists such as Tracey Emin, Gerhard Richter, or Louise Bourgeois and their versatile, yet recognizable, practice. So stay tuned!
Excellent advice! We were never told this in art school though🤨. Een beetje vakantie voor jou Julien, geniet ervan, ‘t is een prachtige streek!
Hartelijk dank, Christine. Zeker een prachtige streek, volgende keer Umbrië :-)
A gallery is nothing more than a consignment shop. They make little or no investment in the artist. That is to say, the gallery does not buy the work and then sell it. They put it on the wall, call it new, as in look, trending ideas, and exciting. Picasso changed many times over the years. Degas painted ballet dancers then painted horse racing. Is the artist a creative person or a craftsman? The galleries' contacts and ability to bring in the "right people" is where they help. My relationships with galleries has always been "the winds of change". A new england gallery i showed in was all about new england then they happened to see my work in another gallery that sold my italian paintings. The gallery then wanted my italian paintings. A few years later their direction changed again. I got a letter stating among other things all work shown should be of a specific area in a particular state. The gallery changed twice. Were they consistent? No of course not. I appreciate galleries and successful ones do put your work in a good light and show it to the right people. But, they change and blame the artist for changing his/her work. Artists are praised for their talent and ability to make beautiful objects. But, galleries are businesses and when people want "mid-century work" the gallery changes and then says we can't sell your work. The artists are then told, impressionism, a mid-century look, Fauvism, cubism are trending. So much for consistency. The artist is called creative, new, fresh, colorful, dark, etc., but in the end, their work is called "decorative arts". Today people don't die from consumption at 35. Most of us live a good 75 years. In this climate, if an artist paints barns, he can either paint barns his entire life or he can change when the barn market dries up. The consignment shop gallery can say at any time, your work isn't selling. They usually say that when they have had success with another artist and feel safe to let you go.
Hi there, thank you for tuning in and for bringing up this interesting discussion. I strongly disagree a gallery does not invest in an artist. If they invite you to a show, they will invest much time and money in you. If they have their gallery in a major art city such as for instance Paris, they invest between €3.000 and €8.000 in rent only. So without taking into account all the other costs, they would have to sell €6.000 up to €16.000 if they have a 50% commission on sales to pay rent... When it comes to your experience with the inconsistency of what galleries want-this turn of events is not representative of most art galleries. On the other hand, if they invested in your work and you make a sudden change, their collectors won't be happy, so neither will your gallery. You can develop, but it has to make sense. I will expand on this topic of style and consistency in the foreseeable future, so feel free to stay tuned!
@@contemporaryartissue read my comment again. Everyone has costs. that is the cost of business. a consignment shop has costs. a retail seller has costs and the artist has costs. "but it has to make sense". The whole point of making art, especially abstract and surreal and fauvist, cubist, and many other styles of art is that art doesn't have to make sense. It just needs a buyer.
@@ronjohnson4566 I have read your comments carefully. Yes, everyone has costs-and galleries have tremendous costs and, thus tremendous risks when offering new artists a platform to showcase and sell their work. So it is unfair to state make no investment in the artist. Simply because they don't buy your work straight away, doesn't mean they don't invest time and money in you. When it comes to "making sense"; the art does not have to make sense, but the artist's oeuvre does. At least, an oeuvre that makes sense and is exciting to follow will have better chances a finding numerous buyers.
@@contemporaryartissue look up the word consignment. i would make the arguement but you cant seem to hear it.
@@contemporaryartissue If you don’t know what a consignment shop is, that’s fine. Look up retail, discount, used, and consignment. You may fine this enlightening. Are you saying your definition only includes new artists. At what point does the gallery decide to buy the work from the artist because they are a great investment. I have heard gallery owners say, they bought/own the artist’s work. There are galleries that buy estates or entire collections of artists work. Usually this happens after the artist or the collectors of that work die. The family then sells the estate. Those galleries also sell living artist work on a consignment basis. Most galleries are consignment only.
It would be foolish to invest more than you have to. So, how much the gallery invests is their business and how much the artist invests is his business. Seems to me if a gallery is wasting their money on a bad idea, the artist should look at another gallery.
In addition, people live much longer these days than they did just 60 years ago. So, oil painters became acrylic artists, printmakers, neon artists, conceptual artists, because the world changes and people want different things. An artist would be foolish not to change with the times. Impressionism is not selling so make mid century paintings. The overview of their work can not make sense to you but it can make sense to others. Mozart made beautiful music but at some point the king got tired of it and wanted something new. Before mozart could create a new exciting sound he died. I think he died at 35 or so. Marcel Duchamp was a painter and at somepoint he decided to make a completely new type of art i.e., The bride stripped bare… he lived to a ripe old age. He said he quit making art but I believe in 1960 or so he showed another different type of work. I.e., Given, the waterfall and the illuminated gas. So much for oeuvre.
