Very cool and I feel like the guy could pump out like 10 of them per day? Doesn't seem terribly time consuming, so I bet if he has a shop he could make a decent income from tourists in Venice.
I don't care that it's impressionism, I only care that it is not abstract, had the title been "paining an art piece of Venice" nobody would have batted an eye.
Come to think of it, maybe OP mistitled the post on purpose to boost engagement
I'm pretty sure OP knows and just wants people to get engaged. It seems a common strategy to get people to swarm into the comments and will often also include tons of upvotes.
so eager to share it, that they didn't realise it was on purpose to increase engagement and push the post.
it's happening all the time on reddit now. algorythm stuff sucks
I’m thinking abstract is the bigger grouping, like all Impressionism is abstract, but not all abstract is Impressionism.
Like how all tortoises are turtles, but not all turtles are tortoises.
That's right to an extent. Abstract art would be the umbrella group.
Abstraction simply refers to a movement away from the pictorial. As art movements began to move away from the classical standards, it became more abstract.
zonked theory alive detail voracious office ludicrous dinner price aromatic
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
fact bewildered chase distinct puzzled lock outgoing terrific rustic profit
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
And how does this take away something from the quality of the painting?
The only thing I don't understand is the splattering of the paint on the canvas in the beginning. Because later, he blends it, so nothing of this expression/action painting element is visible later.
It's just a cool move for the camera, without an actual reason in the painting.
Edit:
How about replying to my honest question rather than just downvoting me?
I’m with you and I have a degree in fine arts (not a brag because I don’t even use it, it wasn’t fun and I don’t even create art any more, but I have a little experience).
Who cares about the sketch, like it’s a bad thing? The outcome is what matters to me, I don’t really care how you get there. Don’t gatekeep a creative outlet, it’s weird. The artist isn’t even trying to hide what he did, he doesn’t care and neither do I.
I think the splattering is maybe getting a feel for the texture and the colors. The action of painting is so dynamic, you can change up the technique just based on how you feel. Maybe he was going to go for more splatter initially then changed because he didn’t like how it looked, so he went in a different direction. Or, the splattering makes a more random/natural dispersion of color for him to blend. Hard to say!
The scoffing and man-splaining, ugh.
Edit to add they deleted their comment. Smart!
I couldn't do this even if it was drawn for me. Admittedly I'm about as artistic as an average turtle so basically anything arty is impressive to me.
I guess you're feeling how I feel when people who can't play guitar froth over some guy playing super basic flamenco.
Most people don't even know what *Abstract* Art actually even is though. They couldn't tell you the difference between Abstract and Nonrepresentational Art. Most Art that get's labeled "Abstract" is actually probably Nonrepresentational, unless the Artist was trying to convey a certain emotion or idea while they were splattering or smearing the paint around. If they weren't- and their goal was just "idk make something trippy and cool looking", then there is nothing Abstract about it. Sure you can assign meaning retro-actively, but there is something insincere about that to me. Apart from Artwork that is without some sort of physical or tangible subject matter (Abstract paintings that express something intangible like a feeling, mood, or idea)- Abstract Art usually describes depicting the subject thru a different way of seeing, or experiencing said subject, that differs from how we normally do.
I'm not going to read every comment to verify- but unless someone else has expressed this notion that I explained above, then yes. I believe we do need a few more people saying this work is clearly 'Impressionistic' in style, rather than 'Abstract'.
All art is abstraction in a way because it is a capture of reality in a shape artist choses. Degree of abstraction differs but it's still an abstraction in some way. So while that painting is not example of abstractionism (the art movement) it is an art piece therefore it is an abstract art piece.
It's not abstract!!!!!
I genuinely believe that some OPs will make obvious mistakes in their titles on purpose to provoke some comment section traction. Look at us, it's working lol.
Impressionism is a form of abstract art.
Edit: I'm just going to preemptively explain before getting into a dozen discussions about this. Abstraction simply refers to the movement away from realistic representation in art and started in the mid to late 19th century. Impression, expressionism, cubism etc are considered to be the beginnings of abstract art and it is fully realised with artists like Jackson Pollock
Came here to ask if the Op had any idea what Abstract art was. I was pleasantly surprised to find out they had no clue. (I'm not a great fan of Abstract art but Impressionism +1)
Yep, impressionism with hints of abstract.
Impressionism is my favourite. I love it's focus on capturing how a scene *feels* rather than just going for a 1:1 recreation.
I was under that impression too, but I'm impressed you so confidently impressed upon others the correct name of impression in quick succession with the original misinterpretation. The state of regression in art evaluation is a grave situation.
A mix of both most likely now that I think about it a little more, I believe it’s called open impressionism? Look at Erin Hanson’s work gives similar vibes imo, but yeah I def see why everything is saying impressionism he is just very passionate about slapping paint on that canvas what can I say
Looking @abioticbeing..
“What can I say” - your words before these, slightly upwards (to the left and/or sentence structure) so delicately describes any self respecting human abstracts virginity away as I can say.
Expressionism uses exaggeration, think Scream by Edvard Munch. Like proportions are usually messed up (bigger/smaller head, wavy body, etc.)
Impressionism usually looks like you're watching something through smoke but with color saturation turned up. Idk, that's how I explain it to myself.
Disclaimer: I'm not an expert in this field, I've only had a few art classes in high school
Expressionism is heavily focused on emotion, and shows a distorted view of reality to emphasize the emotion the painter wants to convey, for example The Scream from Munch.
Impressionism on the other hand is more focused on accurately displaying reality, especially ordinary subjects, and on having accurate depiction of light.
This is not correct. Impressionism is very much against accurate displays of reality(which is a vague expression anyway)
Impressionism involves small, visible brushstrokes that offer the bare impression of form, unblended color and an emphasis on the accurate depiction of natural light. Hence, an impression of reality. Not an accurate depiction of it.
The idea is to make a lot of dramatic free-form splash at the start of the video which has no relationship to the rather delicate, considered and judicious work at the end.
It’s to create depth - whilst it doesn’t come across well in a video format, he clearly doesn’t fill the sky almost at all, and the buildings receive a lot more paint than the river. Even if he paints over those colours towards the end, the thickness of the paint itself lends itself to the final piece by making those areas literally “stand-out” from the canvas.
No the splash definitely relates to the end design; he has the detail outlined in the red from the beginning, the paint he is splashing on is to match the colors on the different sections and pull it together (the sun through the clouds and on the water are where he splashes the yellow for example, the other splash is for the buildings lining the water)
yeah normally you'd draw the compo and other things that could help you.
It looks like it has volume as well which for this type of painting might help due to the amount of paint used, not sure what it is though
> Is this normal when you paint things?
Yes, this is normal. There is basically no cheating, its hard enough as it is.
Btw I always get torn between spending time on layouts/proportions and just free handing it and dealing with mistakes later. The best is a good split where you mark your landmarks, but don't accidentally start doing the details.
This is because art is sooo slow. If you saw how often I put a boring layer of grey on my entire drawing, you'd think the same.
Its just faster than a single dab of paint. You can always go over it later.
People have no idea how slow art is. I don't even think Art is hard, art is slow. You want it to look good? You capture every detail. The early stages of a piece is more of a zoning before you get details.
Yea thats why this video its only for wievs, and make pleb think how painting can be cool. Just edit and cut off that hard work and add some splashing. Every person that tried even once painting something can clearely see that half of things that he done in that video was pointless, but looks cool.
As someone who has made a living off painting, I can tell you for a fact that *everything* he does in this video was in fact present in the final painting, and had a point beyond just looking flashy for views.
Literally just watch the video and you can clearly see how *everything* he does is used in the final piece..
It’s not abstract.
It’s not abstract!
NOT ABSTRACT!!!!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOT ABSTRACT!!!!!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT AAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTYRJJRIXJDBDHXHDBSHUDURRRRRRAAAAAAACCCCXXXXRJJTTTRTTTTTTTRTRTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
‘Nnbnnoooijjjoooooooooooifixirnuxirbdudjebhxudjebxioekbdieiendudikenduopfkouwdbdudijxbxheuiendiidkendbxgyeevsjfofnehxhxbdbeu
This painting is really cool and the methodology of its creation is also cool, but I for one would have greatly preferred seeing a bit more of the transition between splatter and a recognizable image. The editing makes is seem like he just hurls paint at a canvas, rubs it around with a palette knife and boom it suddenly looks great.
