UJRefugees.net

disco.moon wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:32 pm

Stapes wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:29 pm

disco.moon wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:27 pm I FUCKING LOVE JACKSON POLLACK.

Reservoir Dog wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:26 pm

Reservoir Dog wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 3:27 pm

See.....I just don't get it.....lol

I can see why people don't like it or get it.

I look at it and see madness. Being overwhelmed. And his works are thick, heavy paint. He was a very troubled man too.

And probably pee and blood. Maybe feces too.

necronomous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:14 pm

nerd_alert wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 4:01 am

disco.moon wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 1:14 am Judith beheading Holofernes 1598 - 1602 (?)

Caravagio

I really like Caravaggio. Really interesting play between light and dark.

You may want to make a note... 24 Nov 2021, PBS, Secrets of the Dead, "The Caravaggio Heist"

https://drawpaintacademy.com/chiaroscuro/

Agreed. One of my favorites

I'm guessing that you guys also like Tintoretto.

disco.moon wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:36 pm

Reservoir Dog wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:23 pm
I'm guessing that you guys also like Tintoretto.

This was the one I pictured when you said that. His take on the Last Supper

Reservoir Dog wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:23 pm

necronomous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 5:14 pm

nerd_alert wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 4:01 am

disco.moon wrote: ↑Sat Oct 23, 2021 1:14 am Judith beheading Holofernes 1598 - 1602 (?)

Caravagio

I really like Caravaggio. Really interesting play between light and dark.

You may want to make a note... 24 Nov 2021, PBS, Secrets of the Dead, "The Caravaggio Heist"

https://drawpaintacademy.com/chiaroscuro/

Agreed. One of my favorites

I'm guessing that you guys also like Tintoretto.

Why yes I do.

disco.moon wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 11:49 am

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:39 am What blows me away is the realism of the painters during the Renaissance period. I mean, how is that possible? You can even see the textures of their skin.

I agree. The amount of talent that people had back then is amazing, whether it's paintings or sculptures. The sculpture of "the rape of persephone by Hades" is a prime example of the details from long ago.

Damn, look at that. Can even see the impression of his fingers on her flesh. I mean, how do you do that? Whether a painting or sculpture.

I know almost nothing about paintings, sculpturing etc (or the lingo). But how do you go from Bas-relief (If that's the right word) like the Egyptians where every person, animal, object is portrayed from the side view (showing motions like running or war scenes) to a couple of centuries of Renaissance evolution where you can see the smallest details down to the skin tones? Or a painting that no matter where you stand watching it, the eyes follow you. I mean, WTH? I can't even begin to understand how that was accomplished.

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:15 pm I know almost nothing about paintings, sculpturing etc (or the lingo). But how do you go from Bas-relief (If that's the right word) like the Egyptians where every person, animal, object is portrayed from the side view (showing motions like running or war scenes) to a couple of centuries of Renaissance evolution where you can see the smallest details down to the skin tones? Or a painting that no matter where you stand watching it, the eyes follow you. I mean, WTH? I can't even begin to understand how that was accomplished.

Well, the Egyptian side view stuff was thousands of years ago and the Renaissance was hundreds of years ago. So, they had some time to perfect it.

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 6:49 pm

disco.moon wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 11:49 am

Damn, look at that. Can even see the impression of his fingers on her flesh. I mean, how do you do that? Whether a painting or sculpture.

They made a mold out of plastic and then poured the molten marble into the mold.
It's completely unknown how they could do that in a painting.

necronomous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:19 pm

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:15 pm I know almost nothing about paintings, sculpturing etc (or the lingo). But how do you go from Bas-relief (If that's the right word) like the Egyptians where every person, animal, object is portrayed from the side view (showing motions like running or war scenes) to a couple of centuries of Renaissance evolution where you can see the smallest details down to the skin tones? Or a painting that no matter where you stand watching it, the eyes follow you. I mean, WTH? I can't even begin to understand how that was accomplished.

