@broadblues

Chuckle Chuckle... indeed... so true!

Q!

"i am home"

@QuBe

I know folks, the reporting sounded off. To me, I'm glad that somebody mentioned the Amiga on radio! It has been Apple this, Mac that for the past 10 years. People forget about Commodore and Amiga!!! When Apple I was introduced, schools already had a completed Commodore Pet with a keyboard, tapedrive, monitor AND BASIC :)

_________________
-- --
aka Tony Rocks

The Venus image looks like the same image that came with my early DPaint disks except Andy Warhol pasted a 3rd eye in the center of her forehead and now it's valuable art -)

_________________
X1000 with 2GB memory & OS4.1FE

@Xenic

Xenic...that was the first thing I thought :) I guess they are looking for get some new "works" for the museum. ;)

_________________
-- --
aka Tony Rocks

@Xenic

Quote:

The Venus image looks like the same image that came with my early DPaint disks except Andy Warhol pasted a 3rd eye in the center of her forehead and now it's valuable art -)

I don;t if it "valuable art" or not in a financial sense but it's historical art, early steps in a new medium, or at least in a new context as computer art clearly prexisted the 80's.

The other images are clearly more distinctly Warhol.

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@Xenic

Quote:

Xenic wrote: The Venus image looks like the same image that came with my early DPaint disks except Andy Warhol pasted a 3rd eye in the center of her forehead and now it's valuable art -)

The real artists are those that never end up famous. This guy is proof of how bad mainstream "art" can be. Most of his so called art is something that any kid could do, but yet he turned famous and rich because of it.

@Tomas

Quote:

The real artists are those that never end up famous.

Honestly, that is such a stupid statement! What the fuck is a 'real artist'? Why is famousness or not a qualifying factor? To become 'great' at any artistic endeavour, be it 'fine art' music or any other media takes a lifetime of extreme commitment, few people so talented and commited would be overlooked, even if they don't become household names.

Quote:

This guy is proof of how bad mainstream "art" can be. Most of his so called art is something that any kid could do, but yet he turned famous and rich because of it.

He didn't just turn rich an famous overnight, he spent an entire lifetime developing his skills, working as n illustrator, and was major contibutor to the pop art scene of the 60s. And no your avarage child could not just do as well. If you think his art is mainstream now froma 2014 perspective that's only because he was so influential that the mainstreams flow was changed.

Last edited by broadblues on 25-Apr-2014 at 07:04 PM.

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@itix

thanks for the clarification, much appriciated.


@raffaele

haha yes i know what you mean by that indeed.

_________________
See my blog and collection website! . https://www.blog.amigaguru.com

@broadblues

Soo true ma man. To say his work was childish is silly. He also helped change the way graphic arts is used.




Great album from 1967 btw ;)

_________________
-- --
aka Tony Rocks

I see that the Warhol museum have named their Amiga technical expert as Mr Hans Campbell.
Anyone heard of him?

@Xmas87

Googling 'Hans Campbell Amiga' throws up the nicname 'DoomMaster'

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@broadblues
Quote:

Honestly, that is such a stupid statement! What the fuck is a 'real artist'? Why is famousness or not a qualifying factor? To become 'great' at any artistic endeavour, be it 'fine art' music or any other media takes a lifetime of extreme commitment, few people so talented and commited would be overlooked, even if they don't become household names.

Someone who actually makes something that looks good instead of just taking a photo and changing the colours like this Warhol guy did and yet it looks like something someone made in mspaint.
Same thing with abstract art where they basically just paint a fucking dot or throw some red paint and call it art.

And I dont see how you can say how this hack of an artist has any skills.

Last edited by Tomas on 25-Apr-2014 at 11:44 PM.

@Thread...

Just think people that when Warhol cut&pasted that third eye in DeLuxe Paint Venus demo image he has created a symbol that will endure the name of our computer for the centuries to come...

In the future there will be plenty of people graduating in arts who will study early experiments of multimedia computer art, and they will base all their studies upon Warhol and the computer he used...

Lots of professors will write enormous amounts of essays about the tri-cyclop Botticelli digital Venus modified by Andy Warhol...

And in the universities there will be lots of freshmen and co-eds who got their legs "cut off" in art exams just because they will check the "Macintosh" wrong answer instead of "Amiga" in the test question: "What computer used Warhol for his multimedia experiments?"

Last edited by Raffaele on 26-Apr-2014 at 12:12 AM.

_________________
"When the Amiga came out, everyone [at Apple] was scared as hell." (J.L. Gassée, former CEO of Apple France and chief of devs of Mac II-fx, interviewed by Amazing Computing, Nov 1996).

@Tomas

Andy Warhol worked in a vast range of media, from traditional painting and drawing techiques to screen printing. Some of the prints were from photos some from earlier paintigs.


Quote:

And I dont see how you can say how this hack of an artist has any skills.

I'm not saying he's my favourite artist (not entirely sure I have one) but you're ridculously small minded and ignorant if you genuinely think that.

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@Raffaele

Quote:

Just think people that when Warhol cut&pasted that third eye in DeLuxe Paint Venus demo image he has created a symbol that will endure the name of our computer for the centuries to come...

I supsect it was more likely a test image, that anything else. File dates and stuff might show when he did it in relation to over works created, ofcourse we have no access to that.