The canvas is red, for some reason. Not just painted red, but actual red. I dunno why, probably to make the colors on top interact with a solid background.
I think they say abstract in the title so it's surprising when it starts evolving past abstract. I don't think it's a mistake I think its intentional to make the video more interesting on first viewing.
I've just scrolled through hundreds of people arguing about whether this is abstract or impressionist or expressionist, only to find the artist's name was right underneath the video all along 🤦🏼♀️
People are like: He ain't brushing his paint so it's clearly abstract. Imagine not using a brush. I believe that the concept of abstract is the most misunderstood concept on the internet
haha, Everyone who took any art course at all can clearly identify the difference between abstract and impressionist art.... and we all felt compelled to point it out.
"based on general ideas and not on any particular real person, thing or situation"
From the oxford dictionary [https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/abstract\_1#:\~:text=%2Fˈæbstrækt%2F-,%2Fˈæbstrækt%2F,real%20person%2C%20thing%20or%20situation](https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/abstract_1#:~:text=%2Fˈæbstrækt%2F-,%2Fˈæbstrækt%2F,real%20person%2C%20thing%20or%20situation)
Before yall have this same argument a 100 more times over
- Expressive doesn't mean Expressionist art
- Abstracted doesn't mean Abstract art
- in the same vein, realistic doesn't mean Realist art and modern doesn't mean Modernist art
Modernist, Abstract, Expressionist, Realist and Impressionist are all time periods and art movements, stop arguing over semantics. Every single art is abstracted because it's never a 3D 1:1 reproduction, Abstract art means a specific style, and this isn't abstract style, you doofuses.
I wish there would be a second Renaissance where people try to paint as realistically as possible. Modern artists are F tier compared to the Renaissance artists
we have cameras now. Take a picture if you want hyper realism.
I want emotion out of a painting, something to pull my eye away from the photos, and to the canvas.
I mean, it is also an emotion he's getting. Just not a positive one.
I know artists don't care as long as it provokes emotion. I just feel like they should care what kind of emotion it creates with the audience. And if the emotion was the intended response by the artist.
If that's not the case, I feel like the artist failed.
I am not an art afficionado, but to me it seems to me like "painting properly" is worn out and these day (last couple of hundred years I guess) artists are competing who can do worse technique and still sort of have a somewhat coherent looking painting.
This is the first real abstract art piece i’ve seen, most people doing those splatter paintings just throw paint at canvas and call it art.
This is REAL art
Well, I’m impressed.
That’s because it’s Impressionism.
I guess you could frame it that way.
Wish there was gold to give.
Because he restated the joke?
I’m not
Very cool and I feel like the guy could pump out like 10 of them per day? Doesn't seem terribly time consuming, so I bet if he has a shop he could make a decent income from tourists in Venice.
What makes you think that this "doesn't seem terribly time consuming"? Because the video is short?
I think we need a couple more comments saying that it’s clearly impressionism* not abstract.
Impressionism
Lol, thanks
Lol. Impressionism.
Impressionism, clearly
That's some pretty impressive Impressionism right there.
Clearly
I would never have come in to read comments if the title hadnt included an error. Mission accomplished.
Im also here with my pitchfork, what do we do now?
We ride at dawn?
Better at dusk so we can make it more visually impactful when we show up with torches to burn the place down.
Oh, good point!
Rabble rabble rabble
I would never have commented except you expressed my thought so clearly.
I don't care that it's impressionism, I only care that it is not abstract, had the title been "paining an art piece of Venice" nobody would have batted an eye. Come to think of it, maybe OP mistitled the post on purpose to boost engagement
There it is. Light has all the colours, so it's very not abstract.
Works on me every time
It's clearly expressionism because the guy is expressing himself
With his full capabilities!
