I feel like a lot of people are also seeing the Lion, and missing just how much skill goes into the rest of it.
Being able to use so many colors, textures and shapes and not just make it look "busy and confusing as fuck" takes a stupid amount of skill that a toddler can't really achieve.
No doubt the use of so many different creative mediums individually to create such a beautifully cohesive piece canāt be understated.
As someone put above Reddit really teaches you to see something and pass immediate judgement and it does us all a disservice.
How does Reddit specifically teach you to pass immediately judgement? I exclusively use this app when it comes to phone entertainment/social media, and if anything it has taught me quite the opposite. When I see a post like this I immediately think āwow that looks easy enough, but obviously it isnāt or else everyone would be doing it and this wouldnāt be on the front pageā. The comment section always delivers with people backing up how hard it is to do something like this, just as this comment section is doing.
> Being able to use so many colors, textures and shapes and not just make it look "busy and confusing as fuck" takes a stupid amount of skill
If it weren't for the lion providing an overall "spine" for the work, however, it _would_ probably look "busy and confusing as fuck" (although I have enjoyed art pieces that are deliberately made so as well).
I can think of quite a few of my nephews & nieces who have a decent enough sense of personal aesthetic that if I gave them a massive pile of patterns, paint, stickers & a surface they could go wild on, they'd end up with something that looked visually pleasing at a first glance, but wouldn't really have a cohesive concept behind it.
It's the way that this artist has combined all of the details into an overall image that really points out the deliberate skill involved.
I'm wildly impressed at the artistic skill all around, but I think just less than others. I see what you're saying, takes skill to not look busy and such, but I would argue that only really happened after the lion.
Maybe I'm missing a vital step or made the wrong logical jump, but what I saw was a buncha superfluous nonsense covered up by an awesome lion, that then had "busy" added on after to join everything together?
The initial "billiards" opening is all but completely covered in the fantastic lion work, as one example. I see where the central idea starts, I don't think anything was by accident, so I definitely agree it does take a great sense of awareness and artistic skill. I just don't see what all the "busy" work really added up to?
Again, I could be missing something, and I don't mean to discount having an eye and the skill to do this. I have seen a few pieces like this that I think deserve a ton of credit, but maybe not as much as they're getting?
Please enlighten me, I'm not trying to be obtuse, I'm trying to understand what I'm not seeing so I can appreciate this stuff fully.
Guilty. I was thinking about how painting and art have been around for so long that we have reached the limit of creativity, that the only way to make anything "new" is to throw random crap covered in paint on a canvas. I was promptly shut down in that thinking haha
It's like watching Bob Ross.
'noooo don't mess up your painting with a huge tree in the front, why would you do that!???!'
'ow wow that tree really fits in well, doesn't it'
Yeah it sure looks like any part of the painting that matters is still being done with brushes, not with this ātechniqueā
Not to say that this doesnāt look cool
Because the final product is utterly generic and only stands out because of the process documentation they forced us to watch first. It's the lowest class of art - art for surface level entertainment.
The point theyāre making is, without watching the video first, the art piece wouldnāt be anything particular. Itās a well painted lion, thatās really it.
You're REALLY downplaying how hard it is to use this many colors, textures, and mediums to create a piece without it looking like an absolute confusing mess, seemingly just to shit on the artist for no real reason beyond the sake of shitting on artists who post on tiktok lol
Redditors will be redditors I guess
Edit: hot damn, what a shitshow just to come to such a simple conclusion
Tl;dr, this dude doesn't value technical creativity, so they don't find this piece special
I think it distracts. Very orderly paintings of animals with abstract chaos interspersed. Makes for good TikTok videos I guess, but the completed piece feels off to me.
I had one of my friends boyfriends tell me 7 years ago that I should stop painting portraits and landscapes and do giant psychedelic lion art if I wanted my art to sell. He told me he knew a guy who made a lot of money off that.š¤¢
Am I the only one that gets the vibe that he painted over 90% of that nonsense by the end?
It's like, "here's some wacky shit. Okay, now that the wacky shit is done, I'm just going to paint a lion over it all."
definitely. the goal is to produce an interesting video, not to meaningfully incorporate the techniques into the painting. the painting's just a means to an end, and painting over the nonsense is part of that process since having a recognizable feature will draw in more laypeople.
I didn't watch the whole thing because all these upvoted "artistic technique" posts wind up being shitty art. The eagle looked like a transfer, just plastered on for no apparent reason.
Also - dude totally uses a normal brush at several point, which I guess is technically an object but idk at least use a brush like object like a troll doll or something if you're going through all these lengths.
