What is your opinion on this original acrylic painting?

I wouldn't buy it, but then I have to be truly impressed to buy art, which usually means I can't afford it.

I think the cat's head looks distorted toward the right.

Let me get you another martini.

here - you ask for an honest opinion here

it sucks

quote:

Originally posted by butchloc:
here - you ask for an honest opinion here

it sucks

Well it seems my future as an artist is not going to be too bright!!!!!

Looks like something a 7th grade art sudent would have done.

Honest opinion, you painted it. If you like it and want to keep pursueing painting from time to time go for it.

I have seen a lot worse stuff sell for good money.

Beauty after all is in the eye of the beholder.

I wouldn't buy it but I'd be happy to say that I painted it.

Personally, I don't like it.

But it's still LOTS better than I could do.

Vapo, all great artists started somewhere. And I'd bet money they didn't produce a master piece their first time on the canvas. For what it's worth, keep painting. I see potential there.
PS: never be discouraged by naysayers. Most could never paint what you produced in a 100 tries. If it's any consulation, here's my first attempt at painting ducks several decades ago. Hell, I was brave enough to enter it into the federal duck stamp competition. Looks like crap but that didn't stop me

quote:

Originally posted by L. David Keith:
Vapo, all great artists started somewhere. And I'd bet money they didn't produce a master piece their first time on the canvas. For what it's worth, keep painting. I see potential there.
PS: never be discouraged by naysayers. Most could never paint what you produced in a 100 tries. If it's any consulation, here's my first attempt at painting ducks several decades ago. Hell, I was brave enough to enter it into the federal duck stamp competition. Looks like crap but that didn't stop me

Hey.....the acid test.....does it look like a duck...?....and yes it does.....

If I tried to paint a duck, it'd look like an alligator.....maybe!...

Vapodog,
I think it is a good study. If I had done that I would be proud of it.

I'm still trying to get up the nerve to try my hand at some canvas a la Jackson Pollock. Maybe one day. . .

Vapodog,
if you enjoy doing it i would not give a bugger what anyone else said or thought
and with practice you will improve.
well done it better than most people could produce.

Art, like any thing visceral, needs to be experienced to be appreciated. Gustave Klimt, Ansel Adams, Van Gogh, et. al., all look distorted, flat and lifeless online and out of context.

I'm sure that in person it would speak to the viewer much better than a posted snap. Keep it up!

Vapodog, tell me what you want for the painting, I may buy it. I would be the only guy I know who has a painting by an AR artist.

Tom

FWIW, it's better than any of the twenty-something paintings hanging in our hospital.

Vapodog,

Please ignore the naysayers. I really like the soft lines of the flora, it is reminiscent of some of Diego Rivera's paintings. The cat, on the other hand, is painted with harder lines and with a different style, which is slightly (ONLY slightly) disconcerting to my eye. But the cat's expression is great. The composition and colors are also great. You should be proud of this painting - I certainly would be. My advice to you - keep painting. You have a LOT of talent.

Glen

I agree with the above post......if you told everyone you bought it at a gallery and that it was painted by a recently deceased master, they'd all be slobbering over it.

I guess that's why art's value is in the eye of the beholder(or what he's been told by others it is.....lol). I've seen VERY highly-priced art that I wouldn't put it my garage. I'd have no problem hanging yours in my garage(jk....I think it looks great, all kidding aside).

vapodog, if you painted that you should be proud!
Peter.

Vapo
I was going to tease you and say that I like it much better than your checkering patterns, but I realized that would be immature....


On a serious note: your painting suffers because the weakest component, the cat, is the first thing that caught my eye the moment I saw the painting.

The depth of field in your painting is outstanding.

And the cat is really not that bad, but is is a bit "off" and the effect is jarring.

The longer I look at your painting the more I like it.

P.S. I would really like to see this painting if you reworked the left side of the cat's face/ear.

Stinko.

Good morning, Mr. Vapodog;

I almost never post on this board and visit it only occasionally. When I do, much of my visit is to look at art and photography. I include most of the guns in that. I admire your courage in hanging yourself all out like this. Let me say up front that I like your work.

Your critics seem to be wanting a photographic representation of the subject. If that is what they want, take a picture for them. If your painting is what you see and/or how you want to say it, fine. Look at some of the most celebrated art work from the present all the way back to the European masters. Or better yet look the "primitives" from several sources. They look like what people want to say, not what someone else expects or wants to see.

One day I was going somewhere with the head of the art department of a sizeable university. We both enjoyed seeing a buzzard someone had posted on his iron gate frame. It was made of an old plow disc, a little sheet iron and some rebar. Neither of us mistook it for a buzzard, but we enjoyed what its maker wanted to say. I've looked at it and enjoyed it for years.

