Archive for the Artists Category

Patreon Begins

Posted in Art, Artists, Criticism, Gallery Talk, Games (other), Studio Work, Technique on 19 September, 2018 by endlessslug

Heya folks – I just set up and launched my first Patreon site. I’m hoping to earn just a wee bit of studio money this way.  I’ll be posting developmental work and new work on that site so if you like what I do, check it out and keep on checking.  There’s just so much to do!!

Link to new site:

https://www.patreon.com/CasaDomo

Advertisements

Rebuilding, Preparing

Posted in Art, Artists, Gallery Talk, Studio Work, Technique on 18 September, 2018 by endlessslug

The Slug has a lot going on these days and time is more limited than ever before.  That said, the studio is coming together, but slowly.  For reference, after a very long sabbatical, I’ve decided upon a new body of work, possibly two or so because The Slug can’t just do one…  However, The Slug is also hella broke and getting the materials and space ready to create is a hassle, besides the security of extra funding to keep the psyche clear.  For those of you who actually do fine art, you know that creation doesn’t happen when one is an anxiety ridden mess.  You need clarity, security, and some sense of happiness in order to get anything done.  Broke depressive artist = bad artist.  Don’t believe the hype!

Anyway, I will keep everyone posted as the work continues.  I’m going to contact my old agent soon and see about getting gallery space again, and a friend introduced me to Patreon, so I’ll most likely start that up soon too.  Lots to do.  Really though, the most important thing is the work.  Without that, what’s the point of the rest eh?

Buy stuff.

Slug out.

Work, of the Type I Dislike

Posted in Art, Art Student Handbook, Artists, Contemorary Art, Criticism, Leisure, Literature, Pop-culture, Social Science, Technique on 7 November, 2010 by endlessslug

The slug found himself a job.  It’s one of those jobs that kills all creativity and time, yet kind of pays the bills.  My new workmates like to remind me (constantly) that “it’s money, right?”

Wrong.

Yes, I get paid, but so what?  My interests are broader and I was getting along while also building two different companies.  I was producing, I was beginning a successful climb towards my own agenda of success and quality workmanship.  But now I must toil at a graveyard-shift shit-pile of a job and make way less than the average employee (as I’m considered a “temp”), and get absolutely no new work accomplished.  I know its difficult for a non-artist/writer to understand sometimes, but artists no matter what the type require time, above all, to complete projects.  In fact, we need time just to think and design a project.  We cannot simply sit down for 30 minutes at a time between meals or social events or work and be expected to pump out masterpieces – or anything at all.  The mundane world sees this as “correct” – that now artists and writers must make themselves a “decent” or “honorable” living because the general public believes very little in what we do for them.  And of course, there are artists and writers out there that have really made a terrible image for the rest of us working little and pissing out terrible work for a high profit return (cf Andy Warhol).  I would encourage the public to see artists as carpenters or other construction laborers, and no different, as much as popular artists, or the “artist you know” would like you to think otherwise.  Artists are craftsmen and women like any other, but our work is often situational and based on life experience, not a directly or obviously functional device like a house or car.  This is also not to take away from the artistic elements of the work that other craftsmen do.  I saw a forklift driver the other night whom I felt was a fine artist of truck loading, for example.  The difference between us is only that I (or any other artist) focus on the artistic/aesthetic and secondly on function; just a reverse of the practical consensus.  I wish we could be paid by the hour to create our structures, our homes, our food, our art, but this cannot be.  I don’t blame the public here, I blame artists in conjunction with a cultural mentality that we must all find some sense of uniqueness to consume and compete with.  A mixture of protestant ethic and capitalism, combined with contemporary reliance on spectacle and immediate gratification.  A competition for the shock, as it were, as a means to qualify for a self-defined (yet with immense lacking of experience) sense of personal hard work in the completion of a sub-standard pile of regurgitated sameness steamers.

You can make something new and important and be paid for it.  Relax.

The Slug’s Move is Ended… for now

Posted in Artists on 10 August, 2010 by endlessslug

Ok, I’m all moved! Now for the massive unpacking!

bah.