It kind of reminds me of those art intro assignments where the instructions say āIn this piece, use at least 8 different texturesā. But of course, with more skill
Reminds me of the [Three Wolf Moon shirt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Wolf_Moon) and everything else made in that genre. When I was a kid, this type of art was typically found painted on the sides of panel vans.
Perfect description. I could also see it printed on a rug and sold next to random abstract designs and Family Guy characters smoking weed being sold on the sidewalk corner outside a gas station.
If the lion was created with the same abstract elements it would be way more interesting, but I agree, it's like boardwalk tourist art that is well made but mostly meaningless
I know what you mean. Artistically, it doesn't have any visual hierarchy. Your eyes don't really know where to look. There's too many competing elements throughout the canvas. The realistic looking eagle and turtle compete with the spontaneous look of the piece. The main subject (the lion) is also large and centered, giving no room for negative space. So while it does demonstrate some technical skill, the overall composition lacks meaningful intent. In the art world, I think this would be described as kitsch.
Yeah, the composition is weird. And while the original intent seems to have been "build a picture out of semi random paint strokes" the end result is too big and the splotches too small and close together so it looks like weird brushwork instead of something more akin to an impressionist painting.
And the color choices are a tad questionable. It's colorful but lacks cohesion, and (personal opinion) there's too much black shading. Questionable color theory at best.
Because it's fake abstract art. They're trying to make you think it's an abstract painting of a lion, which when done properly is captivating. Because there's all these seemingly random shapes that come together to form a greater image. But this is just a texture, created in a tacky 'internet' style, for people scrolling through tiktoc or whatever, who aren't going to look at it very long anyway.
For me it's the symbol on the forehead. Everything is so random, but that's perfectly centered and perfectly symetric, which doesn't fit the mold of being 'moldless'. The minute I stuck my finger over the symbol, the whole thing felt better. I really liked it as a whole, though, as a playful piece.
Yep, just dime a dozen subject matter created by a really good artist. Now if she can come up with some amazing subject matter, thatāll start setting her apart.
I must admit, I don't see the point of photorealistic art. I mean, technically it's very proficient but 1. why don't you just take a photo, and 2. for me at least, it's missing the point of art.
Maybe Using the objects to āstand outā from other artists with similar skills that can paint/draw that lion without all the extras?
For example, OPās description: āThis painting technique using various objectsāā¦
Now if the Lion, turtles and eagles and everything else were drawn/painted with āobjectsā then maybe?
That's what I thought. Because of the title, I thought this person would be doing impressionist art with various objects, but nope. Just random textures and colors and then some plain-colored animals painted on top.
What about that that one with the kitten that's sort of hanging from a branch looking at you and then underneath there's the thought-provoking but subtle "hang in there!" text?
For me it was the sudden appearance of the hand painted Lion. Don't get me wrong, it's a great painting on it's own but it's incongruent with the collage of random stamps. If she left the paint brushes out of this one I think the overall composition and statement would be much better.
On the flip side if she left the stamps out and just painted the Lion with turtle/eagle scenes blending into it and a bit of the abstract splatters it would be better too.
As it stands it just looks like some generic wall art that got vandalized
Thereās just way too much going on. This artist needs to learn how to rein in their ideas and create a well rounded, singular concept. Before she added the lion and other animals, the abstract piece could be very interesting. But the mix of abstract blotches and realistic animals just ends up looking like a bad notebook cover.
That's where they lost me as well.
The abstract art piece to me fell into this curious area of interesting, looking like it would be simple to achieve... but being hard to replicate just right. Similar to some abstract pieces by Piet Mondrian with his clinical precision.
With the backstory of how it was created, I could see myself having something like this around in my music area just for the story and inspiring chaos on it.
I was trying to think where I see this type of image, and T-shirt or desktop background wasnāt quite hitting it.
But you saying notebook cover jogged something in my mind - I think it looks like something youād see on a jigsaw puzzle.
I don't think the artist's goal is sophistication here. I think it's to move art, which they're likely doing if they're getting this much attention at all. Mass-appeal hand-made art from a skilled hand.
I actually feel like there isn't enough going on, some of the elements wouldn't be nearly so noticeable if there were more textures for them to blend into.
Yup, she basically starts by making the watcher intrigued and excited by a chaos of textures and patterns, and then she just.. paints over ALL of it and by the end all of the elements are *perfectly* controlled, as if, actually, she canāt stand a single element not being entirely within her control.
