Drawn

“I’m not often a fan of “bad” drawing”??… what a way to start a post.

Art is subjective, and by downing “anyone’s” work(*ie. a three year olds to a seasoned professional) is wrong.

*But you made up for it for complementing this book.

“I’m not often a fan of “bad” drawing”??… what a way to start a post.

Art is subjective, and by downing “anyone’s” work(*ie. a three year olds to a seasoned professional) is wrong.

*But you made up for it for complementing this book.

…I figured that might get a rise out of someone! The quotation marks are meant to indicate the subjective nature of what is considered bad, and show that I do understand the artistic statement and skill of styles like this. I know it’s not really bad. And I think I made it pretty clear I am voicing a personal opinion rather than downing someone’s work.

I considered not sharing my opinion, but since being on Drawn! puts me in the somewhat uncomfortable position of being an arbiter of what is good and tasteful, I think it is only fair to be honest about my biases. I would in fact like to see a little discussion on the recent trendiness of faux-naive drawing styles, and what that means for traditional realism. As I hoped to show by posting this book, I believe it is super effective in some circumstances, but I think if something is done just for reasons of trendiness then it’s a bit shallow. What say you?

…I figured that might get a rise out of someone! The quotation marks are meant to indicate the subjective nature of what is considered bad, and show that I do understand the artistic statement and skill of styles like this. I know it’s not really bad. And I think I made it pretty clear I am voicing a personal opinion rather than downing someone’s work.

I considered not sharing my opinion, but since being on Drawn! puts me in the somewhat uncomfortable position of being an arbiter of what is good and tasteful, I think it is only fair to be honest about my biases. I would in fact like to see a little discussion on the recent trendiness of faux-naive drawing styles, and what that means for traditional realism. As I hoped to show by posting this book, I believe it is super effective in some circumstances, but I think if something is done just for reasons of trendiness then it’s a bit shallow. What say you?

Jaleen, I really commend you for mentioning that subject about this trend in the faux-naive drawing style. I will agree that yes, sometimes it works, but I do get a bit tired of seeing it over and over again in a lot of the more hip magazines. I have often made jokes to my friends that I would only be able to get work in some of these magazines if I did all my illustrations using my left hand.

Fortunately, like any trend, it has a limited life-span. I have noticed in the past year or so a bit more of a surge in the use of cartoony and whimsical illustration styles.

Jaleen, I really commend you for mentioning that subject about this trend in the faux-naive drawing style. I will agree that yes, sometimes it works, but I do get a bit tired of seeing it over and over again in a lot of the more hip magazines. I have often made jokes to my friends that I would only be able to get work in some of these magazines if I did all my illustrations using my left hand.

Fortunately, like any trend, it has a limited life-span. I have noticed in the past year or so a bit more of a surge in the use of cartoony and whimsical illustration styles.

This faux naive style i think is effective to show a certain mood. I think art is good for that. The reason why it may get alot of print nowadays is because it’s simple and easy for “everyday” people to understand. What i always say is if it conveys an idea, mood or reaction.. and get’s people thinking(the concept, not the drawing) then it’s done it’s job.

And it’s just a style.. i wouldnt’ get too hung up on it. Kinda like “Flash animation and design” in advertising. It’s cheap, fast and “flashy”. It catches peoples eyes and it sells. I’m not a fan of it myself, because i think anyone can do it, but it is what it is.

I do agree with directors taking more note of “traditional” drawing and illustration out there. There’s alot of interesting artists that don’t get their due.. but it also falls into marketing oneself. One must market themselves wisely.

There’s a market out there for everyone. Just support what you want to see and don’t support what you don’t want to see.

Those are my three cents.

A
sketchees.blogpsot.com

This faux naive style i think is effective to show a certain mood. I think art is good for that. The reason why it may get alot of print nowadays is because it’s simple and easy for “everyday” people to understand. What i always say is if it conveys an idea, mood or reaction.. and get’s people thinking(the concept, not the drawing) then it’s done it’s job.

And it’s just a style.. i wouldnt’ get too hung up on it. Kinda like “Flash animation and design” in advertising. It’s cheap, fast and “flashy”. It catches peoples eyes and it sells. I’m not a fan of it myself, because i think anyone can do it, but it is what it is.

I do agree with directors taking more note of “traditional” drawing and illustration out there. There’s alot of interesting artists that don’t get their due.. but it also falls into marketing oneself. One must market themselves wisely.

There’s a market out there for everyone. Just support what you want to see and don’t support what you don’t want to see.

Those are my three cents.

A
sketchees.blogpsot.com

naive style? i should hope all art is naive.
as far as a lot of interesting artists that don’t get their due…i know the guy that produced and directed the video busted his arse and spent his own money on it for no pay. so sing us something.?

naive style? i should hope all art is naive.
as far as a lot of interesting artists that don’t get their due…i know the guy that produced and directed the video busted his arse and spent his own money on it for no pay. so sing us something.?