Letters to the Contemporary Age I

Posted in Art, Artists, Contemorary Art, Criticism, Pop-culture, Social Science with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on 22 July, 2010 by endlessslug

Dear Post-modernism,

Are we done yet?

Have we not underwhelmed the intellectual world and utterly confused (for no reason) the general public enough to move on?  Can we put you to rest and nail the coffin shut so that no culture in the future will ever stoop to such a low cycle in art?  Early man was not even so bold as to make art entirely for himself.  I’m tired, so tired, of walking into supposedly “high art” galleries and uttering only “what a dick” to each exhibit.  Whatever happened to paintings which somebody wanted to buy because they were aesthetically pleasing to the individual and pleasant to display in public?  What’s so wrong with semi-nude nymphs feeding fountains in my front yard?  Post-modernism, is it still necessary to demonstrate the modern artists’ complete lack of knowledge of anything other than art trend and con-artistry?  When did artists become professional assassins of knowledge and thieves of culture?  When will we return to the days where a painter could talk to his or her ancestors or descendants about everyday things?  I recall a time when I could paint a pear and have it mean nothing else but “pear”; although that pear always said much more than that in complex understanding.  It meant more exhaustively: a pear which is there – a pear which is tangible, edible, tasty, delightful; a pear I want and will always want.  A pear my descendants will want and will say, “what a great pear, I understand that my ancestors enjoyed pears as much as I do.  I enjoy this painting.”  The funny thing is, Post-modernism, is that I hate pears.  But I can paint what it must be like to enjoy such a thing.  I see others eat them all the time.  About 50% of the lunch table in my old high school had pears for lunch every day.  But I explore what I hate about pears that others enjoy – and I paint pears for them.

And when did you shift from being about French Socialistic ideas about power relationships and into this self-righteous, selfish disaster all about yourself entirely?  “I, I, I, I, I, Me, Me, Me, Me, Me” – Shut up already, Post-modernism!  We ought to want our descendants to understand something about our times, sure, but in general, not specifically about “my time” as a human in this age.  We are part of a great lineage, a chain of kinship like everyone else.  All artists ought to spend time among non-western villagers.  Make things with them.  Learn how to make art for people, but not community art – this is for idiots (i.e., muralists).   Community art is lifeless and limited, like a tourist photograph, and is among the worst kind of you, Post-modernism.

So, are we done? Can we move on? Can we make distinctions between Modernism, Structuralism, Post-Structuralism, Post-Modernism, and Post-Post-Modernism?  Do we need a new “-ism” to describe this contemporary black hole of shock and self-centered-ness?  Can we paint beautiful things again and not gross, disgusting shock-value trash?  How is shock a power relationship? Because it affects people of all socio-economic and cultural levels? Sure, but you did not have to waste 50 years of fine art and artists on telling us this when it could have been simply written down in an article on a shelf, instead.

Sincerely,

Endless Slug

Busy Bees and “Art Students, Please!”

Posted in Art, Artists, Studio Work, Technique with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on 14 April, 2010 by endlessslug

Hi all, the Slug has been pretty busy as of late running some business-end things and working on some new projects so I haven’t been able to write as much as I had intended.  I have a few saved posts ready for rainy days but I don’t believe the time is quite right…

With that said, I’ll leave this post short but I will add a sort of teaser of things to come:

Top 10 Things Art Students Should ALWAYS Refrain (that mean’s “do not do this” kiddies) From Painting:

1 – Aliens.  No one cares man.

2 – Pot leaves.  It’s just advertising.

3 – Any other drug references.  If it’s a cry for help, go elsewhere.  If not, stop using and experience the world a bit and see if you still want to paint this.

4 – Crosses, thorn-crowns, crucifixions.  Do you work for your church?  Even great historical painters ALL hated painting this stuff.

5 – Black female jesus.  This isn’t profound, it’s stupid.  Why not paint actual religious females with your g/f’s image in them? Oh wait, there aren’t any. What?

6 – Girlfriends.  Note, I do not say boyfriends – why? cause who paints that?