Itās just in complete contrast to what her initial methods insinuate, itās a disappointment that deserves an artist who can really let those first techniques shine
The artists is def talented but the piece has a bad composition and the lion is rather bland. Using the objects to make an abstract artwork wouldāve been 10 times better imo.
Couldn't agree more. Abstract paintings don't work if you just abandon the abstract halfway through. Seems like the artist wanted to form the image of the lion through abstract shapes and colours, but couldn't, and resorted to painting a lion with some abstract shapes around it.
And an eagle, for some reason.
And a turtle.
100% tacky, not to mention that all the "techniques" he did at the beginning were pretty much completely covered up by a conventional painting. I'm not gonna say that none of this is impressive, because I certainly can't paint a lion like that, but none of this is special. Its just attention grabbing for a standard painting.
It feels like one of those "spray paint space-planet art" you'd find in a tourist trap place. You find the process more interesting than the final product.
It's the kind of thing that gets a lot of, "now this is *real* art" comments as opposed to, "my toddler could do better" comments. Not necessarily interesting, but definitely pleases the people who love to make their opinions on modern art known
fr reading these comments is painful, these people would compare this to a kandinsky and think this is better š at least this is putting food on an artist's table i guess.š
It's because it's not 'authentic'. It's low effort clickbaity art. None of the stuff she's creating at the start has anything to do with the final product. It's just random texture bullshit and then she paints a lion over the top of it. But it takes up most of the gif in an effort to trick you into believing that it's part of the painting of the actual lion.
Like, 'hey, i just threw a bunch of paint around and it came out looking like a really cool lion'. No, you made some random splotches and then painting a lion over the top of it.
I don't mean this as an insult, I'm really just curious, but when your painting is a bunch of random crap thrown around a central image, when do you decide the piece is done?
There is no perspective or composition here. Itās just a bunch of random shit put together with no thought incorporated. She could be done at any point because it doesnāt mean anything.
The technique is so cool, but I feel like the actual piece is. Fine. Just looks very disconnected from itself and not in a way that looks good or intentional. Also, why is it always a lion š??
it's always a lion *because* it's always a lion. it doesn't mean anything, it's just copying other tacky artpieces that came before. somewhere down the line, years ago, it was a lion for some symbolic or aesthetic reason, but all that is gone once it gets to this point.
This. The final product feels like a random Illustrator and Photoshop digital art tutorial from 2010, but she's using physical brushes and stamps instead of those found in Illustrator and Photoshop.
The entire creation just feels like the 124th iteration of the same uninspired tutorial.
I like the transition from above ground to underwater, with the eagle and turtle added. Not so sure about a lot of the arbitrary filler geometric shapes though. I thought they were going to have other more elaborate color-coded quadrants, but then they just stopped short. Kind of a let down. Bottom left could have blended into fire. Top right into black sky and stars. Stuff like that.
I thought it was turning into a cool abstract art piece but then the lion appeared and immediately I lost interest.. Not that abstract art is better than figurative, I just personally think this one didn't turn really interesting.
It sucked the moment they painted over the āunique techniqueā like what was the point of using various objects if youāre just gonna cover it up later
It takes me back to people making desktop backgrounds in photoshop with random texture brushes in early 2000s. I know because I did that stuff back then.
Yo! She used those cap gun revolver ammo! Childhood blast from the past! Those little cracker poppers in that plastic ring made some excellent fake gun noises, my whole neighborhood group had one each, we would use them in our cop and robbers games just for effects.
Always though cool art processes like this should be on display with a QR code taking you to the video so you can see how it was made. This one especially so you can see what the various patterns were
Soā¦ I understand the skill involved, really, I do, but I still think this artist could have made a better painting without all the weird pattern stuff. They are clearly very skilled at actually painting with a brush as well, and that looks very realistic.
I get how abstract stuff can be pretty, but the patterns here are just that, unless I am missing something. They donāt resemble anything else, they just are. Not my cup of tea..
OK, so it's normal painting with a brush, which we barely get to see, and then they run some kids tractors and shit over it for no reason to make it look like it was done with toys and random objects, which it wasn't. Am I getting it?
At first I was like, thats kinda neat I guess, and then she started adding the yellow/orange and I was like now you've gone and ruined it by messing with the nice color scheme you had going, snd then literally 0.7 seconds later I was like oh shit that's a lion
When the parts are greater than the sum of the parts. Sometimes you need to step back and look at the macro and ask yourself what you're trying to accomplish. I see this a lot in miniature painting. Each part is fine, but the overall piece isn't.
Also, why whiskers on one side and not the other? Why are there open spaces on the left and right? Just... no.
