Unpopular Opinions Thread (Non-Political)

[Renegade7]

Da Vinci and Michelangelo supposedly were illegally gathering dead bodies so they could get to their art as realistic as they could.  If you don't appreciate or impressed looking at a statue with veins in it, not sure what to tell you.  

Edited August 23, 2018 by Renegade7

[Kosher Ham]

29 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

So the argument is that photorealistic painting can’t have artistic expression?

Ok...but I don’t believe you

 

Interesting. 

I want to do a portrait painting. You know, old school style. 

 

I don't care what anyone thinks about it. 

That is what art at the end of the day is. 

 

I want a painting that looks like a picture from an incredible artist that can share the vision with me. 

I can paint and draw...but for whatever reason, hands and necks are difficult. Details, shading, colors, etc. Good. 

Hand and necks...always look off to me, even if it is from a picture. 

 

[grego]

Yacht rock, channel 70, is the best channel on Sirius xm. 

[mcsluggo]

2 hours ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

And yet about 800 people each year attempt the climb. Why?

Because even if Sir Edmund was the first they still haven't done it.

 

and many many thousands of people strive to create art.  but the only ones that are noticed, stand out from the crowd for one reason or another.   It doesn't necessarily create the best incentives (its how you end up with lazy **** like crucifixes in piss)... but to deny it a strong shaping force on the industry (and your probability of success, if you are an artist) is a recipe for failure.   

 

 

there are probably 100k people today that can draw/create/paint pictures at least as "realistic" as Da Vinci <<<<<i completely pulled that number out of my ass... so don't ask me to try to verify it>>>>>... so that is no longer the way to stand out.   You better have something else (hopefully something ADDITIONAL, not just ELSE) that distinguishes you.    

[Riggo-toni]

1 hour ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

So the argument is that photorealistic painting can’t have artistic expression?

Ok...but I don’t believe you

 

Ok, here we may have a semantic disagreement on the definition of photorealistic. That isn't duplicating any reality in my universe. It would take some serious editing to make a genuine photo look like that.

[JSSkinz]

On 8/22/2018 at 5:22 PM, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

One of his paintings sold for 110 million.  Get your niece some big canvases.

LOL, I had one come across my desk earlier this year.

 

Edited August 23, 2018 by JSSkinz

[skinsmarydu]

On 8/22/2018 at 1:51 PM, Elessar78 said:

Certain dog breeds are dangerous to have around children. Pitbulls, Rottweilers. heck, maybe even German Shepherds, Doberman Pinschers.

Depends, we've been through this before, tho.

The breeds you mentioned need attention AND room to move. Not everyone knows or is well equipped when they think it's "a cool idea" to acquire one. 

Just sayin. 

[Kosher Ham]

30 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

LOL, I had one come across my desk earlier this year.

 

 

 

 

My most complemented tie. 

Children of the world. 4th grader designed it if I remember correctly. 

[JSSkinz]

9 minutes ago, Kosher Ham said:

 

My most complemented tie. 

Children of the world. 4th grader designed it if I remember correctly. 

1

Its crazy but Spaceman was right, people are paying ridiculous amounts of money for his work right now, the appraisal on the painting I posted was $14M.

[skinsmarydu]

32 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

Its crazy but Spaceman was right, people are paying ridiculous amounts of money for his work right now, the appraisal on the painting I posted was $14M.

Who? I think I missed the artist? 

I like everything @Riggo-toni paints. Dude's got awesome vision for lighting detail, and for making what looks like just a glance at something more noteworthy. 

 

Edit add; didn't mean for this to sound like it does regarding the topic...just throwing out my very novice opinion on an artist who I've actually met in person. ?

Edited August 23, 2018 by skinsmarydu

[Fresh8686]

20 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

That's the pessimist in you coming out, and based on some of the stuff you've talked about in your own life doesn't shock me.  A lot of people just don't know what they're doing or why they doing it, just know they supposed to do something, and looking both ways before crossing the street then getting hit by an airplane doesn't help.  What I've found is push come to shove, a lot of people don't know what to do outside put themselves first out of fear someone won't do the same for them.  Still one of the most charitable countries on the planet anytime a natural disaster shows up.

 

But if I'm in a room of classmates, most aren't plotting my demise for their success.  I find that at work, at Redskins games, there are some f'd up people, and in a large country a small percentage adds up.  We had a good news thread not to long ago, don't know what happened to it, but my guess is we are so wrapped up in what's going wrong that we forget what's going right everyday.  I wish more people had more context to their own daily strife, we'd appreciate the struggle more.  Not everyone is like us and can say "ya this is bad, but its been way f'n worse".  And news doesn't help by spending 8 hours talking about Omorosa pretending to be Mission Impossible and taking pictures of the back of peoples chairs instead of what's going on with the Rohingya.  People say they hate being from Virginia, I tell them can you imagine not being able to come back to Virginia?  Or your entire country?

 

We've both met a lot of people, but there's a difference between being prepared for the worst of people and expecting it.  

 

I feel you man and you do have a point. In a neutral situation a good handful of people are decent to be around. But, in my studies and experience, when you add stress or an element of scarcity that percentage of people who will behave with principle decreases. When you add in temptation the percentage of people decreases again. When you add the removal of risk of reprisal or punishment, that percentage decreases even more. And then add tribalism and hierarchical struggle and it reduces again.

The group of people in this world who have a palate for principled behavior, fitness/resiliency to handle stress and temptation, and a full enough emotional/spiritual cup to have the will and dedication to do so over duration are of a much smaller number than people might realize. Maybe they make up 20% of the population? Holding up the rest of the world similar to the 80/20 Pareto Principle? I'm just guessing of course, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was something like 40% of people are corrupt, 40% of people are followers/undeveloped, and 20% of people keep the rest of the world from sliding back into the dark ages.

I feel like people aren't properly trained to responsibly handle power and our technological advancements give even greater degrees of leverage which increases the emotional pressure of power, increasing the curve of difficulty and the requirements for foresight/long-term vision. All we need is one person dumb enough and unhealthy enough to get their hands on a nuclear weapon and we're all ****ed. Then you've got these supposed "elites" who act like ****ing sociopaths and are so sheltered from the consequences of their actions.

That fragility in the face of such pressures bother me...  

Edited August 24, 2018 by Fresh8686

[Riggo-toni]

3 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

Da Vinci and Michelangelo supposedly were illegally gathering dead bodies so they could get to their art as realistic as they could.  If you don't appreciate or impressed looking at a statue with veins in it, not sure what to tell you.  

Actually I am even more amazed by some of the renaissance sculptors (I forget the name of the one I am thinking of in particular) who could replicate the appearance of thin clothing over a body.

There was no photography in the quattrocento, so what they were doing was groundbreaking back then. The previously technology was tempura painting, which had such fast drying time that features could never be given any depth or detail.  Medieval painting bores the hell out of me - after living in Italy all the religious iconography gets stale.  Renaissance painters were unquestionably some of the greatest in history.  Yet I would say their work is far more fantastic than pure realism.  How many models had the kind of muscular physiques portrayed in the Sistine chapel?  More amazing to me is how they apparently instinctively juxtaposeded complementary colors long before the discovery of a color spectrum and with it formal color theory.

There seems to be a misunderstanding here - I am not opposed in the slightest bit to realism, but I think the best art enhances reality above mere duplication. And in case anyone missed it, I got drawn into this discussion by knocking the work of Basquiat and Rothko.  While we're at it, I also think Basquiat's champion Warhol was a mediocre talent with a terrific hype machine.

Edited August 24, 2018 by Riggo-toni

[skinsmarydu]

Did you see the movie?  I thought he was portrayed well, but I wasn't blown off my couch by his work.

*whaado I know anyway*?

[purbeast]

Any M. Knight Smamalayadingdong movie other than 6th Sense is ****ing TERRIBLE and so is anyone who likes any of his movies other than 6th Sense.

 

If you like The Happening or The Village then you are an even MORE ****ING TERRIBLE person.

 

And if you like Lady in the Water you should be banned from life.

[Spaceman Spiff]

1 hour ago, skinsmarydu said:

Who? I think I missed the artist? 

I like everything @Riggo-toni paints. Dude's got awesome vision for lighting detail, and for making what looks like just a glance at something more noteworthy. 

 

Edit add; didn't mean for this to sound like it does regarding the topic...just throwing out my very novice opinion on an artist who I've actually met in person. ?

 

Basquiat.

 

 

2 hours ago, JSSkinz said:

Its crazy but Spaceman was right, people are paying ridiculous amounts of money for his work right now, the appraisal on the painting I posted was $14M.

 

I think hip hop culture has played a part in hyping him.  If you've made it into a Jay-Z lyric and Jay-Z is buying your paintings, that automatically elevates the cool factor.  

 

EDIT:  I actually thought what you posted was a joke.  Looks like something a 2nd grader drew.

Edited August 24, 2018 by Spaceman Spiff

[Destino]

27 minutes ago, purbeast said:

Any M. Knight Smamalayadingdong movie other than 6th Sense is ****ing TERRIBLE and so is anyone who likes any of his movies other than 6th Sense.

 

If you like The Happening or The Village then you are an even MORE ****ING TERRIBLE person.

 

And if you like Lady in the Water you should be banned from life.

Unbreakable is why this opinion is right at home in this thread. 

 

Also, After Earth was worse than all the movies you mentioned. 

[Spaceman Spiff]

And while we're here, Keith Haring sucked, too.

[Riggo-toni]

1 hour ago, skinsmarydu said:

Did you see the movie?  I thought he was portrayed well, but I wasn't blown off my couch by his work.

*whaado I know anyway*?

Jeffrey Wright, the guy who played him, is a big Redskins fan (and one of my favorite actors).

[purbeast]

50 minutes ago, Destino said:

Unbreakable is why this opinion is right at home in this thread. 

 

Also, After Earth was worse than all the movies you mentioned. 

I stopped paying attention to any of his movies and didn't even remember what After Earth was until I just looked it up on IMDB.  I believe you it's worse. Basically any movie that he makes is worse than the previous one.

[Renegade7]

 

3 hours ago, Riggo-toni said:

Actually I am even more amazed by some of the renaissance sculptors (I forget the name of the one I am thinking of in particular) who could replicate the appearance of thin clothing over a body.

Ya, first example that comes to mind is Michelangelo with "The Pieta", that's insane, and 500 years ago.

 

 

Quote

There was no photography in the quattrocento, so what they were doing was groundbreaking back then. The previously technology was tempura painting, which had such fast drying time that features could never be given any depth or detail.  Medieval painting bores the hell out of me - after living in Italy all the religious iconography gets stale.  Renaissance painters were unquestionably some of the greatest in history.  Yet I would say their work is far more fantastic than pure realism.  How many models had the kind of muscular physiques portrayed in the Sistine chapel?  More amazing to me is how they apparently instinctively juxtaposeded complementary colors long before the discovery of a color spectrum and with it formal color theory.

There seems to be a misunderstanding here - I am not opposed in the slightest bit to realism, but I think the best art enhances reality above mere duplication. And in case anyone missed it, I got drawn into this discussion by knocking the work of Basquiat and Rothko.  While we're at it, I also think Basquiat's champion Warhol was a mediocre talent with a terrific hype machine.

I get what some of ya'll are saying in that you respect photorealism more then appreciate it because we see real everyday, art I think we all want to see something we've never seen before.  Same time, the level of skill needed to pull that off is just insane, I don't believe for two seconds even half of 100K people can pull something like this off:

 

Diego Fazio - with a charcoal pencil

 

 

I found this on Pintrests looking around, can't tell who did it, but I mean, I'd say there's some expression here, not to mention... holy ****.

 

 

Photography was mentioned about trying to capture the most special on moments in reality, but even in something as easy as taking a picture of something, I always look into what the artist is trying to say with their piece.  Why take a picture of that?  Why paint that?  Even in what appears to be a portrait of homegirls above, why her?  What's her story?  

 

I have no idea how to categorize that picture of the lady with her hands of her face and face on top of her hands.  I tried googling abstract photorealism, but no, I think its just photorealism with a twist (as I can see someone taking the skill of maybe two photos at the same time to pull that off, one with her hands down and one with her hands up).  I'd like to see more art like that, think that's the next level as there is only so much you can do with a canvas, and why we see more stuff like 3D art:

 

 

  I'm not sure where digital art fits into this discussion, but I've seen some very beautiful pieces that I get was done with a computer, but again, not many people can do, and in many cases are aesthetically pleasing or trying to say something.  I've been the type to peak at places like Deviant Art since I was in grade school, but I'd feel sick if someone said this doesn't really count as art because it was done on a computer:

 

I'd say right now, today's generation of artists are considerably better in many ways to artists before them given the multiple new techniques that have evolved and mastered now.  Andy Warhol's soup can can't touch none of this that I've just posted. Riggo, my mom has a Master's in Fine Arts with minor in Art History and approves of you assessment of him being overrated. I've taken her to a couple different art museums, both of us kinda get bored with early church art, though no way I can pull off any of that.  They say art is in the eye of the beholder, its not like football where we can look at a player and say "ya, he sucks" because he doesn't have the skill to play the position at a level that justifies paying him as a "professional" football player.  It doesn't seem to be that simple with art when you have guys like Pollock who from my perspective is just throwing paint all over the place a lot of the times.

 

In regards to modern art and the pricing attributed to who's famous versus actually the best, that's absolutely true and recommend this episode of "Adam Ruins Everything" to anyone that hasn't already seen it:

 

 
 

Edited August 24, 2018 by Renegade7

[The Evil Genius]

I'll probably take some heat for this, but I'd rather look at a Peter Lik repro (or original) than a painting..paintings rarely do anything for me. 

[Renegade7]

4 hours ago, Fresh8686 said:

That fragility in the face of such pressures bother me...  

 

I mean, we're basically apes with machine guns and backwards baseball caps.  The fact the violent crime rate in our country has dropped the way it has since its peak in 1991 and nothing compared to say 1000-2000 years ago is a testament to how far we've come. Evolution isn't going to move fast enough to change that, so its all choices at that point.

 

Same time, reality on the ground is our society "as is" would last maybe 30 days tops without power.  Having said that, research shows that even though 90% of US population would die, most wouldn't be from each other, it be from lack of clean drinking water.  I agree with 20% of the population causing 80% of the problems, anything higher then that is arbitrary.  If anything, people will go rouge nation to take care of their family not because we are inherently evil or weak minded(mess around and we get into philosophy and ethics in here), but because pretty much every species on the planet does that for their family in the face of finite resources.  It's all well and dandy until its obvious there's not enough food for everyone, then what?  We trap ourselves into choices we don't want to make because we don't have backup plans for when **** goes wrong.  That's fixable, despite the risk of our nature if we don't.  Stuff you're talking about could be taught in grade school along side sex ed and drivers ed.

 

Its really up to us to make sure we have what we need to help blow over worst case scenarios. Situation is extremely fragile, though, even now.  We're talking about resources, 9 million people die from hunger or hunger related reasons every year, 3-4 million from lack of access to clean drinking water.  We're already doing a ****y job of making sure everyone has what they need.  Having said that, look at what happened with Black Plague in Europe: half the population died, but even with everything collapsing around them, people didn't have time to "take advantage" of the situation.  Even royalty was dying or hiding as deep as they could until the whole thing blew over.  After it was over, there was so much empty land that land ownership skyrocketed and next thing you know Renaissance happened.

 

In regards to our technology falling in wrong hands, yes, we have the ability to wipe ourselves out without even trying now.  But that's the trade off for living in the world with things like Extremeskins and ability to have this conversation like this.  Trying to think of the groups that would do something like nuke a city, Al Queda last we could confirm was around 9,000 globally in 2009, ISIS was about 100,000 at its peak, out of 7.5 Billion.  In the book "Sum of All Fear", Denver got nuked, but instead of everyone losing their minds, we buckled down and did the best we could to find people responsible.  I'd say the fact someone hasn't already shot Trump in the head is a sign that despite a lot of the rhetoric we have these days, most people, even the bad ones, may be concerned about the whole thing going to hell but don't want to ensure it.  

Edited August 24, 2018 by Renegade7

[Destino]

1 hour ago, The Evil Genius said:

I'll probably take some heat for this, but I'd rather look at a Peter Lik repro (or original) than a painting..paintings rarely do anything for me. 

Paint doesn’t speak to me.  I’ve stared at paintings.  Sat in front of them.  I’ve tried reading about a painting prior to viewing it and approaching it cold.  Not even a whisper.  

 

 

[JSSkinz]

11 hours ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

EDIT:  I actually thought what you posted was a joke.  Looks like something a 2nd grader drew.

I used the snipping tool to cut it out of the appraisal so it's not a good quality picture, it's supposedly real, I have the chain of ownership and authenticity from a reputable source but the feedback I received from institutions that lend money on luxury items is that the family members were running the estate and the authentication of his work for years, come to find out the sisters were authenticating forgeries of his work and they got caught so it spooked everyone and they feel there is no longer a way to validate his work. They ended up closing the authentication committee.

 

 

Edited August 24, 2018 by JSSkinz

[purbeast]

Speaking of art, The Louvre is the most overrated place I've ever been to.  I actually had no desire to go there (or Paris) but was in Paris since my wife had always wanted to go there so we went to check it out.  It was so ridiculously crowded.  We basically just walked through and didn't stop to see much.  The only cool part was seeing all of these huge marble statues in one room.  

 

And the Mona Lisa is the most overrated painting.  That room was so dumb and crowded with people just trying to take selfies with the 1 foot painting 10 feet away from them in the background.