Well, the Egyptian side view stuff was thousands of years ago and the Renaissance was hundreds of years ago. So, they had some time to perfect it.

how old are those clay sculptures of armies of men they have uncovered in china? and the sphynx wasn't a side view sketch.

Animal wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:23 pm

necronomous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:19 pm

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:15 pm I know almost nothing about paintings, sculpturing etc (or the lingo). But how do you go from Bas-relief (If that's the right word) like the Egyptians where every person, animal, object is portrayed from the side view (showing motions like running or war scenes) to a couple of centuries of Renaissance evolution where you can see the smallest details down to the skin tones? Or a painting that no matter where you stand watching it, the eyes follow you. I mean, WTH? I can't even begin to understand how that was accomplished.

Well, the Egyptian side view stuff was thousands of years ago and the Renaissance was hundreds of years ago. So, they had some time to perfect it.

how old are those clay sculptures of armies of men they have uncovered in china? and the sphynx wasn't a side view sketch.

He was speaking about the side views to the Renaissance in more or less the "painting" type look. As for sculpting, the improvement was actually quite a bit. The sculpting technique is greatly different. Just look at body proportions. The details, the anatomy, even the cleanliness of the carving.

Like I said, I know almost nothing about the history. But wasn't the main revolution in the Renaissance the "invention" of Perspective?

that's probably when they actually perfected how it was used. and began to teach it.

the greek's and romans used a lot of perspective in their architecture, although they had no idea what it was. they just knew what looked more pleasing to the eye. the distance between shapes and such. they also figured out that if you made columns completely vertical and symetrical from top to bottom, then from a distance they looked fatter at the top. In order to overcome this optical illusion, they began to make columns fatter at the bottom and thinner at the top so that from a distance they looked parallel and uniform. they finally found that making the "bulge" the most at about eye level was actually the perfect solution. they did all kinds of tricks like this to over come optical illusions caused by perspective at distances.

Animal wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:23 pm

necronomous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:19 pm

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:15 pm I know almost nothing about paintings, sculpturing etc (or the lingo). But how do you go from Bas-relief (If that's the right word) like the Egyptians where every person, animal, object is portrayed from the side view (showing motions like running or war scenes) to a couple of centuries of Renaissance evolution where you can see the smallest details down to the skin tones? Or a painting that no matter where you stand watching it, the eyes follow you. I mean, WTH? I can't even begin to understand how that was accomplished.

Well, the Egyptian side view stuff was thousands of years ago and the Renaissance was hundreds of years ago. So, they had some time to perfect it.

how old are those clay sculptures of armies of men they have uncovered in china? and the sphynx wasn't a side view sketch.

The terracotta army

https://www.worldhistory.org/Terracotta_Army/

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:33 pm Like I said, I know almost nothing about the history. But wasn't the main revolution in the Renaissance the "invention" of Perspective?

That's where they put it to better use, sure. But the sheer volume of paintings and techniques is really way too much to list.

necronomous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:19 pm

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:15 pm I know almost nothing about paintings, sculpturing etc (or the lingo). But how do you go from Bas-relief (If that's the right word) like the Egyptians where every person, animal, object is portrayed from the side view (showing motions like running or war scenes) to a couple of centuries of Renaissance evolution where you can see the smallest details down to the skin tones? Or a painting that no matter where you stand watching it, the eyes follow you. I mean, WTH? I can't even begin to understand how that was accomplished.

Well, the Egyptian side view stuff was thousands of years ago and the Renaissance was hundreds of years ago. So, they had some time to perfect it.

Yeah I get the Egyptian bas-relief ( if that's the right word) was ancient, but even deep into the Middle Ages, painting still seem to be side views or maybe quarter front views. But then Boom- 2 centuries or so of Renaissance painting evolution changed everything. Amazing.

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:44 pm

necronomous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:19 pm

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:15 pm I know almost nothing about paintings, sculpturing etc (or the lingo). But how do you go from Bas-relief (If that's the right word) like the Egyptians where every person, animal, object is portrayed from the side view (showing motions like running or war scenes) to a couple of centuries of Renaissance evolution where you can see the smallest details down to the skin tones? Or a painting that no matter where you stand watching it, the eyes follow you. I mean, WTH? I can't even begin to understand how that was accomplished.