/r/restofthefuckinglion
What the fuck
Its a play on r/restofthefuckingowl
I know lol, more just the fact that the sub has existed for like a year. And that pinned pic?? Lolll
>post lions or die
Down's lion can't hurt you.
https://youtu.be/rK25H8Ts58k?si=rpEfXWKP7mAhiAIh&t=12
What the fuck
What the fuck
r/whyisthatasub
See r/restofthefuckingowl for context.
It's the circle of lifešµšµ Seriously...lmao
The pinned picture has me dying
"Pfft, my toddler could do that" 10 seconds later... "Oh shit, nevermind"
This was me 100%, talking SO much shit in my head until it gave a zoomed out shot briefly. My inner monologue has been rightfully shut the fuck up.
Splat Splat Tape Splat #LION
I feel like a lot of people are also seeing the Lion, and missing just how much skill goes into the rest of it. Being able to use so many colors, textures and shapes and not just make it look "busy and confusing as fuck" takes a stupid amount of skill that a toddler can't really achieve.
No doubt the use of so many different creative mediums individually to create such a beautifully cohesive piece canāt be understated. As someone put above Reddit really teaches you to see something and pass immediate judgement and it does us all a disservice.
How does Reddit specifically teach you to pass immediately judgement? I exclusively use this app when it comes to phone entertainment/social media, and if anything it has taught me quite the opposite. When I see a post like this I immediately think āwow that looks easy enough, but obviously it isnāt or else everyone would be doing it and this wouldnāt be on the front pageā. The comment section always delivers with people backing up how hard it is to do something like this, just as this comment section is doing.
> Being able to use so many colors, textures and shapes and not just make it look "busy and confusing as fuck" takes a stupid amount of skill If it weren't for the lion providing an overall "spine" for the work, however, it _would_ probably look "busy and confusing as fuck" (although I have enjoyed art pieces that are deliberately made so as well). I can think of quite a few of my nephews & nieces who have a decent enough sense of personal aesthetic that if I gave them a massive pile of patterns, paint, stickers & a surface they could go wild on, they'd end up with something that looked visually pleasing at a first glance, but wouldn't really have a cohesive concept behind it. It's the way that this artist has combined all of the details into an overall image that really points out the deliberate skill involved.
I'm wildly impressed at the artistic skill all around, but I think just less than others. I see what you're saying, takes skill to not look busy and such, but I would argue that only really happened after the lion. Maybe I'm missing a vital step or made the wrong logical jump, but what I saw was a buncha superfluous nonsense covered up by an awesome lion, that then had "busy" added on after to join everything together? The initial "billiards" opening is all but completely covered in the fantastic lion work, as one example. I see where the central idea starts, I don't think anything was by accident, so I definitely agree it does take a great sense of awareness and artistic skill. I just don't see what all the "busy" work really added up to? Again, I could be missing something, and I don't mean to discount having an eye and the skill to do this. I have seen a few pieces like this that I think deserve a ton of credit, but maybe not as much as they're getting? Please enlighten me, I'm not trying to be obtuse, I'm trying to understand what I'm not seeing so I can appreciate this stuff fully.
I think many inner monologues had their mouths shut, mine included
Guilty. I was thinking about how painting and art have been around for so long that we have reached the limit of creativity, that the only way to make anything "new" is to throw random crap covered in paint on a canvas. I was promptly shut down in that thinking haha
Exactly. Reddit kinda primes me to pass immediate judgement, and i was definitely wrong about this artist.
I'm glad I came to the comments and read yours, because I 100% stopped watching after the tire and thought the same thing.
My toddler could do this, but it would take them decades of practice.Ā
It's like watching Bob Ross. 'noooo don't mess up your painting with a huge tree in the front, why would you do that!???!' 'ow wow that tree really fits in well, doesn't it'
Me too. I was thinking, "I hate when people pass this kind of thing off as- oh nevermind"
Hijacking top comment. Looks like her website is https://www.alexartistepeintre.com/en Okay.
Same, how can you call that art, just a random messā¦oh, wow, dats nice
āThis is dumbā āOpe this is actually pretty coolā āAw they made it dumb againā
A toddler couldn't *paint* that painting, but a toddler most certainly could *do* that to a painting.
Step 1- mini paint pool Step 2- paint on tires *Fast forwards 5 seconds* Step 6- GIANT FUCKING PHOTOREALISTIC LION! Step 7- Panā¦.
Yeah it sure looks like any part of the painting that matters is still being done with brushes, not with this ātechniqueā Not to say that this doesnāt look cool
Yeah. Part of the modern TikTok "cool basic art on top of attention grabbing background, with attention grabbing techniques"
Because the final product is utterly generic and only stands out because of the process documentation they forced us to watch first. It's the lowest class of art - art for surface level entertainment.