What about Damien Hirst?
David hockey?
And many other?
Damien Hirst follows a very clear and consistent vision, with recurring themes such as life, death, science, religion, and art itself. With David Hockney, there is also this very consistent investigation of perceiving reality and transforming it into painting, ranging from his LA pool paintings up to his multicamera video works or inversed perspective paintings. They are versatile artists, but their vision and works are consistent.
@@contemporaryartissue so clearly, look and style of an artwork is not needed to be "painted" by the same artist.
But if an artist is known to be eccentric and unrecognisable then it can also be considered as consistency.
Lia an artistic personality brand.
@@contemporaryartissue great channel and content by the way.
Very much appreciate your efforts to help artists understand the system.
I have not watched all of your content but
I hope you are able to uncover the "money laundering" myths of the art world in some way.
@@danrazART There are indeed artists with an intentional 'no-style style', think of Ryan Gander or Maurizio Cattelan. Happy to hear you enjoy the content. We are very happy to share our kaleidoscopic perspective on contemporary art, and are always in search for new perspectives. Have a great day!
Great advise if you want to make a product to sell to galleries and collectors. If you want to be an artist, not so much.
Feel free to watch our more extensive take on this topic and feel free to comment if you still think the same; ruclips.net/video/A3kyKh44EbY/видео.html
Yes indeed it is really important to be consistent in the vision and the story you tell - and to Express it it a clear and strong artist statement. And I love the question: why is your Art important today?
And thankyou you for the examples of artist keeping the story but somehow developing the way they express it through technique and style. 🎵❤️🎶
It certainly is! The pleasure is all mine, thank you so much for tuning in. Have a great day!
For a brief 9 mins I imagined chatting with a thoughtful friend on a hillside in Tuscany and it was really fun. Next time I'll pick the shade tree lol
Hi David, what a wonderful comment! Sounds like really fun indeed. Thank you for tuning in my friend!
I love your channel! Please take a video lighting course. The light behind you needs to be less bright then the light in front of you. You should have the sun or light pointing at your face, with dark behind you. Again your content is fabulous but hard to watch. - a photographer/videographer.
좋은 영상과 작품 소개 감사드립니다.
The pleasure is all mine, thank you for tuning in.
I wonder whether there is a difference between the U.S. and the Europe when it comes to having an artist statement on one’s website. It seems like it’s expected for it to be on your site in the U.S. ??
I don't believe there is necessarily a difference for the high-end art world. Generally speaking, I advise to always have your CV on your website and possibly also a short artist biography/info text in the third person. An artist statement in the first person is more extensive and not necessarily a public text, but a personal tool for the artist.
@@contemporaryartissue Thank you!
Thanks for maintain a channel with such subject and a realistic and erudite way.
PS. The out side location is nice and refreshing.🤙🧠👁👅🌱🤙
Thank you so much, the pleasure is all mine!
Vision & Consistency is key - and do not get this mixed up with something formulaic - you can have Vision & Consistency while keeping it exciting- look at how Salvador Dali always had the same style but it was wild stuff. be smart- your not going to be good at everything - do what you were meant to do.
Spot on! Great summary and advice for all artists watching this video. Thank you!
Thank you for this insightful video. Why do you advise NOT to publish your artist statement?
Artist statements can be published online, but I would recommend not to publish it written in the first person, and go for a summarized version of the artist statement. We don't want to share all the information at once, nor do we want to come across as too eager to promote or talk about our works. Even more, we don't want to bombard the website visitor with a tremendous amount of information, this mind be rather overwhelming. On our website we aim to intrigue and incite the visitor, with a hint a mystery. Thank you for tuning in!
Thank you, much appreciated.
why should i destroy old experiment and remove online traces when i found my style ???
If they are relevant to your work today, you should not destroy them. But if they are not very good, or don't have anything to do with your work today, it is better to 'hide' them from the art world and only to present your very best works
wow all the comments- just change slowly...and honestly if you were deeply involved your work WOULDN'T change drastically overnight, it just wouldn't...you can evolve...Think in say a writer...does a science fiction writer suddenly write love poems. NO. Or you write historical ficiton then suddenly you'll write non-fiction....not unless there is a connecting thread- THEN it can work.
