perceptual 'modes' in art
polycounter lvl 18
I've got a vauuuggee feeling like I've posted something about this before.. forgive me if that's the case.
i've been thinking about it and i think art comes down to (or a large part of it is made up of) what i'd call "Modes". the basic premise is that there are different perspectives from which you can view any piece of art, and an artist will develop in his ability in these modes.
this is important because it's a good model for critique. upon looking at someone's art, you can instantly tell what modes he needs to develop.. this of course is based on your perception but to be fair, if somethings un-appealing, i think the whole " i meant to do it that way" argument is usually an excuse.
some ideas:
Line
Form
Silohette
Detail
Color
Texture
Light
some examples:
LIGHT:
http://www.kahlil.org/Monet-Blanc1024.jpg
http://www.mystudios.com/art/impress/monet/monet-woman-with-parasol-1875.jpg
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/DMS/MEP131~That-Yellow-Bastard-Sin-City-Posters.jpg
http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/msnbc/Secti...wide.hlarge.jpg
FORM
http://www.etsu.edu/philos/classes/rk/earlymodern/adobejpgimages/15thinkerlarge.jpg
DETAIL
http://www.kolbyjukes.com/images/work/speed%20models/thepunisher2.jpg
Texture
http://www.darkart.cz/images/data/artists/wayne_barlowe/QMan_WB_BI_1587_The_Examination.jpg
whatdya think?
another topic that's related is the level of abstraction that you're focusing on, but i won't get into that
i've been thinking about it and i think art comes down to (or a large part of it is made up of) what i'd call "Modes". the basic premise is that there are different perspectives from which you can view any piece of art, and an artist will develop in his ability in these modes.
this is important because it's a good model for critique. upon looking at someone's art, you can instantly tell what modes he needs to develop.. this of course is based on your perception but to be fair, if somethings un-appealing, i think the whole " i meant to do it that way" argument is usually an excuse.
some ideas:
Line
Form
Silohette
Detail
Color
Texture
Light
some examples:
LIGHT:
http://www.kahlil.org/Monet-Blanc1024.jpg
http://www.mystudios.com/art/impress/monet/monet-woman-with-parasol-1875.jpg
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/DMS/MEP131~That-Yellow-Bastard-Sin-City-Posters.jpg
http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/msnbc/Secti...wide.hlarge.jpg
FORM
http://www.etsu.edu/philos/classes/rk/earlymodern/adobejpgimages/15thinkerlarge.jpg
DETAIL
http://www.kolbyjukes.com/images/work/speed%20models/thepunisher2.jpg
Texture
http://www.darkart.cz/images/data/artists/wayne_barlowe/QMan_WB_BI_1587_The_Examination.jpg
whatdya think?
another topic that's related is the level of abstraction that you're focusing on, but i won't get into that
Replies
I'm not sure about that though. those principles always seemed disassociated to me. I'm not talking about the piece of art it's self, I'm talking about the world that the piece of art represents.
does that make sense? have i just been missing something obvious this whole time?
The medium being the elements of design and the execution itself, and the message being the meaning that communicates an idea or evokes a feeling.
They are intertwined to some extent, the medium certainly influences the message.
For me, when the artist is well versed in all the elements of design, the smarter their pieces become, and they can communicate on multiple levels. I keep coming back to the artist or the piece because it resonates on so many levels, I see more in the piece each time I see it again. Rembrandt, Mantegna, Michelangelo, etc.
The elements are underlying structures, line can be used to move the eye around the piece on a very deliberate path, etc. I've always been very interested in how these work.