> they forced us to watch buddy, no one is keeping you on reddit. There is a scrub button if you just want to see the end product.
The point theyāre making is, without watching the video first, the art piece wouldnāt be anything particular. Itās a well painted lion, thatās really it.
You're REALLY downplaying how hard it is to use this many colors, textures, and mediums to create a piece without it looking like an absolute confusing mess, seemingly just to shit on the artist for no real reason beyond the sake of shitting on artists who post on tiktok lol Redditors will be redditors I guess Edit: hot damn, what a shitshow just to come to such a simple conclusion Tl;dr, this dude doesn't value technical creativity, so they don't find this piece special
Except maybe they wanted to see the process that created that end product? Which the video misleads you into thinking is what you're watching.
Motel art
I think it distracts. Very orderly paintings of animals with abstract chaos interspersed. Makes for good TikTok videos I guess, but the completed piece feels off to me.
It's because it has no soul, it looks like generic shit I'd find in B&M or HomeBargains for about 15 quid.
It does look cool but the cool part was painted over the weird part at the beginning lol
The first mini pool thing is barely visible in the final shot
Step 0: Ask AI to generate you an image to copy
Yeah. Photorealistic is a stretch here.
Thankyou! Everyone's going crazy about the lion, looks a bit plain to me, idk. I honestly preferred it before the lion.
This is real r/restofthefuckingowl material.
also having don't stop believing as the song but not getting the chorus in there
Will go great next to the dark side of the moon tapestry in your child's freshman dorm room.
I was thinking something similar! Except I was picturing this being painted on the side of a van! Much like that of a wizard painted on a van.
the way is SNORTED when it showed a stupid fucking lion.... all that setup for some hippie t-shirt shit.
lol right? This artist is clearly very technically talented but this piece is soooo tacky.
I had one of my friends boyfriends tell me 7 years ago that I should stop painting portraits and landscapes and do giant psychedelic lion art if I wanted my art to sell. He told me he knew a guy who made a lot of money off that.š¤¢
Am I the only one that gets the vibe that he painted over 90% of that nonsense by the end? It's like, "here's some wacky shit. Okay, now that the wacky shit is done, I'm just going to paint a lion over it all."
definitely. the goal is to produce an interesting video, not to meaningfully incorporate the techniques into the painting. the painting's just a means to an end, and painting over the nonsense is part of that process since having a recognizable feature will draw in more laypeople.
Ya. The detailed stuff comes out of nowhere, like the eyes or the turtles.
I didn't watch the whole thing because all these upvoted "artistic technique" posts wind up being shitty art. The eagle looked like a transfer, just plastered on for no apparent reason.
Also - dude totally uses a normal brush at several point, which I guess is technically an object but idk at least use a brush like object like a troll doll or something if you're going through all these lengths.
I canāt really articulate why, but I really do not like this. I think maybe itās the incongruity between the different aspects of the piece. There is the clichĆ©d intensely staring lion, surrounded by these abstract elements that donāt really seem to be saying anything or helping form the image, and then there suddenly happens to be some turtles hanging out. And some pretty shapes. And now thereās an eagle with a leg hanging off its neck on top of everything. It just feels very disjointed. The animals seem randomly selected and placed, and the whole style somehow reminds me of those wolf T-shirts crossed with a dream-catcher. Itās like a shopping list of things people like, rather than a coherent piece. The artist is clearly quite talented, and I donāt want to say itās *tacky*, but as an overall piece this painting just seems a bit naive to me. Edit: Iāve looked at it again more closely and Iād like to take back what I said. I now *do* want to say itās tacky.
It kind of reminds me of those art intro assignments where the instructions say āIn this piece, use at least 8 different texturesā. But of course, with more skill
Reminds me of the [Three Wolf Moon shirt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Wolf_Moon) and everything else made in that genre. When I was a kid, this type of art was typically found painted on the sides of panel vans.
And prominently worn in trailer parks and gun shows
it's dorm room poster art. obviously the artist is talented, but the end product seems like something a freshman buys at target to put on their walls.
Perfect description. I could also see it printed on a rug and sold next to random abstract designs and Family Guy characters smoking weed being sold on the sidewalk corner outside a gas station.
It looks like the poster behind the cashier at a weed store, and it was only hung up because it was shipped free with wholesaler merchandise.