7 – Erotic art.  Why? because for students, it’s just porn and nobody ever tells them otherwise.  Skills first people.

8 – Famous people.  We’ve seen it. Stop.

9 – Animal portraits.  Seriously get the fuck out of the house.

10 – Your friend’s band promo.  [facial expression of ‘geh?’]

We’ll add an addendum list…

Top 10 Ways in which Art Students Should Stop Working (e.g., the technique guide):

1 – Never bring anime into an art studio.  We’ll kill you.

2 – Stop using ‘graphitti’.  To artists this translates to: “ignorant fuck who thinks themselves better than 40000 years of art history.” Cave paintings are better than gra-shitty art any day.

3 – Cray-pas.  What, are you 7?

4 – Painting with ‘non-traditional’ tools such as leaves, stems, twigs…  it’s all about the process right? No.  It really isn’t.  How unnatural is a sable brush?

5 – Stop sticking things to canvases.  It really looks like shit.

6 – Stop sewing into canvas.  Make a quilt, don’t paint.

7 – Don’t use hemp canvas.  Hemp is useless for anything, don’t believe the hype, listen to your painter ancestors who have tried it numerous times with no useful results.

8 – Don’t let your canvas peek through your paint for that ‘painted’ look.  It’s a painting, ass.

9 – Quit “expressing” all over the place.  I certainly don’t want to clean that up.

10 – Quit using perishables.  Potatoes strung up over a piano?  Dude, “Fuck” and “Off”.

-Endless Slug

Quit Painting Other People’s Art

Posted in Art, Artists, Contemorary Art, Criticism, Gallery Talk, Literature, Studio Work, Technique with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on 16 March, 2010 by endlessslug

Here’s an issue I see frequently in the world of art today from the lowly student, to the returning retiree, to the professional: Re-creating a work of art into the artist’s medium resulting in a lifeless copy of something once beautiful and meaningful.

Do you know what I’m referring to? Have you seen/created works like this?

I’ll contain this discussion to my fellow painters:

O BITTER MUSE!

The most common form of copy-painting folks often come across is people who paint from photographs.  Yes, yes, I know, many painters and especially illustrators use photographs frequently as reference in the construction of an image.  A reference.  Say it with me now, “R E F E R E N C E”. A painter knows how to draw the image already, the photo helps in the small details when a painter feels they need to recall more specific information.  Far too often, we see students and especially pseudo-professionals create a work entirely from a photograph.  A trained eye quickly picks up that photos have been used.  Why should we not do this? The work ends up lifeless – only a copy.  Some artists can make some aspect of these works interesting: Watercolorists can sometimes create interesting effects in color application and transparencies, drawers can create different effects in line weights and contrasts, and the painter can shift a whole mood in addition to the previous two effects.  But these changes are often pedantic and cannot detract from the image as a photo.  We can always tell the photo-painting because of the inclusion of excessive details revealed by looking at a pictoral reference, which are different from the movement details we find with live or imagined objects.  The photo is a static instance of an event and completely unsuitable for a painting.  Photo-paintings also lean towards the development of bad habits: restrictive drawing space, restrictive palette, attempts at color which result in drab local color arrangements, and lack of experience in drawing live models/scenes.  As painters, we must, at all cost, SEE (with our personal eyes) what a subject looks like – how it moves – how light plays off edges and curves, how lines appear and disappear, how color plays in the shadows, and so on.  A photo cannot reproduce this; neither does video.

A couple of simple rules:

Stop and change your idea immediately if you plan on painting any of the following:

1) Family photos

2) “Found” photos

3) Pet Photos

4) Cellphone Pix

5) Website caps

6) Cropped areas of a photo in an attempt to do something “different”

7) Paintings of famous photographs or paintings of work you did in your photo class that you got that A- on.

8 ) Anything your friends say you should paint.

Because:

A) These are all terrible ideas and have been done by every wannabe post-mod contemporary shit student artist for the last 10+ years.

B) It will result in a terrible painting that no one wants to see.

C) They are boring.

D) They are artistic Plagiarism!

