compare and contrast the work of art today from work of art before
2007-05-03 21:38:28 · 5 answers · asked by shecatar27 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Painting
In some ways, yes. The techniques and craftsmanship that was employed in the past are no longer being practised or have been lost. Today we have different standards of what is considered contemporary "fine art." Scutptures such as those of Ancient Greece or the Renaissance have yet to be trumped by contemporary artists of today. The grand lavish paintings of the Neoclassical and Romantic era it seems will never be again. Those paintings will remain icons of the past. That is why so many flock to the museums to these works. I have yet to see a multitude of contemporary artists create such works on a grand scale.
While it is true that in this day and age there is a plethora of artists and some may say too many artists, there is a gross lack of work that emphasizes grandeur, scale, technique, study, individualism and quality.
Your question is hypothetical. Some could argue that work produced today is no different in quality or standards than say those produced in the past. However, it really depends on a personal opinion. My opinion is that I just happen to view work of today as being less than magnificent than those works created in the past centuries. Much of the work produced today is influenced by technology and the usage of photographs to create paintings. Finances play a HUGE factor in creating work. Materials are outlandishly expensive thus this could contribute to the reason why there are so few huge paintings being produced today. Trends also influence art. Right now plein air painting is hot. Small little canvases, post card sized paintings, etc all contribute in some way to the watering down of standards that used to exist in fine painting.
The Salon exhibitions of the past were so very important to an artists career. Acceptance or rejection from such a show made or broke artists careers. Today, we have the web to host artwork. Anyone can set up shop on the web and host their own "fine art" gallery. So in the broad spectrum, sure, it would appear that the work of today is decline. But there are some pockets of exceptional work that is being created. And it just seems that this quality of work is being drowned out by the flood of mediocre work posted and advertised by self-promoting artists.
2007-05-04 02:13:40 · answer #1 · answered by sassychick 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nah. Same old same old.
Point is there never have been this many artist in the world, never this much exposure for any artist, never this much money being spend on...non vital stuff.
Good art will survive the test of time and as so much is produced some good stuff is bound to do that.
2007-05-03 21:52:24 · answer #2 · answered by Puppy Zwolle 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Painting reached its peak in the baroque period. Jan Vermeer van Delft and Diego Velasquez were the best of all time. Salvador dali said that a drop of Vermeer's divine blue pigment was worth much more than all of the paintings that came after his time. Jackson Pollock is infantile compared to Vermeer.
2007-05-04 03:17:21 · answer #3 · answered by miyuki & kyojin 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i always appreciate the work of art before.in my idea those art were based on identity,validity, that in new arts with the help of lots of materials it can not be found.
2007-05-03 23:29:39 · answer #4 · answered by aida 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. I just think that with the media- less and less artists get to be "successful". All the $ goes to the few chosen ones and the rest are left out in the cold. :(
2007-05-04 06:19:13 · answer #5 · answered by kermit 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