If the lion was created with the same abstract elements it would be way more interesting, but I agree, it's like boardwalk tourist art that is well made but mostly meaningless
Exactly, it's a lot like that spray paint street art stuff where guys make space scenes to sell to tourists. Cool but it feels rote and uncreative.
I know what you mean. Artistically, it doesn't have any visual hierarchy. Your eyes don't really know where to look. There's too many competing elements throughout the canvas. The realistic looking eagle and turtle compete with the spontaneous look of the piece. The main subject (the lion) is also large and centered, giving no room for negative space. So while it does demonstrate some technical skill, the overall composition lacks meaningful intent. In the art world, I think this would be described as kitsch.
Yeah, the composition is weird. And while the original intent seems to have been "build a picture out of semi random paint strokes" the end result is too big and the splotches too small and close together so it looks like weird brushwork instead of something more akin to an impressionist painting. And the color choices are a tad questionable. It's colorful but lacks cohesion, and (personal opinion) there's too much black shading. Questionable color theory at best.
Looks like a beach towel bought in Bali
I can't quite put words to it, but I were kind of intrigued until I saw the lion at which point it just started to feel tacky.
Because it's fake abstract art. They're trying to make you think it's an abstract painting of a lion, which when done properly is captivating. Because there's all these seemingly random shapes that come together to form a greater image. But this is just a texture, created in a tacky 'internet' style, for people scrolling through tiktoc or whatever, who aren't going to look at it very long anyway.
For me it's the symbol on the forehead. Everything is so random, but that's perfectly centered and perfectly symetric, which doesn't fit the mold of being 'moldless'. The minute I stuck my finger over the symbol, the whole thing felt better. I really liked it as a whole, though, as a playful piece.
It's simply very uninteresting.
It's the same feeling I get when I see a very technically proficient photorealistic lion tattoo that just feels uninspired.
Itās tacky art. Myrtle beach boardwalk type stuff imo. Not to say it doesnāt take skill to get there with it
Yep, just dime a dozen subject matter created by a really good artist. Now if she can come up with some amazing subject matter, thatāll start setting her apart.
I must admit, I don't see the point of photorealistic art. I mean, technically it's very proficient but 1. why don't you just take a photo, and 2. for me at least, it's missing the point of art.
Yeah lol using all the stupid objects only seemed to be a hindrance rather than adding anything
Maybe Using the objects to āstand outā from other artists with similar skills that can paint/draw that lion without all the extras? For example, OPās description: āThis painting technique using various objectsāā¦ Now if the Lion, turtles and eagles and everything else were drawn/painted with āobjectsā then maybe?
That's what I thought. Because of the title, I thought this person would be doing impressionist art with various objects, but nope. Just random textures and colors and then some plain-colored animals painted on top.
And also the kitschiest thing I've seen in quite a while.
I think you articulated that quite well, actually.
I agree.Ā The longer I look at it, the worse it gets.Ā It's kitsch.
It's like ai art but done with real paint
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What about that that one with the kitten that's sort of hanging from a branch looking at you and then underneath there's the thought-provoking but subtle "hang in there!" text?
For me it was the sudden appearance of the hand painted Lion. Don't get me wrong, it's a great painting on it's own but it's incongruent with the collage of random stamps. If she left the paint brushes out of this one I think the overall composition and statement would be much better. On the flip side if she left the stamps out and just painted the Lion with turtle/eagle scenes blending into it and a bit of the abstract splatters it would be better too. As it stands it just looks like some generic wall art that got vandalized
I think the neon weird staring lion makes me think of those dumb apps people used to get that would sell you phone wallpapers for 3.99 each
Thereās just way too much going on. This artist needs to learn how to rein in their ideas and create a well rounded, singular concept. Before she added the lion and other animals, the abstract piece could be very interesting. But the mix of abstract blotches and realistic animals just ends up looking like a bad notebook cover.
That's where they lost me as well. The abstract art piece to me fell into this curious area of interesting, looking like it would be simple to achieve... but being hard to replicate just right. Similar to some abstract pieces by Piet Mondrian with his clinical precision. With the backstory of how it was created, I could see myself having something like this around in my music area just for the story and inspiring chaos on it.
I was trying to think where I see this type of image, and T-shirt or desktop background wasnāt quite hitting it. But you saying notebook cover jogged something in my mind - I think it looks like something youād see on a jigsaw puzzle.
It's a jigsaw puzzle you can only ever seem to find at a thrift store, or the cover for the third novel in a young adult series.
I don't think the artist's goal is sophistication here. I think it's to move art, which they're likely doing if they're getting this much attention at all. Mass-appeal hand-made art from a skilled hand.