Well, the Egyptian side view stuff was thousands of years ago and the Renaissance was hundreds of years ago. So, they had some time to perfect it.

Yeah I get the Egyptian bas-relief ( if that's the right word) was ancient, but even deep into the Middle Ages, painting still seem to be side views or maybe quarter front views. But then Boom- 2 centuries or so of Renaissance painting evolution changed everything.

Well not quite. You just had a time where the arts weren't completely supported, to a time where it mandated as part of kingly decree. But you should look at middle ages paintings. Its more than just side views. Granted the anatomy aspect was meh, but it wasn't just side views.

Michaelangelo - Pieta. This is the mother mary holding her crucified son. This is just fucking incredible. He is as limp as a dish rag. And look how complicated her dress is.





you can open the image in a new tab to get higher resolution.

necronomous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:48 pm

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:44 pm

necronomous wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:19 pm

CentralTexasCrude wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 7:15 pm I know almost nothing about paintings, sculpturing etc (or the lingo). But how do you go from Bas-relief (If that's the right word) like the Egyptians where every person, animal, object is portrayed from the side view (showing motions like running or war scenes) to a couple of centuries of Renaissance evolution where you can see the smallest details down to the skin tones? Or a painting that no matter where you stand watching it, the eyes follow you. I mean, WTH? I can't even begin to understand how that was accomplished.

Well, the Egyptian side view stuff was thousands of years ago and the Renaissance was hundreds of years ago. So, they had some time to perfect it.

Yeah I get the Egyptian bas-relief ( if that's the right word) was ancient, but even deep into the Middle Ages, painting still seem to be side views or maybe quarter front views. But then Boom- 2 centuries or so of Renaissance painting evolution changed everything.

Well not quite. You just had a time where the arts weren't completely supported, to a time where it mandated as part of kingly decree. But you should look at middle ages paintings. Its more than just side views. Granted the anatomy aspect was meh, but it wasn't just side views.

OK Thanks

disco.moon wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:42 pm

Animal wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:29 pm Michaelangelo - Pieta. This is the mother mary holding her crucified son. This is just fucking incredible. He is as limp as a dish rag. And look how complicated her dress is.





you can open the image in a new tab to get higher resolution.

Wow. That's incredible. I love sculpted fabrics. I know nothing about Michaelangelo.

he's the guy that was paid by the pope to lie on his back and paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. He also sculpted the famous statue "The David".

Vincent Van Gogh - Cafe Terrace at Night.

I'm not sure why I was googling "The Last Supper" several weeks ago. I think it had to do with some theories I heard in that Tom Hanks Movie "The "Da Vinci Code" and whether a woman was in the picture, etc. Anyway, once in the rabbit hole, this painting came up. And there are a lot of people that think this painting was Van Gogh's interpretation of "The Last Supper". The guy in white in the middle being Jesus, etc. There's a shit load of theories involving The Last Supper.

disco.moon wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:42 pm Wow. That's incredible. I love sculpted fabrics.

open image in another tab for a super high res.


Push through the tourists in the Roman piazza, dodge the chaotic traffic, and duck inside the church of Santa Maria della Vittoria, and there, in the Cornaro Chapel, you’ll see it: The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa.

A swooning nun, eyes closed and lips apart, yields herself to the gaze of a young male angel. His hand pulls open the robe around her chest, his spear sharp and ready to thrust. To the left and right, high in the chapel walls, male members of the Cornaro family, carved in the same white marble, peer down from theatre boxes like enthusiastic voyeurs.

You don’t have to be a Freudian to see something suspicious here. The imagery is frankly erotic. Is the expression on Saint Teresa’s face really one of religious ecstasy? Or, if one looks closely and skeptically, does it not rather resemble the look of coital bliss?

Shocking and blasphemous, you might think. But this is not the fantasy of the sculptor. What Bernini, that great master of Italian baroque, offers in The Ecstasy is a very literal interpretation of an event that Teresa of Avila herself described.

