Jump to content
Jesse Cairnie

inspirational painters.. Whose yours?

Recommended Posts

I just don't get it. His stuff just doesn't do anything for me.

I'm a Jackson Pollock fan myself.

 

Jackson Pollock is one of the few "contemporary" artists I appreciate. Looking at his stuff up close, it has great texture and feeling to it. Everything else just goes over my head. Like this bad boy:

post-11421-1209449959.jpg

"Red Plank" by John McCracken

 

It's a shiny red board leaning up against a wall and I think it's work like this that make people believe they don't "get" art. At least I don't get it. Anyone, feel free to enlighten me on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is in part a plug for a good friend of mine, David Imlay. I've always thought he's done some fantastic work, and he inspires me constantly with his framing and how he's able to paint light. His pieces can be viewed in various galleries here in SF.

 

http://www.davidimlay.com

 

http://www.davidimlay.com/gallery2/main.ph..._serialNumber=2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I did use Van Gogh's Starry Night:

 

http://photos.oes.org/albums/userpics/1000...h(1152x864).jpg

 

as a plot element in The Black Sky. It seemed a perfect fit as the story is about a group of space travelers that enter a beautiful but uncharted and ominous nebula to retrieve a lost science probe and become trapped in orbit around a strange, mystical planet that seems to defy scientific explanation. The Starry Night and the Hubble images of the Crab Nebula were the inspiration for the script. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everything else just goes over my head. Like this bad boy:

post-11421-1209449959.jpg

"Red Plank" by John McCracken

That reminds me...this painting by Robert Rauschenberg is hanging at the SFMOMA and at first I had that same, "What the hell is that?" feeling, but then I read the description and it seemed to make sense. I won't try to paraphrase the description, but I guess the point is that context is important and the artists intent matters. Of course in some cases the artist doesn't state his or her intent with the expectation that the viewer can decide what it means to them, which is good too. But for more literal people, like me, these seemingly simple paintings are helped in many cases by having some description of the artists intent. Without the description of the aforementioned painting, I would have just strolled past that painting saying, "yeah, great, three canvas's painted white...." and missed the point entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jackson Pollock is one of the few "contemporary" artists I appreciate. Looking at his stuff up close, it has great texture and feeling to it. Everything else just goes over my head. Like this bad boy:

post-11421-1209449959.jpg

"Red Plank" by John McCracken

 

It's a shiny red board leaning up against a wall and I think it's work like this that make people believe they don't "get" art. At least I don't get it. Anyone, feel free to enlighten me on it.

 

 

Hello Drew,

 

Let me see if that 5 years in art school might actually be useful to me:

 

Contemporary art requires a change in how you process visual information in your gourd. It sort of has to be blamed on Sigmund Freud and his fellows. When psychology started to manifest in our society, art began to explore the same thing but through visual means. Art had been struggling with what to do about photography's taking over reality. Impressionism was getting downright old and overdone. So, artists began changing the very way we looked at art. Instead of the artwork being the thing, it became- How does the artwork effect YOU? It has been that way ever since. While there has been a portion of artists that have stayed with tried and true styles, the cutting edge in art remains this psychological perspective.

 

Is that any use to you at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John Singer Sargent, an esteemed portrait painter from the early twentieth century, with a knack for atmospheric settings brought to life by his compelling compositions and masterful brushstrokes. Sargent has always been one of my favorites, unfortunately I've yet to have an opportunity to create a look based on his work.

Sargent is great. One of my favourite paintings in the Tate Britain is this one:

 

Sargent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Glen Alexander
Starting to explore Rothko:

 

 

 

msg-120940818646.jpg

 

Rothko is brilliant, get to Tate Modern, some of his Seagram Paintings are there. The whole room pulls you into a different space.

 

They said later on there were going to have an exhibit of all of the Seagram paintings at once place, which will probably be a once in a lifetime event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Glen Alexander

Vincent Van Gogh, his writings, his work, a true artist and therefore human being.

 

Anyone writes any crap about being insane or the ear better be wearing flame proof clothing. :-D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Drew,

 

Let me see if that 5 years in art school might actually be useful to me:

 

Contemporary art requires a change in how you process visual information in your gourd. It sort of has to be blamed on Sigmund Freud and his fellows. When psychology started to manifest in our society, art began to explore the same thing but through visual means. Art had been struggling with what to do about photography's taking over reality. Impressionism was getting downright old and overdone. So, artists began changing the very way we looked at art. Instead of the artwork being the thing, it became- How does the artwork effect YOU? It has been that way ever since. While there has been a portion of artists that have stayed with tried and true styles, the cutting edge in art remains this psychological perspective.

 

Is that any use to you at all?

 

 

Fair enough.

 

I can appreciate the artistic and cultural significance, I have reservations about many Impressionistic works myself. However, aesthetically it's not really my cup of tea. Setting foot in the contemporary wing of the museum used to drive me up a wall, because half of the work I'd kind of dig. The other half though, I'd have to wonder if it hadn't really been destined for the dumpster out back and made it into the gallery by mistake.

 

Although, I guess that's part of what's so great about art to begin with, it resonates differently with different people.

 

Still, nothing's more inspirational than...

waterloo.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Glen Alexander
Fair enough.

 

I can appreciate the artistic and cultural significance, I have reservations about many Impressionistic works myself. However, aesthetically it's not really my cup of tea. Setting foot in the contemporary wing of the museum used to drive me up a wall, because half of the work I'd kind of dig. The other half though, I'd have to wonder if it hadn't really been destined for the dumpster out back and made it into the gallery by mistake.

 

Although, I guess that's part of what's so great about art to begin with, it resonates differently with different people.

 

Still, nothing's more inspirational than...

waterloo.jpg

 

Yes the visual equivalent of that Simpsons episode where Homer is on board of the film festival and votes for "Football in the groin." ha ha ha

Edited by Glen Alexander

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sargent piece is beautiful. John William Waterhouse is another of my favorites although the Pre-Raphaelites (including him) didn't paint with much depth.

 

i forgot to add a link to the artist I mentioned earlier, Katie Miller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you love the Pre-Raphs then you must like the Alma-Tadema/Leighton bunch. Boy-oh-boy could they paint nekked chicks!

post-1743-1209520305.jpg

post-1743-1209520340.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe i should put some links/images ;)

 

Vermeer: http://www.essentialvermeer.com/

vermeer.jpg

 

Beksinski: http://www.gnosis.art.pl/iluminatornia/szt...w_beksinski.htm

zdzislaw_beksinski.jpg

zdzislaw_beksinski_005.jpg

 

Waterhouse: http://www.johnwilliamwaterhouse.com/index.php

waterhouse_the_lady_of_shalott.jpg

 

Friedrich: http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/f/friedric/index.html

Friedrich%20-%20Moon.jpg

oakwoodabbey2.jpg

 

Not painters but photographers, a lot of you probably already know of this but many probably don't.

library of congress: http://www.flickr.com/photos/library_of_congress/

2179930812_1c734d4726.jpg

 

hope someone finds this as useful as i do. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reckon I'm lowering the tone to pulp art.

 

But Richard Powers is a big favorite of mine:

 

Bal_135.jpg

 

 

donleavy_ginger_berkbg264.jpgdick_man_berk05051.jpg

 

 

pohl_korn_glad_balf570.jpgleiber_silver_balf561.jpg

 

pohl_korn_merchant_bal21.jpg

 

Maybe I was a bit carried away. Will save Ed Emshwiller for another day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reckon I'm lowering the tone to pulp art.

 

But Richard Powers is a big favorite of mine:

 

dick_man_berk05051.jpg

 

 

Maybe I was a bit carried away. Will save Ed Emshwiller for another day.

 

 

Just awesome covers....please check out Phil Hale a devastating illustrator....

 

 

hale_punch.jpg

 

dt213.jpg

 

phil_hale-chicken_placebo_generator.jpg

 

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an indirect intellectual, philosophical and emotional inspiration, I would say Paul Klee more than any other.

 

Paul Klee

 

"Ohne Titel" [Gefangen, Diesseits-Jenseits/Figur] (1940)

 

"Fast getroffen" (1928)

 

 

As a more direct inspiration, though still not directly visual or even scenic (never connected between the artform of painting and the artform of cinematography that directly): the work of Paul Cézanne.

 

In that respect, I highly recommend the films "Cézanne" and "Une visite au Louvre" by Jean-Marie Straub and Danièle Huillet, currently available on a rare Japanese DVD edition with a third masterpiece, "Lothringen!". A new US-/European work edition is announced and will be sold via Amazon.

post-27184-1209961391.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely agree on that, Mike!

 

I will have my first trip to California ever this mid-August, dividing my time there equally between LA and the Bay area for "meet & greet" stuff. But I already cleared half a day in San Franscisco to visit the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art where the above "Fast getroffen (Nearly Hit)" of 1928 is currently exhibited.

 

Can't wait :)

 

-Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I'm concerned, the first technicolor cameraman was Van Gogh. This is my absolute favorite painting of his.

 

noon_rest_from_work.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Rig Wheels Passport



    Paralinx LLC



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Abel Cine



    Wooden Camera



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Just Cinema Gear



    Visual Products



    Ritter Battery



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    G-Force Grips



    Metropolis Post



    Glidecam



    Tai Audio



    FJS International



    Serious Gear



    CineLab


×
×
  • Create New...