It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
I always struggled with a question that I often fail to really have any master answer for me. Why do we still paint realism, when we have the incredible photography and even photoshop and other programs that can enhance photos in many possible forms? I gravitate towards paintings by the old masters, the impressionists. From the impressionist time one of my favorite works is done by John Singer Sargent... but soon thereafter photography became a thing, and before you knew it photography can perfectly represent a figure, a city, a seascape in total reality of the lens... even further came video, and with video not only could we see the person, city, or the sea, but we could also hear their voices... Picasso himself struggled with this, and eluded to abstraction since to him photography had replaced represental painting. How do you feel about the subject, perhaps it can be a future video of yours tackling this question from one artist to another... why do we still paint portraits? Is there still a market for it? Even harder to fathom is why paint scenes of a city or a beach, when one can buy a big photograph, frame it, and hang it for $100.00 instead of paying a master artist in the 1000s... I know there is a certain level of class and awe by a painting, but is there not more than that? Id love to hear your response