A pioneer of Catholic reform, later declared a Saint, Teresa experienced dramatic mystical visions throughout her life. In her autobiography, ’The Life of Teresa of Jesus’, she uses visceral language to express them, including one in which an angel repeatedly thrust a golden lance into her heart:

‘I saw in his [the angel’s] hand a long spear of gold, and at the iron’s point there seemed to be a little fire. He appeared to me to be thrusting it at times into my heart, and to pierce my very entrails; when he drew it out, he seemed to draw them out also, and to leave me all on fire with a great love of God. The pain was so great, that it made me moan; and yet so surpassing was the sweetness of this excessive pain, that I could not wish to be rid of it.’

It was this passage that provided the basis for Bernini’s sculpture. The erotic imagery was not his but Teresa’s. But in portraying Teresa’s spiritual ecstasy so physically, Bernini offers a powerful challenge to our conventional understanding of two different forms of love.

‘Agape’, the Greek word normally used for love or charity in the bible, is usually characterised as selfless, giving, and unconditional. By contrast, ‘eros’ or erotic desire, has often been seen in Christianity as possessive, grasping, and selfish. The antithesis between the two was formulated most sharply by Lutheran theologian Anders Nygren: Christian love good; erotic desire bad.

But in The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa, eros and agape come together: a scandalous conjunction that has deep roots in Christian theology. The Hebrew prophets, for example, often compared the relationship of God and Israel to that of husband and wife. In the New Testament, the portrayal of Christ as groom and the church as bride meant marriage itself was as a sacrament – a physical sign of a spiritual grace.

The explicit sexual imagery of the biblical Song of Songs, a poem full of breasts and thighs, was frequently allegorised in the medieval church to describe the yearning and panting of the soul for God. The Syrian theologian and monk known as Pseudo-Dionysius spoke quite openly of the erotic desire for God. Even Saint Augustine, that most questionable theologian of human sexuality, thought true Christian love needed to be a synthesis of both agape and eros.

Sexual imagery thus permeates christian spirituality. Teresa of Avila’s younger contemporary, Saint John of the Cross, was even more daring in his expression, with mystical writings which read as homoerotic in character. But there are similar instances right through Christian tradition. Repelled by aspects of Wesleyan hymnody, the great historian of the English working classes, EP Thompson, complained of ‘the perverted eroticism of methodist imagery’. In contemporary Christian choruses, the language of desire, and the longing to yield, to be touched, and to be filled by God, is rife.

Perhaps we should be neither surprised nor shocked. We are erotic beings, embodied spirits, structured through desire. If we want to find language to describe our desire to be united with God, what could be more natural than to turn to that which generates our deepest experience of emotional intimacy and physical ecstasy?

The sexual provides the most powerful metaphor for the spiritual. The daring brilliance of Bernini’s sculpture is to make that connection so explicit.

disco.moon wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 9:16 pm

Animal wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 8:57 pm Vincent Van Gogh - Cafe Terrace at Night.

I'm not sure why I was googling "The Last Supper" several weeks ago. I think it had to do with some theories I heard in that Tom Hanks Movie "The "Da Vinci Code" and whether a woman was in the picture, etc. Anyway, once in the rabbit hole, this painting came up. And there are a lot of people that think this painting was Van Gogh's interpretation of "The Last Supper". The guy in white in the middle being Jesus, etc. There's a shit load of theories involving The Last Supper.

Wicked! I've not seen this or have and forgotten.

I think Mary Magdalene was at the last supper (but that's just cuz I want her to have been)

She jumped out of the cake.

The person to the left (jesus' right side) of Jesus is who many think was Mary Magdalene.

and notice how the disciples are in groups of three. there is a long list of things people have hypothesized out of this painting.

its clearly a representation of single point perspective.

Animal wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 9:31 pm

The person to the left (jesus' right side) of Jesus is who many think was Mary Magdalene.

and notice how the disciples are in groups of three. there is a long list of things people have hypothesized out of this painting.

its clearly a representation of single point perspective.

No beer. Would not attend.