Artistic Plagiarism

Sometime in the last 30 years, some idiot decided it was “OK” to “express yourself” in any way you feel as long as you are being yourself. You, you, you, you, me, me, me, me, blah.  Once upon a time, a favorite old art professor told me, “paint from a photo and you’re committing plagiarism.”  The shitbag art students in the class with me argued with this guy for weeks about that statement.  Partly, he said it so these kids would say something and begin to argue to make them academic artists, but he was also correct.  The photo itself is already a record of an event and it’s own aesthetic creation.  It might be more historical document than art, and the ‘artist’ might decide to elevate the work to some sort of western notion of fine art, but the work is already done – why paint that?  Just frame it and put it on the wall.  When you paint it, you’ve just copied someone else’s work – maybe even your own.  To him, and to me, it’s no different than taking words from a published document and using them as if you said them yourself.  And like the trained literature/composition instructor, the trained artist can tell right away when the work is a photo-painting, thus knowing it was plagiarized.  I believe a little part of that intuition exists in all viewers of the work which somewhat universally makes the work uninteresting – except to the Sunday-painter whose mind was just blown: “Wow! I can paint my dog too! and I have the perfect picture of him in a little pink sweater I knitted”.  Thanks photo-painter for shitting up the art world one person more.

So, in conclusion:

I> Don’t paint from photos or any other copy-reference; draw from life

II> If you do paint from photos, DO SOMETHING WITH YOUR PAINTING that the photo does not or can not.  If you constantly strive to improve upon the photo and instead work more from life, one day magic will happen… you will no longer need it.

*** ADDENDUM ***

That was quick – I got bombarded with private and semi-public arguments within minutes of this post.  On one hand, it’s good to see people are reading me, on the other, I wish people would argue less, listen, and learn.

I should clarify, however: Artists of all forms know that human minds are repositories of experiences and knowledge manipulated by intuition and abstract forethought resulting in limitless creativity, thanks to Noam Chomsky and linguistic anthropologists everywhere, boo to modern philosophers and psychologists.  My argument about ‘not’ painting other people’s work is a plea for artists to construct their own work – which they can certainly do.  We all learn some painting from copying masters and other artists, this is normal behavior, but copy-learning must be tempered with real painting as well and eventually, the student moves away from the copies to become their own master.

My argument is for those artists in galleries downtown, right now, who dare put a photo-painting on a wall.  The “why” about this problem might be fleeting for most non-artists though.  The major problem with photo-paintings is that they are terrible paintings, lacking energy, lacking style, lacking composition, idea, complexity – name it, and these paintings do not have it.  The best one can achieve is small variations of technique – but who cares? The average viewer doesn’t give a shit, they want to see a nice painting, not a dentist’s office visit.  It reminds me about times when I’d go see movies with film student friends.  The movies might have totally sucked, but the film student goes on and on about the direction, lighting, and so on, amidst a flood of angry or confused movie-goers.  This is crap, and a hallmark of the postmodern world we live in where things are now created for exclusive groups, instead of larger audiences.  The longevity and usefulness of personal art is temporary, fleeting, and ultimately meaningless.  We don’t expect every painting, film, or pop-song to be amazing for centuries – of course not – but why don’t we have long-lasting works anymore?  This is the question I raise and attempt to locate data for.  We also do paint for ourselves.  I have a number of personal drawings and paintings that will never be shown.  Not because I’m ashamed, but because that the art is not for a public – there’s no need to show it.  I have a responsibility as a fine artist to show only work which I believe a public would like to see and needs.

Here is a painting exercise for folks – I’ll use my own work.  <gasp> no he didn’ – Sure, I did use photo reference in my earlier days; I too tried painting from photos.  I learned the lesson first-hand that photo paintings lack something which model-based paintings have.  I have since learned how to use a photo for a painting, not as the painting.

Which of the following paintings was created from a photo?  Which of the following paintings was painted with photo-reference?  Then criticize and analyze. I don’t have enough portraits scanned in for a good data set, apologies, so I’m selecting three portraits and two landscapes.

-The Endless Slug