Wednesday, July 17, 2013

Hyper-Realism... Is It Worth It?

So I've always had a soft spot for photo realistic artworks.  It amazes me how well some people can interpret the colors and shapes that make up everything that we see then reproduce them in such a skillful manner.  Having said that, this post is two fold.

First off, I want to post a link to one ridiculously talented young man and his work.  Check out the rest of the site while you are there: it's chock full of great photography and interesting tidbits.

Joongwon (Charles) Jeong's Paintings

A self portrait.

Iron Man... Er... Robert Downey Jr.

There are some great crops and progress shots as well.

Secondly, I want to see what other people think about photo realistic paintings and the like.  I ask because I had a run in with one of my college teachers and his opinion during my final semester and quite frankly it shocked and appalled me.

We had been given time in class to look up style references and inspiration for an assignment so I was having a conversation with a friend about artists and styles we liked.  I had just found Jeong's work that day and was talking about how impressive I find that kind of rendering.  Apparently my teacher had overheard us and butted in, saying how he felt that photo realism is nothing to be impressed by.  Anyone could learn to be a photo realist and, according to him, it takes very little artistic skill and/or talent.  Suffice to say, we got into a bit of a heated debate, the two of us, and my teacher eventually backed down when he realized that I know a bit of the history of hyper realism/photo realism and am able to back my claims and opinions up.

Honestly, I am disturbed that a teacher at an art college would so proudly tout such a claim.  Furthermore, his claim that anyone can do it applies to almost ANY art style.  With enough time and practice, any artist can replicate any other artist's work.  There are no exceptions.  However, with this replication, you don't gain understanding.  Any artistic endeavor involves an understanding of your medium, your subject, and your message.  It takes a lot of work and a lot of know-how.

In order to paint a portrait like Jeong's up there, an individual needs to understand what makes that face.  From the colors visible in the skin to just where to render out pores and where to only hint at them.  If every detail was painted out as it exists, the painting would not look real.  It would look quite grotesque.  Now, that could be another very interesting take on the painting, but it would not be photo realistic.  So photo realism involves not only the understanding of what is there, but the understanding of what to leave out.  Beyond that, it involves extreme and precise control of color, value, shade, and texture.  Focus and a balance of hard and soft edges are paramount.

There is so much that goes in to a painting like this that I am hard-pressed to find a way to not think of it as art, and impressive art at that.  It might not be some people's 'thing'.  I can understand and support that.  However, in my opinion, making the brazen claim that this is not art and is just pure mechanics is down-right ridiculous.

2 comments:

  1. what is the difference between Craft and Art, what are the poles and what instigated this fracture in the history to segregate.... and for the part of declaration its very easy to sustain and school or train of thought on what is art / craft.. very simple distinctions can take objects to each mountain, and very simple interpretations can bring it to the valleys that connect them , where dried up lake beds cry for rain/where blood flows.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I find it extremely respectable to be able to mimic reality that closely, but i also find it immensely boring and photorealistic art without any abstraction or creativity laced into it will never find a place on my walls.

    ReplyDelete

Blogger Template by Clairvo