What is the value of Art school?

warden · Feb 25, 2020

DREW WILEY said:
I never sold a single print to a web surfer, despite hits from nearly every country in the world, or to a tourist - always to serious collectors who saw the actual prints in person. Remember that line of Hannibal Lector : One covets what one sees. Well, one covets very little of what appears on the web because one can't really distinguish much there.

I can't comment on selling artwork online as I've never been interested in selling things online, but I can comment as an art collector (paintings, lithographs, photographic prints and art books including many photography titles) and I can't remember the last time that online review of images hasn't been at least a part of the research and purchase decision making. Pictures online are the first (and sometimes last) step involved in separating me from my money, and I'm careful about what I buy.

There was really no other way to make the decision about Pentti Sammallahti's masterpiece Here Far Away for instance than to see images online when they became available and make the purchase quickly. I'm so glad I did because it quickly sold out and now costs far more on the secondary market. I think this is a good example of showing people what to expect, with the caveat that the book (or print or painting) will of course be better in person. And it is better in person.

https://www.lensculture.com/articles/pentti-sammallahti-here-far-away

OP, sorry for the off topic. But to bring it back, if Pentti starts an art school in my country I'm signing up.

DREW WILEY · Feb 25, 2020

What is this world coming to? Artificial flowers or none?

jtk · Feb 25, 2020

jawarden said:
I can't comment on selling artwork online as I've never been interested in selling things online, but I can comment as an art collector (paintings, lithographs, photographic prints and art books including many photography titles) and I can't remember the last time that online review of images hasn't been at least a part of the research and purchase decision making. Pictures online are the first (and sometimes last) step involved in separating me from my money, and I'm careful about what I buy.

There was really no other way to make the decision about Pentti Sammallahti's masterpiece Here Far Away for instance than to see images online when they became available and make the purchase quickly. I'm so glad I did because it quickly sold out and now costs far more on the secondary market. I think this is a good example of showing people what to expect, with the caveat that the book (or print or painting) will of course be better in person. And it is better in person.

https://www.lensculture.com/articles/pentti-sammallahti-here-far-away

OP, sorry for the off topic. But to bring it back, if Pentti starts an art school in my country I'm signing up.

jtk · Feb 25, 2020

I've spent significant time with Penttis work in two of the finest galleries in the US , in Santa Fe and in Tucson. Exquisite prints, congratulations !

DREW WILEY · Feb 25, 2020

Bingo. In other words, you're basing your assessment on having seen actual prints in person, and not just on some fuzzy little web image among the tens of thousands out there.

Arthurwg · Feb 25, 2020

jawarden said:
So barf.

I was fortunate to walk the Warhol retrospective last year and it was vast, and wonderful. A great way to spend an afternoon learning the history and seeing the art.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/08/...elebrity-portrait.html?searchResultPosition=3

I saw the show as well, so put me down in the Barf category. Like many other of a certain age, I've lived with Warhol for many decades, and used to see him at a table in the back of Max's Kansas City. But when you see all this crap put together in one big show, it becomes obvious that it really is garbage.

Alan Edward Klein · Feb 25, 2020

Vaughn said:
When people post images here, I pay more attention to the image composition than to the imaging-quality on the nuance-destroying computer screen. It is an unfortunate situation, but it does stress the photographers' skill in image-making rather than their PhotoShop efforts/skill in getting images into the net.

I agree. I take people's comments with a grain of salt if they don't,post their photos. Put your money where your mouth is. Also, if they suggest a particular process, how could you know if it's for you if you can't see samples? Who's going to spend precious hours trying something that might take considerable time without seeing some examples? Would you date a girl from a dating service who didn;t include her picture? Just how many pixels do you need to see to decide to give her a call?

DREW WILEY · Feb 25, 2020

I put my money in my lab and its relevant supplies. I didn't do that to impress anyone on a web forum. If you get help from any of my advice, you're welcome. If you can't distinguish actually experience from BS, then it probably won't help you much anyway. Art existed for over 40,000 yrs prior to the web, and probably hasn't gotten a bit better because of it. You're not seeing samples over the web, but merely a facsimile. That can be nice sometimes, but is a still a poor substitute for the real deal. Would you judge a painting based on a xerox of it? Did Lascaux never exist until web pictures of it? Face it, a great deal of technical literature, including photographic, is not necessarily accompanied with web illustrations. Are you going to categorically reject all relevant knowledge prior to UTube or Flikr? Of course not. And I sure as heck wouldn't date any girl based on some web picture. A walrus could be doctored up on PS to look like Marilyn Monroe. I met and married a real person.

removed account4 · Feb 25, 2020

DREW WILEY said:
You're not seeing samples over the web, merely a facsimile. Would you judge a painting based on a xerox of it? Face it, a great deal of technical literature, including photographic, is not necessarily accompanied with web illustrations.

no i wouldn't but i would judge a painting or photograph by what it looks like in a magazine or book. some internet renditions of photographs look as good or better than they look in person, just like reproductions in a magzine or book. over the past few years i saw a big exhibits of wonderful photography at the museum of fine arts in boston. it was work that is often talked about and praised as being some of the greatest.
renditions in magazines and books and posters even looked better than some of the work i saw. not only was the quality of the prints disappointing, but the display lighting was horrible.

i think the king is dead ..

Pieter12 · Feb 25, 2020

There is no substitute for seeing art in person, be it photography, painting, sculpture, etc. However, I would rather be able to see a particular piece of art on the internet than not see it at all. Many times I have read about an artist that was unfamiliar, and was able to research the artwork online, leading to searching out either books (still no substitute for the real thing) or finding places to take in the the art in person.

DREW WILEY · Feb 25, 2020

Well, the big wake-up moment for me is how I failed to understand what the big deal was over certain of Rembrandt's portraits when I looked at them in even well-printed art books.
I knew about how polarized light and so forth can change colors and perception of surface depth. And I had seen numerous genuine etching by him close up. But when I saw his oil painted self-portrait in person in the Natl Gallery I was almost floored. It was remarkable. It's as if even the buttons were real gold and not yellow paint. I'm certainly not against the web as an instructional vehicle, and use it that way frequently myself. I prefer reading real books, but can't afford or even find all that I'd like. There's another Ken Burns special on tonite, and there can be little doubt many of the historic images involved were probably pretty beat up somewhere and had to be digitally healed for sake of the presentation, and often have even the contrast significantly altered; but that's different than someone fooling around with a personal print and changing its intended original flavor, like certain venues tend to do nowadays ridiculously enlarging what were once intimate little snapshots. The biggest problem with trying to market pictures over the web is that it's hard to distinguish a print of serious quality, especially a low-key one, from a tearout from a Donald Duck comic book. I guess that wouldn't bother Roy Lichtenstein, but it sure as heck annoys me.

warden · Feb 25, 2020

Arthurwg said:
"I saw the show as well, so put me down in the Barf category. Like many other of a certain age, I've lived with Warhol for many decades, and used to see him at a table in the back of Max's Kansas City. But when you see all this crap put together in one big show, it becomes obvious that it really is garbage."

We can't all have the same taste and that's fine by me. My taste is pretty far ranging and it includes Warhol - good for me but bad for others. We're good here.

warden · Feb 25, 2020

Pieter12 said:
There is no substitute for seeing art in person, be it photography, painting, sculpture, etc. However, I would rather be able to see a particular piece of art on the internet than not see it at all. Many times I have read about an artist that was unfamiliar, and was able to research the artwork online, leading to searching out either books (still no substitute for the real thing) or finding places to take in the the art in person.

Yep. It's one of the best uses of the internet imho. I've lost track of how many times I've read a review in the New York Times and enjoyed their excellent reporting (including their photographs of course) only to find myself standing in front of the art in person the following month. I keep an active personal art calendar in NYC for exactly that reason: prioritizing. There is always more than I have time to see, and the art world is a big place so the internet really helps.

DREW WILEY · Feb 25, 2020

I'm not denying Warhol his place in whatever. I'm just sick of seeing him. He's become a commodity on every street corner, so to speak, just like Starbucks. Don't these alleged art experts and museum gurus have enough self-confidence to display something different? Well, I realize that there's a lot of pressure on them to share cost somewhat by sharing and recycling exhibits, and that by advertising some big name they hope to attract venue ticket sales. But who want to see the same movie 400 times over, especially one that was starting to get passe 60 years ago? Same reason I never want to see another Avedon image. Same ole stuck record.