Hi Yoga Bliss Dance, thank you for putting this so well into words. You get it! And thank you for tuning in
Hi sorry but the sound quality is bad and I couldn't listen to the video because it was too distracting. If you could address that id really appreciate it.
Gee, and there I was thinking artists were meant to be creative.
Yes, you should be creative. But do it in a coherent manner, otherwise 'creative' seems to become 'random'. Think of Tracey Emin who goes on from showcasing an unmade bed as a readymade installation to traditional expressionist painting and drawing, yet remaining true and recognizable concerning her vision, methodology, and approach. Or what about Luc Tuymans, who is able to go on from painting Mickey Mouse to a gas-chamber of the Second World War, but remains recognizable due to his characteristic nervous brushwork, muted palette, and ambiguous undercurrent.
What about artists like Damien Hirst, Ai Weiwei, Tracey Emin, they've all changed so many mediums and forms and meanings. Damien Hirst is probably one of the best examples that you can do something completely different and still be hugely successful. And there are many more. Being an artist that becomes a brand by doing the same paintings or photographs or sculptures just in different colours over and over for decades, is not an artist in my eyes.
Picasso, Richter, Guston also come to mind.
thanks for the info I am writing a statement about my art, but I just want to add who is the artist consistently making the most money for his artwork because he could change his style Picasso. Collectors are not artists a lot of people want to pigeon hole artists. When I finish with my artist statement I will send you a copy if you are interested. keep up the good work
Thank you Lori, good luck with the artist statement and your artistic endeavours. Wishing you all the best!
Speaking of consistency, isnt it a bit too repetetive to do the same slow zoom for each point?
In fact, you are absolutely right! We have stopped doing this with our most recent videos. I believe we are learning :-)
Always interesting but still a very "top down approach " . The basic " Kierkegaardian " committment is missing . All this too often leads to soulless competence . The necessary drive starts from infancy , whether one recognises it earlier or later doesn't matter !
This is the second video of yours that I have watched. Both of them are easy to listen to but dizzying to watch. The camera consistently closes in to the subject and then goes back to the first setting. This zoom and unzoom happens while you breathe. It makes watching a jarring experience. I understand that this technique is supposed to provide visual interest, but instead, it is visually distracting.
Thank you so much for the constructive feedback, you are absolutely right. We have adapted our editing to avoid this over-dynamic panning and keep it more simple. Thank you!
I’m sure this is sound business advice, but what you’re describing sounds like a recipe for lifelong misery to me. I’d hate, hate to be pigeonholed like that.
It’s like you’re talking about art as just another product, like say soap, where the consumer will pitch a fit if you change the formula.
This makes me more convinced than ever-either you’re a business person who happens to sell “art”, or you’re an actual artist.
Don’t force it, focus/consistency will probably come naturally anyways over time
This is exactly what he is doing.
predictability becomes boring, Damien Hirst does completely different things all the time but you can see his DNA in his work. Artists should not restrict themselves to one distinctual style, that will kill the artist's creativity. The work will show your DNA if you're consistently being "you" even if you do different styles.
Hi Natsu, thank you for tuning in. Predictability and consistency are indeed two different things. Damien Hirst is indeed a great example of a more versatile oeuvre that follows a clear vision and is consistent throughout. Other great examples are Tracey Emin, Louise Bourgeois, Maurizio Cattelan, and even Luc Tuymans.
man, maybe better make a podcast, the light is really bad hahah
We are very individualistic and narcissistic. We all want to be unique and different. This is the era that we live in and art is following the trends in society. Actually it should be the other way around. That’s why contemporary art is mostly crap. Crap society crap art.
Funny! Anybody can say that!
Art is not a career but a lifelong study. Picasso would find you materialistic trap as blasphemy. Investment? Really? You are definitely the product of the left turn the art world took after fashion invaded it with the appearance of Pop and Gloria Vanderbilt jeans.
art is 🔮 science is alchemy is a visionary 🎨🧙♂ art. However, when ignorance is strength and war is peace art is put aside and commerce 👜 and economy ✍ become the merchants of Venice art the naufrage ship and the artiste a future victim on the crucifix✝🕎 leading to an enslaved population rather than freedom that the artist hoped for the population. 🐕🦺
In the end this all is total bullshit
Hi,
Some how l tend to like ur videos. Please can U also enlighten us on of some people/persons involved in the area of visual arts (stake holders). Thank U.❤
Hi Thomas, thank you for tuning in! Excellent suggestion, I have taken note.