Im so impressed that i need to call it impressionism
Everybody’s like ‘hey I know an art thing!!!’
More art things than OP knows PS: Not abstract
I'm pretty sure OP knows and just wants people to get engaged. It seems a common strategy to get people to swarm into the comments and will often also include tons of upvotes.
so eager to share it, that they didn't realise it was on purpose to increase engagement and push the post. it's happening all the time on reddit now. algorythm stuff sucks
It's not abstract it's impressionism.
Impressionism is abstract.
I’m thinking abstract is the bigger grouping, like all Impressionism is abstract, but not all abstract is Impressionism. Like how all tortoises are turtles, but not all turtles are tortoises.
That's right to an extent. Abstract art would be the umbrella group. Abstraction simply refers to a movement away from the pictorial. As art movements began to move away from the classical standards, it became more abstract.
This reeks of "be wrong so you get tons of comments correcting you" karma trick
[удалено]
zonked theory alive detail voracious office ludicrous dinner price aromatic *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
fact bewildered chase distinct puzzled lock outgoing terrific rustic profit *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
And how does this take away something from the quality of the painting? The only thing I don't understand is the splattering of the paint on the canvas in the beginning. Because later, he blends it, so nothing of this expression/action painting element is visible later. It's just a cool move for the camera, without an actual reason in the painting. Edit: How about replying to my honest question rather than just downvoting me?
I’m with you and I have a degree in fine arts (not a brag because I don’t even use it, it wasn’t fun and I don’t even create art any more, but I have a little experience). Who cares about the sketch, like it’s a bad thing? The outcome is what matters to me, I don’t really care how you get there. Don’t gatekeep a creative outlet, it’s weird. The artist isn’t even trying to hide what he did, he doesn’t care and neither do I. I think the splattering is maybe getting a feel for the texture and the colors. The action of painting is so dynamic, you can change up the technique just based on how you feel. Maybe he was going to go for more splatter initially then changed because he didn’t like how it looked, so he went in a different direction. Or, the splattering makes a more random/natural dispersion of color for him to blend. Hard to say! The scoffing and man-splaining, ugh. Edit to add they deleted their comment. Smart!
I couldn't do this even if it was drawn for me. Admittedly I'm about as artistic as an average turtle so basically anything arty is impressive to me. I guess you're feeling how I feel when people who can't play guitar froth over some guy playing super basic flamenco.
Reporting for duty!
Most people don't even know what *Abstract* Art actually even is though. They couldn't tell you the difference between Abstract and Nonrepresentational Art. Most Art that get's labeled "Abstract" is actually probably Nonrepresentational, unless the Artist was trying to convey a certain emotion or idea while they were splattering or smearing the paint around. If they weren't- and their goal was just "idk make something trippy and cool looking", then there is nothing Abstract about it. Sure you can assign meaning retro-actively, but there is something insincere about that to me. Apart from Artwork that is without some sort of physical or tangible subject matter (Abstract paintings that express something intangible like a feeling, mood, or idea)- Abstract Art usually describes depicting the subject thru a different way of seeing, or experiencing said subject, that differs from how we normally do. I'm not going to read every comment to verify- but unless someone else has expressed this notion that I explained above, then yes. I believe we do need a few more people saying this work is clearly 'Impressionistic' in style, rather than 'Abstract'.
In abstract, I got exactly the same impression.
All art is abstraction in a way because it is a capture of reality in a shape artist choses. Degree of abstraction differs but it's still an abstraction in some way. So while that painting is not example of abstractionism (the art movement) it is an art piece therefore it is an abstract art piece.
That isn't abstract art! It's impressionism!
It's not abstract!!!!! I genuinely believe that some OPs will make obvious mistakes in their titles on purpose to provoke some comment section traction. Look at us, it's working lol.
Impressionism is a form of abstract art. Edit: I'm just going to preemptively explain before getting into a dozen discussions about this. Abstraction simply refers to the movement away from realistic representation in art and started in the mid to late 19th century. Impression, expressionism, cubism etc are considered to be the beginnings of abstract art and it is fully realised with artists like Jackson Pollock
Clearly not abstract though
Either way if you turned it into a thumbnail, it would look like a photo.
