Reply
Tue 14 Oct, 2003 12:20 pm
The most popular genre in the more commercially marketed art is now a form of impressionism. It borrows heavily not only form the French Impressionist but there a curious mix of expressionism. Most of it is just competent illustration art. The other trend is toward a photo-realism which is purveyed by artist obviously trained in advertising art. Wine bottles is now a popular fad. What do you believe is the engine of the popular fine art trends?
BTW, Kincaid has begun to manufacture lesser expensive reproductions of his new "Plein Air" art where he supposedly paints on location. Yeah, right. It's really bad imitations of Calfornia murky and muddy impressionism made popular by Laguna Beach artists in the twenties and thirties.
I've seen some modern impressionist art works, but I didn't care for them, because it lacked imagination. It seems the artist tried to paint scenery with the least amount of detail to create the imagery, and went too far in my opinion.
My wife and I stayed over at my sister's home in Elk Grove two weekends ago, and she had several large Kincaid paintings in her home which was purchased by her son. It kind of pained me to see it in her house.
art
C.I., my condolences.
I suppose it is not so surprising that a form
of impressionism is so popular. Ask almost anyone
what their most favourite art movement is and
the answer is most likely to be impressionism.
So to make money, impressionism seems to be
the way to go......
I agree that some of it is splotch and blotch. This is the Spanish painter Royo's work which is very popular:
Yes I think multi media is all the rage. In the last few months of editing this movie I'm working on , I was beginning to decide it looks very impressionistic . It also looks like a magazine and a television news cast or a blank sreen with running text. It will have the familiarity of a documentary but the excitement and adventure of a game. I have felt by involving the entire package of ideas and be sparing with each I coulkd arrive at this uber medium of the movie as an expressionistic moving work of art , like a classic in it,s foundation but the wizdoom of picasso in the end.
Does this make any sense out there? Do i make any cents...
Algis, "Sense" is the word, but sometimes "cents" works for me!
Modern Impressionism
Oh boy, just what the world has been waiting for! Bad Kincaid!!
And Lightwizard - I think Royo's work is awfully sentimental; if that one's typical, I think he and Kincaid ought to meet.
It is rather squishy and sentimental -- his palette is even sugary. It looks kind of like flavors of fruit bars. I picked one of the more flamboyant pieces that at least has some expressionistic energy. He mixes rather realistically rendered faces with abstract backgrounds and floral painting that looks rather like crockery. However, he is a better painter than Kincaid. I'll try to find a visual with the trade magazine that published the really bad representation of the work (in a tiny postage stamp size repro).
Here's one of the worst of the series:
The composition and color are like something a sophomore in high school would produce. He certainly would be told to find another profession if he showed up at any reputable art school with this bilge.
art
Yes, but it's still much better than any Kincaid. At least I can smell the air as it's cooled by the water.
LW, It looks like those "technique" type of painting which is one of the worst forms of painting. You can find these painters on t.v.. They show you how to paint a scene with 'technique,' and not much of anything else. Some also use only the palet.
art
C.I., you are right about the TV "technique" paintings. I can't watch them for more than a minute. But THIS painting (despite what LW correctly says against it) shows how even poor work can have SOME virtue for someone at some time. I don't care for this kind of work, but I happened to have been caught off guard and accidently saw something good in it.
It's leading one'e eye straight off the image to the bottom left-hand corner. I would be prompted to have a psychological response of placing a bucket under the left hand side of the painting. His trees are improved but only to the level of a Sunday painter. This style without all the fussy detail just calls attention to his not grasping the principals of good compostion. He's "filling in space," especially with the contrivance of the tree branch following along the roof line of the building in the background. It looks like a Hitler painting.
(And if you want to go to the site, he's apparantly flying all over the world to paint this stuff in the open air -- I don't believe he has time. He's always on QVC pimping his own decorator crap).
Your mention of the tree branch following along the roof line of the building shows his lack of understanding of trees. This one tree has a very long branch, while the trees in the background is short. Unnatural.
Modern impressionism
Perhaps the way the branches are done is how he's trying to provide perspective?
Seems to me that the branch of the front tree is so long it would have broken right off in another minute, of its own weight.
The colors look like the Martha Stewart pillow collection at K Mart.
He has no clue about perspective, Tomkitten. He's such a rank amateur, it's unfathomable that he's been able to bilk people into buying such naive trash.
If anything, he might have tried to show some movement -- the only movement I am getting is in my stomach.
art
LW, nothing can really save this picture. It's too insipid from the start. But would the composition problem have been helped by a boat moving to the right at the bottom left of the picture?
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace