WetCanvas
Home Member Services Content Areas Tools Info Center WC Partners Shop Help
Channels:
Search for:
in:

Welcome to the WetCanvas forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit our help center.

Go Back   WetCanvas > Explore Media > Oil Painting
User Name
Password
Register Mark Forums Read

Salute to our Partners
WC! Sponsors

Our Sponsors
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-15-2017, 04:04 PM
harryj harryj is offline
Senior Member
Bay Area
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 200
 
Hails from United States
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

Art, one definition

"The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power."

What's beautiful and or emotional is purely subjective, no amount of waffling on about what constitutes art will every lead to much in the way of new insight because it's subjective from the outset, anyone's opinion about what is and isn't art is just an opinion with no more weight than any other opinion including critics. When someone tells me something isn't art because it doesn't fit their notion of what art is it's just opinion, when someone starts to tell people their notion of art is wrong I see that person as someone best avoided in polite company because it's bullying behavior.

Now, if you want to debate the technical aspects of Bob Ross in comparison to other methods, it's pros/cons etc that's something we can be more objective about and would make a good thread. WFMartins reply is sort of opening the thread in this direction. I also think it's a valid technique and that what Bob was doing just scratches the surface of what can be done in that direction.
Reply With Quote
  #17   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-15-2017, 04:28 PM
Lazarus E's Avatar
Lazarus E Lazarus E is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 352
 
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Francis
I think 'art' originally did refer to technique. The art of blacksmithing etc.
And it still can be used that way.
However, somewhere along the way, 'art' has been elevated to such a divine status, it no longer has any meaning. Anything displayed in a museum or gallery can be described as art. Invisible art. (Seriously). A glass half full in an otherwise empty room. Pretty much anything you can think of.
Art is so all encompassing, who can define it?
My definition is, 'anything someone calls art is art'.
must agree with Ron. special the last line.
Reply With Quote
  #18   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-15-2017, 05:34 PM
PthaloGiblets's Avatar
PthaloGiblets PthaloGiblets is offline
New Member
Washington State
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 25
 
Hails from United States
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

I don't happen to particularly like the paintings of Ingres but I recognize that they are great examples of a certain style, that he was very influential, technically very accomplished, etc.

Personally, I don't agree with the argument that all art is entirely subjective although I agree that it has a very strong subjective component.
__________________
CCC welcome and encouraged!
(CCC == Chocolate Chip Cookies)
Reply With Quote
  #19   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-15-2017, 09:39 PM
Raffless's Avatar
Raffless Raffless is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 226
 
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PthaloGiblets
I don't happen to particularly like the paintings of Ingres but I recognize that they are great examples of a certain style, that he was very influential, technically very accomplished, etc.

Personally, I don't agree with the argument that all art is entirely subjective although I agree that it has a very strong subjective component.

Good point.
Objective art vs subjective art is relevant to this thread and in way explains the answer. There is creativity in objective art whereby the artist has complete control. Everything is deliberately created.,(except those happy accidents). I would place Bob Ross as objective art. It serves a purpose.
Reply With Quote
  #20   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 12:44 AM
Jeffro Jones Jeffro Jones is offline
Veteran Member
Melbourne
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 896
 
Hails from Australia
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Francis
As I said, I don't think the word 'art' means anything any more.
There is an inherent difficulty in defining an activity where the purpose of many of its practitioners is "subverting the paradigm".
Wherever art could be defined to be "this thing", someone will come up with a concept that contradicts it, just for the thrill of being a smart-arse.
Personally, I'm just reductive. I don't call paintings "art", I call them "paintings". No one has noticed so far.
My friend: "You really love art don't you?"
Me: "Well, I really love painting."
etc


:::
Reply With Quote
  #21   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 12:56 AM
Ron Francis's Avatar
Ron Francis Ron Francis is online now
A WetCanvas! Patron Saint
Tasmania Australia
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,953
 
Hails from Australia
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

^^ Yes, pretty much my line of thought.
__________________
Ron
www.RonaldFrancis.com
Reply With Quote
  #22   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 08:06 AM
Festus's Avatar
Festus Festus is offline
Veteran Member
Texas
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 519
 
Hails from United States
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElizaLeahy
It's painting, it's pretty; is it art?
It is art presented as technique. As well as being a landscape painter I work in a high end art and frame shop and in any given month we receive not only some original paintings -- usually by obscure or essentially unknown artists -- but high quality art reproductions; all of which I examine to my heart's content.

Time after time I detect bits and pieces of art techniques that could have come directly from either Bill Alexander's or Bob Ross' instructional shows -- especially in much of the 'modern' stuff. In short, neither man invented new techniques as much as they grouped together loads of short cuts, sharpened the execution of the same, and then offered them to the viewing public as viable methodologies. Brilliant!

I have no doubt that both Alexander and Ross privately produced some genuine artistic masterpieces, but the televised stuff was all 'techniques' oriented. The end result depends on the artist utilizing them. As for myself, although I began with Bill and Bob, I then switched to an intense and long term study of Jerry Yarnell's techniques; the next level up in difficulty, if you will. Recently I finished a copy of one of Albert Bierstadt's Yosemite Valley paintings with results that pleased me. In that reproduction I quite deliberately utilized some of Alexander's and Ross' techniques as well as a great deal of what I learned from a study of Yarnell's work. Technique is technique. What matters is what you do with it when all is said and done.
__________________
==============================
My posting nick is Festus . . . but you can call me Ron . . .
Reply With Quote
  #23   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 08:08 AM
olsa123 olsa123 is offline
Senior Member
Karlstad
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 136
 
Hails from Sweden
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Francis
Anything displayed in a museum or gallery can be described as art. Invisible art. (Seriously). A glass half full in an otherwise empty room. Pretty much anything you can think of.
Even this.
Reply With Quote
  #24   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 08:57 AM
bobc100's Avatar
bobc100 bobc100 is offline
Veteran Member
Silver Spring, MD
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 665
 
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by harryj
Art, one definition

"The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power."
I don't mean to single you out, but I always find that definitions like this come up short once I start to examine them more closely. My favorite is that art is anything you recognize as being art. This may sound nearly meaningless, but actually packs a lot of punch. In order to recognize something as art we must first detect some patterns in the work or its presentation which we've learned to recognize as being art. The value is in the way those patterns are uniquely varied. This definition explains how the avant-garde challenges our notions of what is art and why many will reject it. It also explains how an object which is trash when seen by the side of the street can become art when displayed in a museum.