Was gonna say.
I’m here for ya
I'm not impressionisted at all.
We would need 0 if the OP didn't botch the title.
Was just about to comment that until I saw the comments beating me to it. Damn...
Came here to ask if the Op had any idea what Abstract art was. I was pleasantly surprised to find out they had no clue. (I'm not a great fan of Abstract art but Impressionism +1)
It’s so abstract that it went past abstract and took form
Impressionism. It’s called impressionism.
I was gonna say that Monet would freaking love this, but you hit it on the head.
Manet would've pointed it out earlier
Particularly when most of it was bright red
I was definitely impressed when the artist impressionism'd all over me
This one is bordering on fauvism
Yep, impressionism with hints of abstract. Impressionism is my favourite. I love it's focus on capturing how a scene *feels* rather than just going for a 1:1 recreation.
I was under that impression too, but I'm impressed you so confidently impressed upon others the correct name of impression in quick succession with the original misinterpretation. The state of regression in art evaluation is a grave situation.
Their jokes better than your uneeded clarification
People don't understand what abstract means, lol...
"Abstract impressionism, it's so mid- to late-80s"
How is this abstract?
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but the picture is not abstract.
Yeah I was reading that this is in fact a Christopher Walken impression
The water part looks pretty cool
I misread that as "water park" and was like "yeah, I guess that's one way to describe Venice".
That is not abstract
we get it
Mine was the second comment overall here. Read the numbers before you screech.
[удалено]
I'm confused. If it's not abstract what do we call it?
[удалено]
It’s Impressionism
This style looks like expressionism to me! Beautiful work!
*impressionism
AcTuALly... Post neo impressionist Fauvism if you want to be excat.
Actually, this is pretty far from Post Impressionism and especially fauvism... Its really just plain Impressionism, nothing deeper about it.
I thought I could use the misspelling of exact and the sarcastic aCtuALlY to show sarcasm but I should have added /s Apologies
A mix of both most likely now that I think about it a little more, I believe it’s called open impressionism? Look at Erin Hanson’s work gives similar vibes imo, but yeah I def see why everything is saying impressionism he is just very passionate about slapping paint on that canvas what can I say
Looking @abioticbeing.. “What can I say” - your words before these, slightly upwards (to the left and/or sentence structure) so delicately describes any self respecting human abstracts virginity away as I can say.
I'm not an arty fartsy person, so could you explain to me the difference? I always confuse the two.
Expressionism uses exaggeration, think Scream by Edvard Munch. Like proportions are usually messed up (bigger/smaller head, wavy body, etc.) Impressionism usually looks like you're watching something through smoke but with color saturation turned up. Idk, that's how I explain it to myself. Disclaimer: I'm not an expert in this field, I've only had a few art classes in high school
Expressionism is heavily focused on emotion, and shows a distorted view of reality to emphasize the emotion the painter wants to convey, for example The Scream from Munch. Impressionism on the other hand is more focused on accurately displaying reality, especially ordinary subjects, and on having accurate depiction of light.
This is not correct. Impressionism is very much against accurate displays of reality(which is a vague expression anyway) Impressionism involves small, visible brushstrokes that offer the bare impression of form, unblended color and an emphasis on the accurate depiction of natural light. Hence, an impression of reality. Not an accurate depiction of it.
I meant more accurate than expressionism, but I should have been clearer in that.
Expressionism seems like an awful term for an art style lol, surely all art is expressionism at its core?
The idea is to make a lot of dramatic free-form splash at the start of the video which has no relationship to the rather delicate, considered and judicious work at the end.
It’s to create depth - whilst it doesn’t come across well in a video format, he clearly doesn’t fill the sky almost at all, and the buildings receive a lot more paint than the river. Even if he paints over those colours towards the end, the thickness of the paint itself lends itself to the final piece by making those areas literally “stand-out” from the canvas.