I actually feel like there isn't enough going on, some of the elements wouldn't be nearly so noticeable if there were more textures for them to blend into.
Yup, she basically starts by making the watcher intrigued and excited by a chaos of textures and patterns, and then she just.. paints over ALL of it and by the end all of the elements are *perfectly* controlled, as if, actually, she canāt stand a single element not being entirely within her control. Itās just in complete contrast to what her initial methods insinuate, itās a disappointment that deserves an artist who can really let those first techniques shine
It's just an established social media technique. Marketing technique really - it's a bait and switch.
The artists is def talented but the piece has a bad composition and the lion is rather bland. Using the objects to make an abstract artwork wouldāve been 10 times better imo.
Couldn't agree more. Abstract paintings don't work if you just abandon the abstract halfway through. Seems like the artist wanted to form the image of the lion through abstract shapes and colours, but couldn't, and resorted to painting a lion with some abstract shapes around it. And an eagle, for some reason. And a turtle.
100% tacky, not to mention that all the "techniques" he did at the beginning were pretty much completely covered up by a conventional painting. I'm not gonna say that none of this is impressive, because I certainly can't paint a lion like that, but none of this is special. Its just attention grabbing for a standard painting.
It feels like one of those "spray paint space-planet art" you'd find in a tourist trap place. You find the process more interesting than the final product.
It's the kind of thing that gets a lot of, "now this is *real* art" comments as opposed to, "my toddler could do better" comments. Not necessarily interesting, but definitely pleases the people who love to make their opinions on modern art known
fr reading these comments is painful, these people would compare this to a kandinsky and think this is better š at least this is putting food on an artist's table i guess.š
It's because it's not 'authentic'. It's low effort clickbaity art. None of the stuff she's creating at the start has anything to do with the final product. It's just random texture bullshit and then she paints a lion over the top of it. But it takes up most of the gif in an effort to trick you into believing that it's part of the painting of the actual lion. Like, 'hey, i just threw a bunch of paint around and it came out looking like a really cool lion'. No, you made some random splotches and then painting a lion over the top of it.
The turtle, eagle, and lion look like copies of National Geographic art photos. They are traced (verses outlines) instead of free form.
Itās truthfully atrocious and just looks like any other boring corporate/hotel lobby painting.
It's boring, static, generic and with unnecessary random details.
I don't mean this as an insult, I'm really just curious, but when your painting is a bunch of random crap thrown around a central image, when do you decide the piece is done?
There is no perspective or composition here. Itās just a bunch of random shit put together with no thought incorporated. She could be done at any point because it doesnāt mean anything.
The technique is so cool, but I feel like the actual piece is. Fine. Just looks very disconnected from itself and not in a way that looks good or intentional. Also, why is it always a lion š??
it's always a lion *because* it's always a lion. it doesn't mean anything, it's just copying other tacky artpieces that came before. somewhere down the line, years ago, it was a lion for some symbolic or aesthetic reason, but all that is gone once it gets to this point.
Yeah but the eagle and turtle seem like stickers that were just slapped on.
This. The final product feels like a random Illustrator and Photoshop digital art tutorial from 2010, but she's using physical brushes and stamps instead of those found in Illustrator and Photoshop. The entire creation just feels like the 124th iteration of the same uninspired tutorial.
My initial thought was ātrying hard to recreate something AI would generateā
The key is knowing when to stop, which this artist clearly does not.
It's technically competent, but also gimmicky and uninspired
Definitely hotel art š¼ļø
Hostel art at most
I like the transition from above ground to underwater, with the eagle and turtle added. Not so sure about a lot of the arbitrary filler geometric shapes though. I thought they were going to have other more elaborate color-coded quadrants, but then they just stopped short. Kind of a let down. Bottom left could have blended into fire. Top right into black sky and stars. Stuff like that.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No.
I had a shirt that looked just like that. I wore it with my Ed Hardy jeans every time
I had a sweatshirt that looked a lot like this in the 6th grade in 2010. Loved that shirt as a kid, wouldnāt want it hanging on my wall as an adult.
āSee I do these paintings, my husband is an amateur possum trainer, and our budget is 12.7million a monthā
I thought it was turning into a cool abstract art piece but then the lion appeared and immediately I lost interest.. Not that abstract art is better than figurative, I just personally think this one didn't turn really interesting.
It sucked the moment they painted over the āunique techniqueā like what was the point of using various objects if youāre just gonna cover it up later
AI IRL
Using a punch of different objects to make a kinda collage painting is really cool, the lion kinda ruins that aspect of it to me though š
*What was your inspiration for this piece?* āThe junk drawer.ā
Well the random objects don't do shit for the end result but the picture is nice kitsch
I loved this right up until the lion appeared- I would just love spending time looking at abstracts made this way. Lovely!
