Deep Thoughts about Art

Other hobbies and interests.

Moderators: windsong, cj-, BlueGobi, Moderators, Frame

Go ahead and click but don't stop there. Share. Please.

Color Theory
0
No votes
The Gaze
0
No votes
Preconscious, subcoscious, cognative vision
2
67%
Structure of the image
0
No votes
Semiotics of the image
0
No votes
Art History
0
No votes
Art Theory
0
No votes
Art critisism
0
No votes
Material and Techniques
1
33%
 
Total votes: 3

Frame
Moderator
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:25 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Deep Thoughts about Art

Postby Frame » Tue Jun 25, 2013 7:16 pm

Ok; I don't have to ask who of you out there have dark thoughts, or racing thoughts, or uncontrolled thoughts. I see you all out there; you can put your hands down. And I'm sure a fair amount of you creative people have those thought about art.

But how about deep thoughts. How many of you are interested in the fundamental roots of perception, particularly visual perception. It's not and idle question. I have a couple reasons why the topic is important to me.

One reason is that our perceptions are all we really know of the world. How we process our perceptions makes us who we are. Clearly separating the perception from the process can help us see how our minds are making 'sense' (or not) and how we might be able to alter how we understand our world.

Another reason is that I have aspirations (perhaps delusions) of one day being a recognized artist. It's not a career choice a talk of in public, but it's real. And I think any aspiring creator should be wrestling with: how they perceive, how potential patrons perceive, and how other great artists perceive.

There is a huge amount of data out there from neurological wiring, optical recognition, visual philosophy, psychology, Semiotics,... Have you been looking? What are you looking for? What have you found?

So how about it? Who studies visual perception?

jj
Posts: 411
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:24 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Postby jj » Thu Jul 04, 2013 4:56 pm

I wasn't quite sure what I was voting on, but I study psychology, and visual perception is a big topic in our cognitive modules. Cognitive psychology is one of our core modules and really interesting! Sometimes I freak myself out with it if i think about perception too much, existence scares me sometimes. I'd say more about what I've learned and read but I don't remember any of it.. hence why I am repeating the year :)

But yeah it does really interest me too.

I want to contribute more to this but words and thoughts fail me at the mo ;)

jj
Raise your words, not voice. It is rain that grows flowers, not thunder. --Rumi

Frame
Moderator
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:25 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Visual Perception

Postby Frame » Mon Jul 08, 2013 6:52 am

One of the elements of visual perception that I find fascinating is concept of levels of meaning (or cognition). It's not something I learned in psych. class. As a matter of fact I think it's research new enough, that it didn't exist when I was in school.

Experimental research on neuro-processing to show that perception exists in layers (or levels) of meaning where; at the most fundamental their exists a stream of sensory data devoid of meaning and at the top level there is a conceptual cognitive landscape devoid of sensory data. The pure sensory data is subconscious and cannot be remembered. The conceptual constructs are consciously held (and remembered) beliefs.

Various mental processing occurs at different level on the sensory data to organize and attach meaning; and at some point these cognitive constructs reach a level which become conscious. We become aware of them. But there is a huge amount of subconscious partially processed sensory data which affects more archaic parts of our brain without our being aware of it.
Winston Churchill was a pig headed war-mongering fight-loving Statesman who believed in negotiating as far as you could lob a bomb even though he practiced his speeches (every noun, verb, period and pause) for about an hour per sentence.

He was also a chronic depressive painter (hmm, I wonder what Van Gogh might have done as Prime Minister) who was out of sync with his time so they ignored him. Then he was in perfect sync with his time so they made him Admiral and Prime Minister. Then he was out of sync again and they left him behind.

He struggled with all of this and in the process helped win back the free world from eminent darkness.

I like his remark; “ Success is the ability to go from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm.”

4EverMe
Posts: 927
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:50 am
Location: Washington State

Postby 4EverMe » Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:17 am

Hi frame,
How are you? I just now stumbled upon this.
Well, I definately lack any correct terminology as it pertains to art! But the words 'visual perception' interest me because I am an artist in my own areas of creativity. There are innumerable opinions on what defines or qualifies as art, in the general public alone. That said, an artist should definately focus on the principles of 'Visual Perception.'. Most people who are gifted with artistic talent are naturally inclined to see what others miss. Therefore, they have a pretty good headstart.

So, what is my humble idea of Visual Perception? Take a painting, for example. When someone eyes a canvas, they first spot the subject. But what is viewed by the conscious/subconscious mind, is also the whole ENTIRETY of what they see: the shadowing, the lighting/highlighting, an interesting backdrop, beautiful color contrasts. Lighting--Important. The main 'subject' should be complimented by what is displayed in the background etc. I could go on and on! Tried
When life throws UA lemon, throw the dang thing back.

4EverMe
Posts: 927
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:50 am
Location: Washington State

Postby 4EverMe » Wed Jul 10, 2013 3:39 am

The very most one can do is find what interests you the most. (subject/object matter) and put your heart and soul into what you love! To me, this is what usually turns out best. Not so much the rhetoric. Learning about art and all its different forms is helpful, but it's what you create from the depths of your very core that's most important. People will see it and FEEL it.

Thomas Kinkade was what I'd call a 'core artist.' He was a painter of light. No one was going to stop him! .Pisses me off that there were snooty critics who spoke against his work! Who are they but..maybe jealous? From what I've seen, the most recognized painters/artists are those who work from the soul. Bob Ross? Just another example. So, two well-loved artists are now deceased. Others out there? They'll pop up.
When life throws UA lemon, throw the dang thing back.

Frame
Moderator
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:25 am
Location: Pennsylvania

Core Artists

Postby Frame » Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:58 am

I'm not so sure I would call Thomas Kinkade a core artist. I think once he found a successful style he pushed it for all it was worth. I have to say I love his work though. And he certainly is a painter of light. His compositions are also exquisite.

In my opinion people continue to grow and change whether they want to or not. If they are painting from the core, their work changes with them. I think the criticism and his struggles later in life were a both a result of his huge success. The American industrial engine puts huge pressure on people like Kinkade to rework and rework old successful themes (just like the music business) and can stifle a person. And what do rich stifled people do? They act out. It looks to me like that's where the criticism comes from.

But I could do a lot worse than catch his style in my photographs.


Return to “Other/Miscellaneous Interests”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests