Visit this website and make a painting ala Jackson Pollock. Similar to the Picasso website someone posted a while ago, yet with more color and less form. I think I could zone out for a while on this thing. Be sure to click your mouse to change colors.
Mine almost looked more like a Kandinsky than a Pollock.
Cool.
Posted by Palliard (Member # 8109) on :
I never understood the fascination with Jackson Pollock. Surely any idiot can randomly drool paint on a canvas?
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Frankly, I rank Pollock way above Warhol, but, uh, yeah.
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
quote:Originally posted by Storm Saxon: Frankly, I rank Pollock way above Warhol, but, uh, yeah.
A M E N ! ! !
Posted by Coccinelle (Member # 5832) on :
quote:Originally posted by Palliard: I never understood the fascination with Jackson Pollock. Surely any idiot can randomly drool paint on a canvas?
Not just any idiot did it. He did.
edit: Fun link! I'm bookmarking it now.
Posted by SC Carver (Member # 8173) on :
I don't know about an idiot, but a drunk for sure.
To me Pollock and Warhol were about the same. Both were pushing the boundaries of art at the time. Out of their context neither makes whole lot of since.
Of course Pollock's in person do look nice, very relaxing. This thread has inspired me, I think I'll go home an paint one to match my couch.
Rothko was the true scam artist if you ask me.
Posted by SC Carver (Member # 8173) on :
I don't know about an idiot, but a drunk for sure.
To me Pollock and Warhol were about the same. Both were pushing the boundaries of art at the time. Out of context neither makes whole lot of since.
Of course Pollock's in person do look nice, very relaxing. This thread has inspired me, I think I'll go home and paint one to match my couch.
Rothko was the true scam artist if you ask me.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Palliard: I never understood the fascination with Jackson Pollock. Surely any idiot can randomly drool paint on a canvas?
Art is often graded by aesthetic, and there was something of an aesthetic in Pollock work. Some sort of an incredibly abstract and almost fractal visual persuasion.
Pollock's work is very deliberate and intentional, the result of some sort of a frenetic and obsessive haze. Literally, he would work in a trance state, created in a concerted effort to get the canvas to reflect what he had going on in his head.
It's half of why blind paint drool doesn't necessarily make a Pollock painting happen. The other half is probably due to the interestingly natural and fractal result of his strangely calculated motions: he would often create black anchor layers which were designed to frame and contrast new layers; his drips were treading ground between organized form, negative space, and chaos.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)