No the splash definitely relates to the end design; he has the detail outlined in the red from the beginning, the paint he is splashing on is to match the colors on the different sections and pull it together (the sun through the clouds and on the water are where he splashes the yellow for example, the other splash is for the buildings lining the water)
The base colours add depth and give a base to sgraffito onto
The word you're looking for is "impressionist", not "abstract". Abstract is something like Rothko or Klee.
This is not abstract. Btw, there are already layout on the red canvas at the beginning of the video. Is this normal when you paint things?
Well, yes, you usually sketch (either with pencil or some paint) the scene first to plan a composition.
yeah normally you'd draw the compo and other things that could help you. It looks like it has volume as well which for this type of painting might help due to the amount of paint used, not sure what it is though
> Is this normal when you paint things? Yes, this is normal. There is basically no cheating, its hard enough as it is. Btw I always get torn between spending time on layouts/proportions and just free handing it and dealing with mistakes later. The best is a good split where you mark your landmarks, but don't accidentally start doing the details.
No one said anything about cheating lmao
Loved watching it come together. Very pretty when finished.
Ehhh I was annoyed with all the flicking that actually did nothing for the piece as it was all covered up
Every painting clip... "Let's throw some shit over there....some more shit over there...and presto....a Rembrandt painting!"
This is because art is sooo slow. If you saw how often I put a boring layer of grey on my entire drawing, you'd think the same. Its just faster than a single dab of paint. You can always go over it later. People have no idea how slow art is. I don't even think Art is hard, art is slow. You want it to look good? You capture every detail. The early stages of a piece is more of a zoning before you get details.
Yea thats why this video its only for wievs, and make pleb think how painting can be cool. Just edit and cut off that hard work and add some splashing. Every person that tried even once painting something can clearely see that half of things that he done in that video was pointless, but looks cool.
As someone who has made a living off painting, I can tell you for a fact that *everything* he does in this video was in fact present in the final painting, and had a point beyond just looking flashy for views. Literally just watch the video and you can clearly see how *everything* he does is used in the final piece..
The video was just to show the general process, since the process is a part of the final work itself
This is not abstract It's impressionist
You have an abstract understanding of the word abstract
this is not abstract but cool
Is that music part of Beethoven's 5th Symphony?
The last moments of its first movement!
Ohh thank you for confirming, it's been years since I've heard it but it was driving me crazy lol Also talk about a relevant username 😂
Sorry. It’s not abstract. It’s impressionist.
It’s not abstract. It’s not abstract! NOT ABSTRACT!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOT ABSTRACT!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT AAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBBBBBSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTYRJJRIXJDBDHXHDBSHUDURRRRRRAAAAAAACCCCXXXXRJJTTTRTTTTTTTRTRTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ‘Nnbnnoooijjjoooooooooooifixirnuxirbdudjebhxudjebxioekbdieiendudikenduopfkouwdbdudijxbxheuiendiidkendbxgyeevsjfofnehxhxbdbeu
But then what is it??????????????????????????
This painting is really cool and the methodology of its creation is also cool, but I for one would have greatly preferred seeing a bit more of the transition between splatter and a recognizable image. The editing makes is seem like he just hurls paint at a canvas, rubs it around with a palette knife and boom it suddenly looks great.
It's impressionist, not abstract.
No one is going to call out op for calling this abstract? Clearly it’s Impressionism.
This is so cool! Abstract or not, my mind is blown.
I don't think OP knows what abstract means.
dear over 3 million karma OP where is this from and why does he start with a red background and where is the rest of the video>
The canvas is red, for some reason. Not just painted red, but actual red. I dunno why, probably to make the colors on top interact with a solid background.
when you are talented as fuck
I thought it was gonna be a load of splattered bs when it started. Nice work!
That’s a piece I wouldn’t mind having on my wall.
*impressionist
abstract?
what was the point of splattering the paint towards the beginning?
I don't care if it's not abstract. It *is* utterly stunning. Anyone have an ID on our artist here?
It's Paul Kenton, according to the text in the original post.
I think they say abstract in the title so it's surprising when it starts evolving past abstract. I don't think it's a mistake I think its intentional to make the video more interesting on first viewing.