I write fiction. Some folks like it and some don't. But I write for me, not for them. If they like it, so much the better.

If that's what you want to say, say it. When you show the work to someone else, be sure you face it. It's easier to talk about it to the ones that like it and easier for the others to kiss your butt good bye!

Like I said ... I like it. That's the truth. I know it's the truth because I made it up myself and I don't lie.

Be good.

horsefly

Its ok I guess.I wouldnt buy it but I sure as heck dont have the talent you do.I cant hardly write my name!

Vapo,

You did a nice job on the floral patterns. What kills it is the cats head is crooked. I think you were going for a prescriptive on the cats expression but it just comes across as crooked and poorly drawn.

If you were to straighten out the symmetry on the cat it would increase the quality greatly. Symmetry (or the lack of it in this case) is the number one thing we as humans pick up and find repulsive in a human or animal shape. It's actually a proven human characteristic that we are attracted to symmetry.

Not my cup o tea...but I couldn't do it that well, or even close to it!!!

Keep painting.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
What is your opinion on this original acrylic painting?

I like it. I'm no art critic, so I wouldn't have the first idea what it "would be worth" in terms of $$; but then the art market is a fickle bunch, and personal preference/genre seems to rule the day.

As for the painting itself, I like the colors - subtle yet still vivid - and the "shyness" or even meek character of the cat.

That's my 2 cents!

friar

Qualifies as Kitsch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitsch

Grizz

Vapo: I think you have talent. Stick with it. It takes guts to post up and ask for opinions. That says something about you as a person, not just as an artist.
What part of western Nebraska? I think the Sand Hills and the Niobrara Valley are pretty close to paradise.

The above positive comment regarding the plant life is spot on. The leaves and flowers are very very nice!

Vapo
my sister-in-law teaches art & doesn't personally paint as well as you IMHO.

The comment about the symmetry of the cat is spot on.
symmetry in art is a most difficult skill to execute...............which is why paintings of the human form is difficult & so frequently criticised.

overall composition - great
background - great.
delivery of expression in the cat - excellent
( not easy to achieve, but its what gives "life" to a painting)

the only thing that lets the composition down is the symmetry of LHS of the cat's head.........from a viewing perspective.

whether that is a rendition of the actual subject only you know.............irrespective of whether it is an accurate rendition of the animal is irrelevant to the casual viewer..........its asymmetry draws the eye and spoils the overall image.........as the casual viewer has no knowledge of whether the painting intent was a rendition of the real subject or poor execution of symmetry by the painter............the assumption is poor symmetry in execution by the painter.

This comes down to who you are painting it for.
ie
a photograph of a buck with an uneven rack is accepted in a different way by the viewer than a painting depicting the same subject with that uneven rack.
The photograph is automatically accepted as being an accurate depiction of the subject...........the depiction of the same subject in a painting is not afforded the same assumption of true rendition.
This then comes down to the perspective of who you are painting for:-
- another viewer
- yourself, as a rendition of the actual subject with all its foibles.

Painting for others , unless the subject & its foibles is known to them, has an unsatisfactory but necessary requirement for symmetry for acceptance as a skilled rendition.

Sad but true.

A very thoughtful post by DenisB above, and what he says about symmetry in a painting is absolutely true. For another example, if one was to paint a painting of an elephant with one tusk that veers off at an odd or asymmetrical angle to the other tusk, it would be perceived as a mistake by the artist, even if the elephant in real life really did have asymmetrically angled tusks. However, if the tusks came down at identical and symetrical angles in the painting, but one tusk was broken off shorter than the other, then it would neither be considered a freak of nature nor a mistake by the artist, but simply an elephant with a broken tusk, as many are in real life. As DenisB correctly states, asymmetricality is more easily forgiven in a photograph than in a painting.

In your painting, I assumed the asymmetrical face of the cat to be intentional on your part, but because there were no other obvious asymmetricalities in the painting, I didn't consider it to be an abstract painting. On the other hand, if an artist is obviously highly skilled, and if there are many things in his painting which are obviously asymmetrical, or not an accurate representation, then it would be perceived as intentional by the artist, and would be considered an abstract style of painting.

I have been an artist/painter for nearly 20 years, and the longer I struggle with my own limitations, the less critical I am of the work of others. Without knowing you or what you were trying to achieve, it is hard for me to give you an honest critique.

What I can say is bravo for trying, and bravo for posting it.

As far as the asymmetry is concerned, that doesn't bother me at all. Most heads and faces of living creatures are asymmetric to some degree. You have just used your artistic license (intentionally or not) to emphasize it.

I love the foliage; I've wanted to paint a wall with something like that for a long time, but I can't do it. Keep it up; you've got a talent that God didn't bless me with.