HOME | DD
kinnas — Boxer
Published: 2012-06-08 09:19:07 +0000 UTC; Views: 3282; Favourites: 75; Downloads: 33
Redirect to original
Description
Fight the good fight brotha!Related content
Comments: 7
The colour and tone of this really reminds me of Neil Gaiman's Sandman - especially that one cover, geez. Wish I had a copy at hand so I could remember the artist.
I really like your work, you have this wonderful talent for evoking a mood. It's not just "pretty" or "technically impressive" - it draws a feeling out of the viewer. Which, I suppose, is the definition of "art".
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I really love your style, so paint like! I wish I could colour like that!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
There's a real intuitive and expressive flair about this picture. I love the colors, the motion -- there's really a lot of vibrant movement in this image.
If I may remark about a couple things... it's a bit hard to make out what his right hand is doing. It disappears almost completely into a flattened shadow mass... and thus makes the hand appear eviscerated or that he's even reaching into his chest. The right pec appears like skinned muscle like what you'd find on an ecorche. I don't know if any of this is intentional, but it definitely changes my perception of this image as an action piece into something quite a bit more macabre. I'd either try to work out these potential problem areas a bit more, or make your intention of a macabre piece a little more clear.
Of course, then perhaps it might have been a spur of the moment idea with no real intentions for it.
These are just suggestions though... and I definitely think this is a really fantastic idea with a lot of stunning colors. Great work!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm pretty sure he is lacking the right fist, and it's intentional and part of the picture.
I just don't understand people who make comments like yours. It's obvious from the treatment of the face and other arm that this artist *knows* human anatomy. What makes you think he could possibly slip on such a focal part of the picture? Even the color pulls your eyes towards it. It's intentional. And I disagree that everything has to be "obviously macabre" to work. For me, the opposite is true.
I hope this doesn't sound harsh, I know my disagreeing comments tend to. Just sharing a different opinion.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"I just don't understand people who make comments like yours."
You say that and then hope what you say doesn't sound harsh? Maybe you might understand the same irony in that statement the same way that you read irony into mine.
As for what makes me think he would slip, it appears -- to me -- evident all over the picture. The boxer's left arm has been moved around based on subtractive technique, experimental dots and color associations, a diverse array of texture and grunge brushes with still yet more subtractive lasso selection in preceding layers. The process part of things is evident EVERYWHERE in the work. The intent of the work -- as I see it now -- speaks of process and experiment in tandem with a great rendering ability, but this tells me that the idea is somewhat incomplete.
The process here informs the idea.
Which isn't of itself a bad thing. People make great art from incomplete ideas (or ideas of 'incomplete') all the time. In fact, I remarked that there is a lot of beauty to be found here, especially with this art being in fluid motion as much as it is.
I didn't say 'obviously macabre' (with misquotes) in my comment, let alone that it has to be macabre "to work". I spoke in subjective tense that the work appears macabre as it stands, because this idea of visceral intent is complemented by an intuitive process. This, as opposed to a dispassionate and rational approach.
I don't say this to take a shot at the artist out of nowhere. I LIKE his work. Back in my university days, I used to see paintings like this all the time from my art professors. Usually they were experimental works with tentative self-guidance, with the idea itself not being fully resolved. Nothing wrong with that. I saw many great works arise from incomplete ideas, and many artworks be great art simply for being ideas in motion. But I also learned -- many times over -- that hands are problem areas as well because they occupy so much power, particularity and physical presence. Hands alone can change the entire meaning of the work. (Like it does here.)
I remarked about the hands, because the idea of choosing to defer to an idea of incompleteness /at this particular point in the work/ (being as deliberate and skilled as the artist is) just jumps out at me as a copout, or, with presumed intention, takes me to a very visceral place.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I completely agree that hands are very important in art. This is precisely why it surprises me when people assume *good* artists aren't paying a lot of attention to them. Sure, kids mess hands up all the time, but this is not the case here. This is the *only* reason why I commented, though I regret I did because I didn't need a negatively charged discussion. My bad.
Just to clear out a couple of things: about the macabre part - I didn't claim you said it *has* to be macabre to work, though I see my comment wasn't clear there. I just thought you said "If you wanted it to be macabre, make that a bit more obvious, because right now it's not clear" and I disagree - I like ambiguity in art.
I don't really see how the work process is relevant here - if you mean he worked without a sketch and kept tweaking parts of the picture, yeah, that may well be. But since it's uploaded here, he must've considered it finished somehow.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