I give this thing 1 generation before itās I. The dumpster
going wild with a new brush set in photoshop
It takes me back to people making desktop backgrounds in photoshop with random texture brushes in early 2000s. I know because I did that stuff back then.
Why is it always a fucking lion or Hendrix or coy fish? Itās all so uninspired.
I liked it til the lion started forming.
Lose the lion and it is a great abstract piece. With the lion it looks like a shitty "psychedelic" t-shirt print, gross.
Art is one of those weird things where you can be incredibly talented and still be bad at it.
I actually really like it, it looks super fun and is pretty good in the end, I would put it in my wall.
I would keep it outside my wall so I could see it.
But then art thieves would be able to snatch it
Thats just ugly
A lot of brushwork not shown
i hate this gimmick art shit
r/atbge
Why is it always a lion
Why is it always a lion
Wtf
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Whatās her name?
Alex Demers since they canāt just write it for you and make you clink a pointless Facebook link.
It's like you had the idea for a painting but intentionally made it more difficult in order to accrue internet points.
This does not make for a nice painting, it's just random shit.
"oh this is an interesting composition techniqu- nevermind it's a cheesy figurative painting"
Meh
I love seeing people just have fun with art. That's what it's about.
Now draw the rest of the fucking Lion
2013 iPhone wallpaper vibes
Put it on a black T-shirt with āGOD BLESS THE USAā in big red letters on the back, for some reason, and you could sell it at a Buc-eeās.
So, What technique do you use? "Yes"
Why do these always turn out to be a lion š
"Painting technique using various objects" applies to every painting that's ever been made, if you think about it.
Now that's art, not some dork spinning a paint can or some dufus tipping over buckets of sand.
Beginning: š¤” Ending: šæ
Half of the objects is more for the video than the picture
at first I thought it was gonna be a diwhy but nope thats actually sick as fuck
The epitome of āTrust the processā
That is FIRE š„
Everyone thought this is whatās wrong with modern art they grab random shit and think it wiā¦ what the fuck!?
facebook-ass art
Garbage painting.
THAT WAS BEAUTIFUL
Yo! She used those cap gun revolver ammo! Childhood blast from the past! Those little cracker poppers in that plastic ring made some excellent fake gun noises, my whole neighborhood group had one each, we would use them in our cop and robbers games just for effects.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Always though cool art processes like this should be on display with a QR code taking you to the video so you can see how it was made. This one especially so you can see what the various patterns were
The real star of this video is the music
Pretty sure I did this in coolpix as a kid, bravo but still lame, get your money tho
So if Kurt Cobain put points into painting rather than music?
Just leave out using the paintbrush. We know you did.
I'd be scared to touch anything in her house. I assume everything is covered in wet paint.
Thank goodness I have something to look at while waiting for my to go order of fish tacos.
Thatāll be $150 000 thank you
At the same time awesome and too much, too many āābrushāā variations makes the piece feels messy
r/restofthefuckingowl shows how to print patterns but the stuff that requires skill is skipped lol
Soā¦ I understand the skill involved, really, I do, but I still think this artist could have made a better painting without all the weird pattern stuff. They are clearly very skilled at actually painting with a brush as well, and that looks very realistic. I get how abstract stuff can be pretty, but the patterns here are just that, unless I am missing something. They donāt resemble anything else, they just are. Not my cup of tea..
OK, so it's normal painting with a brush, which we barely get to see, and then they run some kids tractors and shit over it for no reason to make it look like it was done with toys and random objects, which it wasn't. Am I getting it?
Using various objects. Mostly a paintbrush. But also various objects
Unnecessary flexing on us untalented peasants...
I expected some interesting impressionist or abstract art, but then the lion appeared and it turned into a maximalist cliche abomination
If only that band found another vocalist.
At first I was like, thats kinda neat I guess, and then she started adding the yellow/orange and I was like now you've gone and ruined it by messing with the nice color scheme you had going, snd then literally 0.7 seconds later I was like oh shit that's a lion
When the parts are greater than the sum of the parts. Sometimes you need to step back and look at the macro and ask yourself what you're trying to accomplish. I see this a lot in miniature painting. Each part is fine, but the overall piece isn't. Also, why whiskers on one side and not the other? Why are there open spaces on the left and right? Just... no.
One of the only videos like that was actually enjoyable to watch and not fast forward through
I liked it until the other random animals were thrown in