Quote (Tanner)

Very stunning work, but I can only give so much gratitude towards hyper-realism... 90% of his work I guarantee is straight from a zoomed in photograph, working block by block. It takes skill, but not creativity. I don't truly see it as a painting.... Might as well be a photograph in my eyes. It doesn't have texture, or visible signs that it was created with his hands..

Quote (Britt)

Though I get what you're saying I don't really think it's a fair assessment. Don't you base a lot of your paintings off of photographs? Even if you're not trying to mimic it in a photo-realistic way, I don't think there's really a line that makes something more creative than something else. This article kind of describes why I think photo-realism is cool: http://artsnapper.com/artist-paint-photos-hyperrealism/

Quote (Nate)

I think it might be that it's easier to fathom something that has fewer brushstrokes because of how our brains work. When we can see the work put into it we can relate to it more, but with hyperrealism it's so detailed we can't fathom how long it takes, and our brain equates it with the click of a shutter, because it looks that real. So we can brush it off easier, but really, it takes much more dedication than anything else.

Quote (Tanner)

I understand that hyperrealism takes skill, and a lot of it, but I personally just don't see them as paintings... Technically they're paintings... But when 100% of the painting is from a single photograph, I cant see that as art. Like I said previously, if you're going to paint directly from a photo, why not hang the photograph ? Painting it doesn't really serve a " purpose " in my eyes. Yes I've painted from photos, but most of the time its combined or manipulated. If not its solely for study purposes. I guess it also depends on how you were trained. Artists will always disagree.

Quote (Cody)

Interesting discussion going on here. I certainly think that photo/hyper-realism is art. Tanner you are right, if the painting appears to be the same as a photo, then why not hang the photograph? Although the texture of the canvas and paint will differ from a digital photograph. Then again with modern prints on canvas, maybe not so much...

One thing that I can relate it to for me is printmaking. I actually start many of my designs by working on the computer. I even go so far as to pick out specific colors of paper and inks on the monitor, and then I try and duplicate that through screenprinting. To me it is very important that the end result is done with my hands. It may look quite similar to the digital design, but the mark of my hand will always render it different. I don't want to put printmaking above digital art, but anyone can shoot out digital images these days - at home, at work, at Office Max. The labor of printmaking, and of reproducing a photograph through painting, is much more tangible and valuable than a digital print.

Some of the art at the Walker Art Center really gets me thinking, "Is this art!?" Art is so broad. Glad that we got our minds turning here.