Deleted member 88956 · Feb 26, 2020

DREW WILEY said:
I'm not denying Warhol his place in whatever. I'm just sick of seeing him. He's become a commodity on every street corner, so to speak, just like Starbucks. Don't these alleged art experts and museum gurus have enough self-confidence to display something different? Well, I realize that there's a lot of pressure on them to share cost somewhat by sharing and recycling exhibits, and that by advertising some big name they hope to attract venue ticket sales. But who want to see the same movie 400 times over, especially one that was starting to get passe 60 years ago? Same reason I never want to see another Avedon image. Same ole stuck record.

And let me throw this in here: never buy or look through "Ansel Adams 400 photographs" for exact same reasons.

VinceInMT · Feb 26, 2020

jawarden said:
This weekend I'll be in Pittsburgh, where I will make the time to visit the Warhol museum for the first time. I can't wait.

I hope you like it as much as I did. My art history professor did her dissertation on an aspect of Warhol’s work so by the time I went to the museum two years ago I had a pretty good understanding of what he was about and it was more than soup cans and Brillo boxes.

BTW, Pittsburgh is an awesome city.

VinceInMT · Feb 26, 2020

DREW WILEY said:
I'm not denying Warhol his place in whatever. I'm just sick of seeing him. He's become a commodity on every street corner, so to speak, just like Starbucks.

Well, that was sort of his point.

Vaughn · Feb 26, 2020

VinceInMT said:
Well, that was sort of his point.

Good point.

DREW WILEY · Feb 26, 2020

If someone enjoys eating a Big Mac every day, or perhaps, expressing this better, a can of Campbell's soup every single day for lunch, it's their perfect right. Seems awfully boring to me. Dada was more creative than the Pop Art phase of the 60's, but things go in cycles. Each was a sort of poke in the eye to the degree of stiffness then present in academic art. Now that very poke itself has gone into hopeless rigor mortis and become its own ubiquitous oppressive regime. Precisely why I didn't join the SFMMA. Last time I visited there it was to see a big Carleton Watkins exhibit. Not much has interested me since. I was rather quietly explaining it to a friend, and then a number of people and even certain museum staff started following me and listening in. The monograph accompanying that exhibition contained a lot of historical fluff, but didn't seem to have a clue how Watkin's was actually looking at things. Allegedly there's a much better, bigger, pricier monograph out now, but I haven't seen it yet.

DonJ · Feb 26, 2020

DREW WILEY said:
Precisely why I didn't join the SFMMA. Last time I visited there it was to see a big Carleton Watkins exhibit. Not much has interested me since.

Well, of course it hasn't. After all, they've only staged about 300 exhibitions in the 20 years since the Watkins show. Give them some time.

How fortunate for those people that you were there to fill in the blanks.

warden · Feb 26, 2020

DonJ said:
Well, of course it hasn't. After all, they've only staged about 300 exhibitions in the 20 years since the Watkins show. Give them some time.

I was just looking at their site today and there is a Dawoud Bey show happening now that I would love to see in person. I'm thinking of stopping by the show and quietly, politely, explaining to the docents what Bey was really aiming for in case they missed it, and then leading the inevitable museum tour of quietude as my admirers listen and flock to me.

BradS · Feb 26, 2020

I recommend wearing long, flowing robes of purest white, hand made sandals...and...maybe, a halo? or crown of laurel ?

DonJ · Feb 26, 2020

BradS said:
I recommend wearing long, flowing robes of purest white, hand made sandals...and...maybe, a halo? or crown of laurel ?

Or maybe a crown of thorns, so there's no doubt about who's speaking.

DREW WILEY · Feb 26, 2020

I'll go back once a vaccine is invented for the Warhol pandemic.

faberryman · Feb 26, 2020

I saw the Brassai and Diane Arbus shows while traveling to SF over the past couple of years. If you don't like Warhol or another artist, you can easily avoid those areas of the museum where their work is displayed.

What is the value of Art school?

did you get an art degree?

AA degree

BA degree

MA degree

warden

DREW WILEY

jtk

jtk

DREW WILEY

Arthurwg

Alan Edward Klein

DREW WILEY

removed account4

Pieter12

DREW WILEY

warden

warden

DREW WILEY

Deleted member 88956

VinceInMT

VinceInMT

Vaughn

DREW WILEY

DonJ

warden

BradS

DonJ

DREW WILEY

faberryman

What is the value of Art school?

did you get an art degree?

AA degree

BA degree

MA degree

Deleted member 88956

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency