PDA

View Full Version : Black & White on Blue


I'm Not Bob
02-03-2004, 12:47 PM
Hi All,

Here is my latest piece. I call it "Black & White on Blue" because it is Black & White on Blue.

The picture shows the new piece hanging next to another piece I have decided to call "Chaos".

Tamana
02-03-2004, 01:39 PM
These are fantastic!! I especially like that lower quadrant of open flow on Chaos, considering I'm studying the Chaos Theory ;). Fits nicely with my mood right now, as does the canal emphasized by the blue running up through the central of the other one.

You've got a great eye for color, balance & design in dribbling. :) I think Polluck would be proud. :)

Would it be possible to see a detail of the lower portion of Chaos in that spacial area?

I'm Not Bob
02-03-2004, 03:06 PM
These are fantastic!! I especially like that lower quadrant of open flow on Chaos, considering I'm studying the Chaos Theory ;). Fits nicely with my mood right now, as does the canal emphasized by the blue running up through the central of the other one.

You've got a great eye for color, balance & design in dribbling. :) I think Polluck would be proud. :)

Would it be possible to see a detail of the lower portion of Chaos in that spacial area?

Hi Tamana,

Stop it. I'm blushing.....

Here are some closeups of chaos. This is as good as my digital camera will allow. The actual painting has much more depth.

VieSaintSo
02-03-2004, 03:19 PM
Not Bob,
you are realy ROCKING now! :clap:

Tamana
02-03-2004, 03:26 PM
POLLOCK

Bloody spelling....

ahem...so, anyway person that's not Bob. Thank you for the close-ups. Amazing that they come from the same one...almost. Even more so how they all integrate into one occurrence...


The butterfly effect: The amount of difference in the starting points of the two curves is so small that it is comparable to a butterfly flapping its wings.

The flapping of a single butterfly's wing today produces a tiny change in the state of the atmosphere. Over a period of time, what the atmosphere actually does diverges from what it would have done. So, in a month's time, a tornado that would have devastated the Indonesian coast doesn't happen. Or maybe one that wasn't going to happen, does. (Ian Stewart, Does God Play Dice? The Mathematics of Chaos, pg. 141)

The movie was pretty good too. ;)

I can see this progression in your painting...Chaos was a good title choice.

jaymarvin
02-03-2004, 03:49 PM
Bob, you're smoking again! GREAT WORK!

jay :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

dragoni689
02-06-2004, 02:39 AM
mmmm

again with the borrowing of the technique
at least this time it is closer to his means and less kitschy
and you didn't blatantly advertize the pieces as "pollock knock offs".... but still, he has been knocked off so many times and with sooooo many concepts (some meaningful) that it is ridiculous for anyone to think that employing his technique for anything aside from practicing it for the sheer enjoyment of ImMITATING Pollock and emulating him in order to study and learn from the technique is silly. :eek:

If that is what you are doing, more power to you.

otherwise, i am personally extremely critical of these works.

One question for you: Have you ever seen/seen many a pollock in person?

I'm Not Bob
02-06-2004, 04:17 PM
mmmm

again with the borrowing of the technique
at least this time it is closer to his means and less kitschy
and you didn't blatantly advertize the pieces as "pollock knock offs".... but still, he has been knocked off so many times and with sooooo many concepts (some meaningful) that it is ridiculous for anyone to think that employing his technique for anything aside from practicing it for the sheer enjoyment of ImMITATING Pollock and emulating him in order to study and learn from the technique is silly. :eek:

If that is what you are doing, more power to you.

otherwise, i am personally extremely critical of these works.

One question for you: Have you ever seen/seen many a pollock in person?

Hi Mark,

So..... We meet again.....

Let's start by saying yes I have seen/seen many a Pollock in actual living color, in person even. Here is the Chicago area, we have some relatively nice museums that actually have a few pieces on permanent display. Have you seen/seen many a Pollock in person (Please note the capitalization of the proper name Pollock, you achieve this effect by pressing the "shift" key on your keyboard)

As far as "borrowing of the technique" this is a really a rather lame point to make, especially after I examined some of the work you have posted on this site. Please illustrate to me the aspects of your art that have not been "begged, borrowed or stolen" from some previous artist.

Also, arenít you a little "wet behind the ears" to be "extremely critical" of any work of art. Even art such as this. These bigoted attitudes are what are wrong with the younger generation today. Next thing you know you will be banning that new fangled rap music and wanting to censor the types of books people can have on display in the public libraries.

One of the reasons I create art, is that I find it to be relaxing and fun. With narrow attitudes like those you exhibit, sounds like creating art must actually be kind of a tedious chore.

jaymarvin
02-06-2004, 04:22 PM
Hi Mark,

So..... We meet again.....

Let's start by saying yes I have seen/seen many a Pollock in actual living color, in person even. Here is the Chicago area, we have some relatively nice museums that actually have a few pieces on permanent display. Have you seen/seen many a Pollock in person (Please note the capitalization of the proper name Pollock, you achieve this effect by pressing the "shift" key on your keyboard)

As far as "borrowing of the technique" this is a really a rather lame point to make, especially after I examined some of the work you have posted on this site. Please illustrate to me the aspects of your art that have not been "begged, borrowed or stolen" from some previous artist.

Also, arenít you a little "wet behind the ears" to be "extremely critical" of any work of art. Even art such as this. These bigoted attitudes are what are wrong with the younger generation today. Next thing you know you will be banning that new fangled rap music and wanting to censor the types of books people can have on display in the public libraries.

One of the reasons I create art, is that I find it to be relaxing and fun. With narrow attitudes like those you exhibit, sounds like creating art must actually be kind of a tedious chore.

Very well said Bob! I agree 100%. We are all "borrow" from somebody in everything we do. Good for you.

Jay
:clap: :clap: :clap:

jaymarvin
02-06-2004, 04:24 PM
mmmm

again with the borrowing of the technique
at least this time it is closer to his means and less kitschy
and you didn't blatantly advertize the pieces as "pollock knock offs".... but still, he has been knocked off so many times and with sooooo many concepts (some meaningful) that it is ridiculous for anyone to think that employing his technique for anything aside from practicing it for the sheer enjoyment of ImMITATING Pollock and emulating him in order to study and learn from the technique is silly. :eek:

If that is what you are doing, more power to you.

otherwise, i am personally extremely critical of these works.

One question for you: Have you ever seen/seen many a pollock in person?

So what painter or artist did you "steal" your act from. Just wondering?

Jay :(

David46807
02-06-2004, 04:28 PM
One of the reasons I create art, is that I find it to be relaxing and fun. With narrow attitudes like those you exhibit, sounds like creating art must actually be kind of a tedious chore.

You go Bob (or...whatever!) You paint for the right reasons, and the results are wonderful. :clap:

I'm Not Bob
02-06-2004, 04:39 PM
You go Bob (or...whatever!) You paint for the right reasons, and the results are wonderful. :clap:

Thanks for the support.

For those of you not in the know, this is a followup to a post made in reference to the "Jackson Pollock's Desk" thread. Check it out. If you dare....

I'm Not Bob
02-06-2004, 06:04 PM
Hi All,

I just had a fasinating thought!!! What if someone could actually base their work on that of Jackson Pollock and actually take it to the next level. What if someone actually broadened and expanded upon this style and technique and created truely beautiful abstract art.

What a concept. Study and learn from what others have done in the past. Then, build on that to create something interesting and unique.

Wait.... What am I thinking.... No one has ever done that before. It will never work. :(

arourapope
02-06-2004, 06:07 PM
But why Pollack? Why not build upon oneself?

judithj
02-06-2004, 06:10 PM
Love the energy and the colours Not Bob. :clap:

-jj

jaymarvin
02-06-2004, 06:29 PM
Hi All,

I just had a fasinating thought!!! What if someone could actually base their work on that of Jackson Pollock and actually take it to the next level. What if someone actually broadened and expanded upon this style and technique and created truely beautiful abstract art.

What a concept. Study and learn from what others have done in the past. Then, build on that to create something interesting and unique.

Wait.... What am I thinking.... No one has ever done that before. It will never work. :(

I'm laughing my a** off! :D :D

I'm Not Bob
02-07-2004, 12:40 PM
But why Pollack? Why not build upon oneself?

Actually, I never brought up the topic of Pollock. At least in this thread. Others made the reference. Once it was brought up I then made comment.

Afterwards, I posted a message in regard to an abstract desk I painted for my office. I titled the post "Jackson Pollockís Desk". I guess that is when the proverbial @$&* hit the fan. For some reason, someone (I won't name names) took offence to this believing that I was mass producing these items and selling them as Pollock knock offs.

IT WAS JUST THE TITLE OF THE POST. I have not even named the item yet. Maybe I will call it "Andy", but then again someone will most likely take offence at that.

Does anyone have a sense of humor anymore????

jaymarvin
02-07-2004, 12:49 PM
Actually, I never brought up the topic of Pollock. At least in this thread. Others made the reference. Once it was brought up I then made comment.

Afterwards, I posted a message in regard to an abstract desk I painted for my office. I titled the post "Jackson Pollockís Desk". I guess that is when the proverbial @$&* hit the fan. For some reason, someone (I won't name names) took offence to this believing that I was mass producing these items and selling them as Pollock knock offs.

IT WAS JUST THE TITLE OF THE POST. I have not even named the item yet. Maybe I will call it "Andy", but then again someone will most likely take offence at that.

Does anyone have a sense of humor anymore????

Yes! What you need to do is go look at the person's background, who attacked you. Then you'll see what's up. The post is under the "Jackson Pollock's Desk" thread.

Jay

dragoni689
02-07-2004, 01:18 PM
"...Have you seen/seen many a Pollock in person (Please note the capitalization of the proper name Pollock, you achieve this effect by pressing the "shift" key on your keyboard)...."

"...Actually, I never brought up the topic of Pollock. At least in this thread. Others made the reference. Once it was brought up I then made comment.

Afterwards, I posted a message in regard to an abstract desk I painted for my office. I titled the post "Jackson Pollockís Desk". I guess that is when the proverbial @$&* hit the fan. For some reason, someone (I won't name names) took offence to this believing that I was mass producing these items and selling them as Pollock knock offs.

IT WAS JUST THE TITLE OF THE POST. I have not even named the item yet. Maybe I will call it "Andy", but then again someone will most likely take offence at that.

Does anyone have a sense of humor anymore????"


Grammar on the internet is totally relative. i dont have to capitolize or use proper spleling or pnctuation, i think you got de message jest fine eben wid my pollock misdake.

i doubt if you understand where i was coming from, and i further doubt if you are actually improving upon pollock's (notice no P) technique; i suppose that certain artists beg borrow and steal (myself definately being one of them), but what I have against those artists sometimes is their total lack of respect for those they borrow from- giving credit where credit is due is one thing, but self promotional usage is certainly another.

I am simply tired of people soiling pollock's good name by saying "pollock this" and "pollock that" about his/her work in order to gain recognition or just be included in some internet search- thus my reaction, bob.

Maybe you're not "mass producing" them. Whatever, that's relative and subjective.

as far as your third to last post, "interesting and unique" your paintings here are not- to me, a harsh critic, they are simply an artist dripping paint on a surface in a dissimilar way to what has already been done, minus any refinements or improvements to technique and/or subject matter.

You should feel lucky though, because while being a harsh critic who is able to dispute the validity of your "works" in relation to their historical context, I can certainly not dispute their vailidity as pieces of art- another entirely relative and subjective thing.

you like them, some people like them, others dislike them, so you should probably just disregard what I have to say as invalid, i'm sure you have been based on your prejudices against my "age" and "wetbehindtheears"ness, keep painting your stuff, and move on.

Gar
02-07-2004, 01:46 PM
and you didn't blatantly advertize the pieces as "pollock knock offs".... but still, he has been knocked off so many times and with sooooo many concepts (some meaningful) that it is ridiculous for anyone to think that employing his technique for anything aside from practicing it for the sheer enjoyment of ImMITATING Pollock and emulating him in order to study and learn from the technique is silly.

I wanted to add a little something to the debate here:
Miles, as you prolly know, I actually employ ariel (or dripped) paint into my work all the time. I really don't think Jackson Pollock should have the total monopoly over ariel application of paint that many people afford him. Though he made the dripped style famous and did incredible, one-of-a-kind work with it.. i personally still think of ariel painting as an effective way to sometimes work. For me, it's just another in a long list of ways to get paint or colour onto a surface. I think i do creative things with paint. I try to learn from the journeys and work of the great artists who came before me. I absorb that history, process it through my current being, add "myself" to the mix, Stir.. and vwalla - outcomes a Gar werk. Thus the cycle continues. Art for humans has been a building process for thousands of years. Like building a hypothetical ladder through space. Living is learning.

The line between honoring past artists memories and just copying them can be a fine one i guess, but if you stay true to finding your own unique vision, style(s), and ingenuity - i think the quality of your werk usually falls into place. No matter what techniques you employ.

Then again most artists aren't very good either. (You've always got all the intangible elements that make something truly exceptional)

arourapope
02-07-2004, 02:17 PM
Yes! What you need to do is go look at the person's background, who attacked you. Then you'll see what's up. The post is under the "Jackson Pollock's Desk" thread.