As far as a Bob Ross painting goes, of course it's art. Whether or not it's good art is a different question. Whether his success came from the value of his paintings as art or something else is also a good question. In any case, you don't get a good answer until you first figure out how to ask the right question.
Reply With Quote
  #25   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 09:49 AM
DAK723's Avatar
DAK723 DAK723 is offline
WC! Guide
Rochester, NY
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 12,008
 
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

There is no verbal definition of "art", as each person has their own individual perception of what art is.

And, in my opinion, conversations about defining art are about as meaningless as one can get!

Don
__________________
Don Ketchek, WC Guide - Pastels

My Blog My Art Gallery My Photo Gallery
Reply With Quote
  #26   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 10:43 AM
sidbledsoe's Avatar
sidbledsoe sidbledsoe is offline
WC! Guide
Maryland, USA
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 15,127
 
Hails from United States
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElizaLeahy
it's pretty
hey, why pick on art, why no definitions here of what is pretty vs what ain't pretty?
__________________
http://sidbledsoe.blogspot.com/
Reply With Quote
  #27   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 05:20 PM
harryj harryj is offline
Senior Member
Bay Area
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 200
 
Hails from United States
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobc100
I don't mean to single you out, but I always find that definitions like this come up short once I start to examine them more closely.


I don't feel singled out. I wrote "Art, one definition" deliberately because it's just one definition, I don't believe that "art" has a definition that suits everyone, and I don't believe it can.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobc100
My favorite is that art is anything you recognize as being art.


Everyone has their definition that they prefer. That's sort of the problem with trying to have a discussion about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobc100
This may sound nearly meaningless, but actually packs a lot of punch. In order to recognize something as art we must first detect some patterns in the work or its presentation which we've learned to recognize as being art. The value is in the way those patterns are uniquely varied. This definition explains how the avant-garde challenges our notions of what is art and why many will reject it. It also explains how an object which is trash when seen by the side of the street can become art when displayed in a museum.

This is why most luxury goods stores feel the same, there's an expectation before you enter the store, the experience in the store reinforces that expectation. Someone with a degree in psychology can probably name it. There are also things like Bounded rationality at play ie it's cognitively easier for me to see art if everything around me is screaming art the way museums do. Seeing art when not in this environment is cognitively more difficult but for those that look it's all around us.
Reply With Quote
  #28   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 05:56 PM
Dcam's Avatar
Dcam Dcam is offline
A WC! Legend
NorthWest NJ.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 18,283
 
Hails from United States
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

You may not agree, but with all the variations, movements, "the shock of the new" and formulaic work, it seems that simple realism in many forms survives and maintains a foothold in Art History of the past and present.
Reply With Quote
  #29   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 06:38 PM
Raffless's Avatar
Raffless Raffless is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 226
 
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

The question should be is Painting Art?

Modern Art doesnt include oil painting as it has lost its meaning. Probably when Bob was at his peak popularity. Since then people want more substance. Probably Banksy is the last visual artist that people take notice of.
Reply With Quote
  #30   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-16-2017, 06:50 PM
harryj harryj is offline
Senior Member
Bay Area
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 200
 
Hails from United States
Re: Bob Ross/Alexander technique - what's your opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAK723
There is no verbal definition of "art", as each person has their own individual perception of what art is.


Yep. Agree 100%

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAK723
And, in my opinion, conversations about defining art are about as meaningless as one can get!


I think trying to label it or define it is futile, it's philosophical. The fact
that everyones concepts/beliefs are different and there's no consensus is part
of being human and why it's so interesting, digging into art is digging into
being human.

TLDR warning:

Let's assume we live in a world where art is defined as:

Circles of unit radius painted in yellow ochre by virgins bathed in moonlight
while chanting "pie jesu domine dona eis requiem".

Everything else is simply not art! I think we can agree that we should add some
alternatives to our list which would extend the definition. As we add more and
more items we must by definition change the definition until it satisfies
everything that can be imagined, anyone with children knows that what can be
imagined is an infinite array of things so we cannot define art using words.
Any attempt to generalize it to incorporate everything then fails because any
definition of art using words is a limitation in some way so it's false from
the get go.

Lots of people thought Mathematics could have a consistent set of axioms from
which we could base everything but along comes Godel and scuppers the whole
idea. Lots of people want art to have some sort of definition but it can't be
defined.

This is a decent article explaining some of the conundrums. The closest anyone
seems to have got to an agreed definition is that a work of art was made by a
human and that's even been challenged, read the article to see how.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/philosophy-of-art

Taken from the article above article:

"Nevertheless, according to the simplest and widest definition, art is anything
that is human-made. Within the scope of this definition, not only paintings
and sculptures but also buildings, furniture, automobiles, cities, and garbage
dumps are all works of art: every change that human activity has wrought upon
the face of nature is art, be it good or bad, beautiful or ugly, beneficial or destructive."
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:08 AM.


© 2014 F+W All rights reserved.