Great Artists and how to be like them.

Think this is the right forum so here goes.

 

Went to Tate Britain today to see Turner, Whistler and Monet (great

value even at 10 quid you Brits out there and anybody visiting London

but be prepared to wait if you have not booked in advance).I am a

great Turner fan (the others to a lesser extent).

 

Coming home on the Tube I got to thinking ( I do sometimes do this)

how could I emulate Turner? The only real thought that came

immediately came to mind would be soft focus and a non-vivid media be

it print or slide (or digital if you must).

 

Who do you really admire and how would you emulate them ?

I like Vermeer and Chardin. I would emulate them by trying to put what is genuinely myself in the work I produce.

I don't think there's any one I completely admire, but I find aspects of many artists work that motivate me. I strive to bring those elements together in my work rather than emulate one.

 

Probably cliche, but Galen Rowell, AA, and HCB are probably the three I try hardest to pull from. My soul (strives to) emulates Rowell, my composition (strives to) emulates AA and I strive to find the decisive moments which were illuminated by HCB.

 

I don't always line them up, but that's where I aim.

Strap yourself to the mast as did J.M.W. Then you'll be able to experience "the fabric" of thunderstorms.

Great artists are great artists becuase they 'follow their Muse'. If you try to copy a great artist you will simply become a poor shadow of that artist. Find you Muse and follow her.

Experience is vital and I had forgotten how far JWM went in his search.

 

To emulate is not quite to copy but the warning is valid. I found the exhibition inspiring and perhaps somehow I could be "in the school of".

Just cut your ear off and the rest will follow.

I don't think you can be great if you 'emulate.' Sure do it to learn, then find your own way. If folks like your way, they'll copy it, you'll get credit and then you'll be famous and considered 'great.'

Robert Mapplethorpe's use of light in his flower series (Lily's, Tulips), inspired me to develop my own way of "seeing" plants and flowers. I certainly do not want to be like him ;) but, his photography did inspire me to focus on a particular subject.

My favorites are Ansel and Araki. I'd like to see one of Araki's subjects tied and hanging

against the face of Half Dome.

For somebody living in the Southwest, I find all of the names above and their work culturally non-relevant in my environment.

If you want to emulate their achievement, rather than copy their work; its best to have the imagination to see the world in a unique or at least interesting way. It might help if, like Turner, you develop rather poor eyesight as you get older.

 

I've seen the exhibition you've visited early this year. Frankly its a bit thin. The Turner exhibition I saw in Birmingham a year before was much more informative and allowed you to see that Turner's eventual view of the world was generated over time not something he was born with.

 

So there's hope for you yet , but not if you set out to copy.

I saw the "Turner in Venice" exhibition that toured America last year,

 

and was TOTALLY,

 

BLOWN AWAY!!!!

 

But one thing I learned, was that Turner was a stone cold realist BUSINESSMAN when it came to dealing art.

 

He was NO liberal, "afraid of talking cold cash" kinda dude.

 

When asked artistic questions,

 

Turner typically GRUNTED!!!!!!

 

"Those that have ears,

 

let them hear."

Phylo made me laugh, great line!

'Just cut your ear off and the rest will follow'.

 

Off my own bat, why do you all want to be 'great artists' anyhow?

The London underground is indeed a place of much musing.........

 

I admire many people, I do not try to emulate them, I try to learn from them. The rest is called imagination.

 

Cheers.

<p>Ralph Eugene Meatyard. From Normal, Illinois. I 'get' him. And of course, this influences my work. But I do not strive to emulate him. I have no desire to be <b>like</b> him.</p>

 

<p><center><img src="http://www.cameramentor.com/images/broken_car.jpg" /></center></p>

 

<p>Best,</p>

<p>Wiggy</p>

To return belatedly I would point out that Tate Britain has a whole additional section(s) dedicated to Turner - in fact too much to take in at one visit so the whole experience was beyond just one exhibition.

 

I do not intend to be a Turner clone and perhaps the lead line was not the best that could have been chosen. I would still like to expand my vision (failing eyesight notwithstanding) in this particular direction, after all if you like something it does have an impact on you.

 

Influence, inspiration and imagination will do for starters.

Bill,

 

Turner was certainly a great artist. Still, he was of his time in the deepest sense, expressing a limited repertoire of nineteenth-century values, particularly the sense of the transcendental sublime. Well, the sublime (as opposed to the merely beautiful) is defined by a certain power over the viewer, an imitation of (or, at least, association with) landscape of a certain dramatic kind. (This is what some photographers in the American West found so appealing?and, coming long after Turner, so easy. This includes Saint Ansel.) The Nazis loved the sublime; it made them feel important (when they furtively knew--but could not admit--that they were slimy to the core). After WWII, many artists became wary of sublime anything. Even before the Nazis, Modernist artists had their doubts about Wagnerian gestures. This history is, of course, not of Turner's doing. You can admire Turner (I do) but you cannot become Turner. Art is part of culture, you as an artist are part of culture, and world culture has moved on. To be an artist (of any kind) and to be like an artist (of any kind) are two distinct modes of being.

Well i like the dark period of Goya. I do not know if i could put that into photo but it could be somenthing....

Insanity appears to be required, obsessive-compulsive disorder being the most useful,

although bipolars do pretty well too, especially since suicide almost always raises the

value of your work. Having a substance problem and being unpleasant to those around

you seems fairly important too.

 

Who do I admire most? Winogrand and Mondrian. Also-rans: Arbus, the Bechers, Krasner,

Kline.

The artist i amdmire the most is J.S.Bach. Very few graphic artists have achieved to make a traduction of his music to images but i guess i could not emulate them because i feel a diferent emotion with the same music. In general i think this happens with everyone.