Jay
edited in order to be more polite:

? Are you talking about me, Jay? You seem to be responding to notBob's response to my question.

dragoni689
02-07-2004, 04:27 PM
I wanted to add a little something to the debate here:
Miles, as you prolly know, I actually employ ariel (or dripped) paint into my work all the time. I really don't think Jackson Pollock should have the total monopoly over ariel application of paint that many people afford him. Though he made the dripped style famous and did incredible, one-of-a-kind work with it.. i personally still think of ariel painting as an effective way to sometimes work. For me, it's just another in a long list of ways to get paint or colour onto a surface. I think i do creative things with paint. I try to learn from the journeys and work of the great artists who came before me. I absorb that history, process it through my current being, add "myself" to the mix, Stir.. and vwalla - outcomes a Gar werk. Thus the cycle continues. Art for humans has been a building process for thousands of years. Like building a hypothetical ladder through space. Living is learning.

The line between honoring past artists memories and just copying them can be a fine one i guess, but if you stay true to finding your own unique vision, style(s), and ingenuity - i think the quality of your werk usually falls into place. No matter what techniques you employ.

Then again most artists aren't very good either. (You've always got all the intangible elements that make something truly exceptional)


I personally think that you DO employ that technique in an original way which is not a replication of Pollock's work...
To quote you, "Out comes Gar's work"....

I just dont feel that that is what bob is doing here though- in my own light of criticism I feel that he is attempting to replicate another artist's style, and that is what I have a problem with and am criticising... Gar, You make original works which involve a subject matter and concept which is uniquely you; You may employ or borrow techniques, but i'm sure the person who invented the ballpoint pen is not going to criticise you for sketching with it.. Simply for using it to try and draw the same things he draws and therefore make a filching of it.
As for bob, he is not making original works with subject matters or concepts which are uniquely "him", but stealing directly.

As for lookcing at My "Background", jay, it is of no consequence or of any relation to my criticism of bob's work- i am drawing from intillect, not neccesarily experience with my own art- let's not drag criticism of my work into this.
I am not here to compare myself to others but to offer my opinion on their work and recieve theirs on mine.

If you want to tell me what you think, I am certainly not going to ridicule your age for it.

jaymarvin
02-07-2004, 06:56 PM
I wanted to add a little something to the debate here:
Miles, as you prolly know, I actually employ ariel (or dripped) paint into my work all the time. I really don't think Jackson Pollock should have the total monopoly over ariel application of paint that many people afford him. Though he made the dripped style famous and did incredible, one-of-a-kind work with it.. i personally still think of ariel painting as an effective way to sometimes work. For me, it's just another in a long list of ways to get paint or colour onto a surface. I think i do creative things with paint. I try to learn from the journeys and work of the great artists who came before me. I absorb that history, process it through my current being, add "myself" to the mix, Stir.. and vwalla - outcomes a Gar werk. Thus the cycle continues. Art for humans has been a building process for thousands of years. Like building a hypothetical ladder through space. Living is learning.

The line between honoring past artists memories and just copying them can be a fine one i guess, but if you stay true to finding your own unique vision, style(s), and ingenuity - i think the quality of your werk usually falls into place. No matter what techniques you employ.

Then again most artists aren't very good either. (You've always got all the intangible elements that make something truly exceptional)

Gar, this is the best post of the whole debate right here. Good for you.
:D

jay

reynolds
02-07-2004, 10:23 PM
pollock had quite the life...lots of alcohol and depression...so go get a bottle and really sink into it... :p and please do knock yourself out with following his lead just watch out when you drive...didn't he die in a car crash? i do not particularly care for these kinds of personal attacks here in this forum...we who have been here awhile have indeed learned how to disagree without slinging paint...but if ya like this kinda thing head on over to debates :evil:

VieSaintSo
02-08-2004, 12:25 PM
Gar,
very good point, well said.
Reynolds,
i agree totaly,a debate forum is where this debate should be happening :D

jaymarvin
02-08-2004, 08:32 PM
Gar,
very good point, well said.
Reynolds,
i agree totaly,a debate forum is where this debate should be happening :D

Even though I have been part of this I agree 100%. I come to this forum for people to look, and help me get better not to have my face kicked in. Most people are insecure about their art. It's good to come somewhere and share, and get support. Don't get me wrong I've raised plenty of hell in my time, been fired from jobs in radio, and have questioned authority most of my life. When you get older you learn there is a time and a place for everything. The time is now, but this not the place for a flame war or a debate about art. And keep in mind I jumped in on Bob's side was as much a part of this as anyone. I admit it I like Bob's work. I hope he keeps on keeping on.

Jay

I'm Not Bob
02-09-2004, 10:48 AM
But why Pollack? Why not build upon oneself?

Hi,

Actually, do not we all draw upon and try to emulate those we admire. While, admittedly, I do not admire Pollock as an individual, I always loved his art and the concept behind it.

That said, in any of the paintings I have done, I have never tried to copy his work, only utilize a technique I find fascinating.