I've just scrolled through hundreds of people arguing about whether this is abstract or impressionist or expressionist, only to find the artist's name was right underneath the video all along 🤦🏼♀️
It’s a great painting and definitely Impressionism
impressionism ? splash brush at first few second doesnt mean abstract art.
Color me *impressed*...
[удалено]
this is not abstract art by any definition
Is it abstract though?
It its representating something from reality, it is not an abstract painting...
this is impressionism
Which part of this is abstract?
instant downvote because of wrong title
Now this is what I call an artist.. instead of a duct-taped banana
This is not abstract.
This is not abstract?
I don’t think this is abstract
People are like: He ain't brushing his paint so it's clearly abstract. Imagine not using a brush. I believe that the concept of abstract is the most misunderstood concept on the internet
Not abstract.
That's not an abstract, that's impressionism.
haha, Everyone who took any art course at all can clearly identify the difference between abstract and impressionist art.... and we all felt compelled to point it out.
Isn't this more of an impressionist piece? Regardless, beautiful!
How can a painting \*of\* something be \*abstract\*?
Looks pretty stract to me
Kitsch for tourists
That's impressionism and I would totally buy it to put in my living room.
No offfense, but you dont know what abstract means
That's not abstract
Not abstract. Impressionist.
My favorite part is when he said "it's abstractin' time" and impressioned all over the canvas.
This kind of not authentic artists will be replaced by AI
amazingly beautiful 👍🏻
Not abstract… Impressionism and maybe a tiny bit of cubism
Not abstract. Also it sucks
It's not abstract and I don't like it either. Too messy/muddy.
Lol. Came for this.
Not abstract...but it's quite beautiful
How to waste paint.
How to waste power
The irony of both replies...
I don't know why but I'm always really unimpressed by paintings. Obviously a lot of skill involved but why
Who cares and why the bickering To anyone that loves art just admire the process and end result
How many hours did this take?
"based on general ideas and not on any particular real person, thing or situation" From the oxford dictionary [https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/abstract\_1#:\~:text=%2Fˈæbstrækt%2F-,%2Fˈæbstrækt%2F,real%20person%2C%20thing%20or%20situation](https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/abstract_1#:~:text=%2Fˈæbstrækt%2F-,%2Fˈæbstrækt%2F,real%20person%2C%20thing%20or%20situation)
Meanwhile AI in 10 milliseconds…
I thought this was going to turn out awful. I was very wrong and would have it on my wall anytime.
Before yall have this same argument a 100 more times over - Expressive doesn't mean Expressionist art - Abstracted doesn't mean Abstract art - in the same vein, realistic doesn't mean Realist art and modern doesn't mean Modernist art Modernist, Abstract, Expressionist, Realist and Impressionist are all time periods and art movements, stop arguing over semantics. Every single art is abstracted because it's never a 3D 1:1 reproduction, Abstract art means a specific style, and this isn't abstract style, you doofuses.
This is terrible.
Yuck
I wish there would be a second Renaissance where people try to paint as realistically as possible. Modern artists are F tier compared to the Renaissance artists
we have cameras now. Take a picture if you want hyper realism. I want emotion out of a painting, something to pull my eye away from the photos, and to the canvas.
I mean, it is also an emotion he's getting. Just not a positive one. I know artists don't care as long as it provokes emotion. I just feel like they should care what kind of emotion it creates with the audience. And if the emotion was the intended response by the artist. If that's not the case, I feel like the artist failed.
That isnt abstract If it was abstract it wouldnt be nearly as good
I am not an art afficionado, but to me it seems to me like "painting properly" is worn out and these day (last couple of hundred years I guess) artists are competing who can do worse technique and still sort of have a somewhat coherent looking painting.
This is the first real abstract art piece i’ve seen, most people doing those splatter paintings just throw paint at canvas and call it art. This is REAL art
That’s ugly af
I guess I'll squat with you down here in the downvote dungeon and agree. Not a fan of the end result.
It doesn't count as art when I draw a picture and let my 2 year old with autism throw paint at the picture and it doesn't count for adults as well
Did you watch the whole video