[edit]
One would hope that the 'software archeologists' would preserve that meta info.
[/edit]

Last edited by broadblues on 26-Apr-2014 at 12:24 AM.

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@Tomas

Quote:

Tomas wrote: @Xenic Quote: Xenic wrote: The Venus image looks like the same image that came with my early DPaint disks except Andy Warhol pasted a 3rd eye in the center of her forehead and now it's valuable art -) The real artists are those that never end up famous. This guy is proof of how bad mainstream "art" can be. Most of his so called art is something that any kid could do, but yet he turned famous and rich because of it.

That's the problem with modern art: it's about the idea, not necessarily about the execution.

As anybody can see, it's hard work to create large canvas paintings, shape towering blocks of marble, cast bronze, etc. And then some guy hits upon the idea that all you need to create art is a blank page, a pen, an idea, and you get something like Picasso's dove, for example.

As for "mainstream art", there probably is no such thing: there is stuff that is accepted as being important and worthy of your attention, and then there's the stuff which is far away from being accepted. Some of that will get accepted as time goes by, some will remain banal.

For example, the critics hated the French Impressionism with a vengeance. At the time it was flowering, the accepted form of contemporary art was mostly large photorealistic oil paintings of scenes from myth and antiquity. Which, more often than not, depicted at least one delicately rendered semi-nude woman. But that was OK, because, well it was art, and it was commercially successful.

Contrast this to the Impressionist, who painted "sloppily", not in the studio but in the open air, didn't paint that many semi-nude women, were not commercially successful, etc. But try to find one of the accepted masters of late 19th century France who are relevant today. Their work looks kitschy, if not outright overcooked today. But it's easy to find a reproduction of Van Gogh's sunflowers, or for that matter, any of his work today.

The fun thing about 19th and 20th century art is that there was a commercial background to it, which is something that features prominently in Andy Warhol's work. 20th century graphic art was easy to produce, and easy to reproduce.

As for becoming rich and famous through his art: Andy Warhol was rich and famous before he became very rich and very famous. He had earned so much money as sought-after illustrator that he could buy a house in Manhattan, store all the art he bought with his money in the top floor, live with this aged mother on the next floor and sub-let the floors below.

Warhol was not self-taught. He received a professional education as a commercial artist, on a grant, if I remember correctly (he came from a poor family and did not have the funds to pay for his education). His work as a commercial artist, in advertizing, fits in with the style of the 1950'ies, which prominently used line drawings, with very little use of colour. Colour printing and advertizing used to be expensive back then, and only few magazines would use it.

The style and techniques Andy Warhol used in this time shaped how he would work for the rest of his career. For example, he would use the so-called "blotted line" technique to reproduce drawing. This works by drawing on a piece of paper which soaks up the ink, the piece paper is then turned over and used like a stamp to reproduce the drawing.

There's a direct link between using the "blotted line" and silkscreen printing, as used by Andy Warhol in his commercially most successful series of portraits, which feature prominently in "pop art". The source of the portraits were usually newsprint, the pictures were blown up, printed and hand-coloured.

So, what does all this say about the Deluxe Paint art disk contents, which Andy Warhol picked up and modified? It fits in well with his established technique and style. There is the existing artwork (not a black & white print of Marilyn Monroe, but a hand-painted digital picture of an Italian Renaissance painting), the copying (not silkscreened printing, but using the Deluxe Paint brush functionality), and specifically the copying of small details (not using the "blotted line", but again the Deluxe Paint brush functionality).

This looks banal to us, because we are familiar with the fact that it is easy to copy and modify digital data. But for an artist such as Andy Warhol, it must have been familiar on a very different level, and not quite so banal.

If you read the Deluxe Paint manual, you'll find that it specifically refers to drawing techniques from the real world (stencil, frisket, brush), and that it makes copying and easy manipulation (undo) central features. Anything could be a brush, and you could manipulate that brush at will, memory permitting. In that respect Deluxe Paint was a much more sophisticated tool than "GraphiCraft" and "Aegis Images". It probably was even more sophisticated than the existing digital image editing software of its time, as it existed on dedicated workstations.

I think it's easy to see how somebody like Andy Warhol would be drawn to experiment with these tools. The changes he made to the picture of Venus are simple enough, but they do fit in with the core of his work. Which explains why the picture is part of the small sample of images provided to the press.

Last edited by olsen on 26-Apr-2014 at 08:27 AM.
Last edited by olsen on 26-Apr-2014 at 08:24 AM.

@broadblues

Quote:

broadblues wrote: @Raffaele Quote: Just think people that when Warhol cut&pasted that third eye in DeLuxe Paint Venus demo image he has created a symbol that will endure the name of our computer for the centuries to come... I supsect it was more likely a test image, that anything else. File dates and stuff might show when he did it in relation to over works created, ofcourse we have no access to that. [edit] One would hope that the 'software archeologists' would preserve that meta info. [/edit]

I suspect it too that the tri-cyclops Venus was just a test image, but i bet a good coffee that it will be printed in many books as an example of early digital art, just for the fact it has been done by a famous artist.

_________________
"When the Amiga came out, everyone [at Apple] was scared as hell." (J.L. Gassée, former CEO of Apple France and chief of devs of Mac II-fx, interviewed by Amazing Computing, Nov 1996).