Did photorrealistic art only developed in Europe?

Tell me, why do you need photo realistic art when you can just look at reality?
And why would you need photo realistic art today when you have phtography and film making?
You are an idiot, please go back go /pol/ or to watching prager university video.

Greek aristocracy was nordic though :^)

If the pinnacle of art was realism then photography would have made it pointless.

>What snowniggers actually believe

That's because the pinnacle of art is not visual at all but music.

The pinnacle was however reached around 250 years ago by an austrian by the name of Johannes Chrysostomus Wolfgangus Theophilus Mozart.

Also you have to understand that it is much easier today to make photo realistic paintings and paintings in general. Back then it was a huge lengthy process that requires timing and more than one person.
Someone had to prep the colors for example, which was a whole process.
This meant that it was hard to make such paintings and thus they were relativly rare and unique.
Today its much much eaiserto make them and there is an abundance of them both contemporary and those we have from past periods.
Remmeber we have a hyper realistic movement which is contemporary...

>if I be quirky the facts won't make me feel bad

>you're muh ethnic art

I had no idea modernist styles invented by white Europeans in the early 20th century was "ethnic art."

or were (((they))) behind it all?

A lot of 19th century and later art was blatantly inspired by sinoid, islamic and prehistoric art though.

>6 countries, most of whom were on the same continent, who were in continual contact with each other and whose nobility and intellectuals travelled between
>one island nation half a world away who shut out all of its neighbors

You're more correctly comparing two traditions than 7 of them.

This is exactly right.

Pic related is considered a masterwork of modern art in Brazil. "Oh but it was never her intention to do photo realistic art". Yet I have seen paintings by her that try to imitate the classic models, and she sucks balls. She wouldn't even be considered mediocre, but sub par and child level, and yet, thanks to modernism, she can hide her lack o talent behind muh expressivity.

She does make justice to the ugliness of the average mixed-race Brazilian though.

friendly reminder that anime is the pinnacle of visual arts

For you.

>blaming jews
Fuck off back to /pol/

>artists should be ranked by their ability to create neo-classical works
>muh

You have to go back

>Defending Jews

Both sides are retarded, considering how insignificant Jews are in the big picture.

That post-modern shit you just posted is awful though. I guarantee the sjw who made that could never match something made in the renaissance.

One thing is to master the classic technique and renounce it. Dali could paint as well as any romantinc painter, and I've personally seen drawings by Picasso that were incredible.

Quite another is to be utterly incompetent and hide your mediocrity behind stylism.

WE

The point of art is not to make tolkien fan fiction.
It is to challnage you but for art to be able to fullfill its mission the watcher must submit himself to it. He must not resist it and let it flow through him.
You must first accept it. I.e. even if you feel that classical paintins are better, give a modern painting the benefit of the doubt just for a moment, and ask yourself why is it painted this way? What do i feel as I accept the work into my mind?

If you do not engage art this way you cannot consume art and thus no art for you will ever actually be art.

>genetics probably, modern art is so popular largely due to frustration among races that can't replicate classical art

I'll take eastern landscape art for 500 Alex.

...

Besides people who think photorealism = pinnacle of art should GTFO and go read Buck Danny comics or something.

This is pretty good, though.

>the bible as brought to you by Junji Ito

Video games are the pinnacle of art. Not even joking, what better art than art you interact with, which also combines visuals with audio

This is Takato Yamamoto, though.

video games are full of kitsch.
they are childish, like comics.
Sure, you can call them art if you like them, you can call comic book movies art as well but they are childish and do not make you think or really feel anything.

Art should challange you, should have insights about life and truth and knowledge...
Where do you see that in video games? shooting baddies playing call of duty? Or some kitsch crap about "who is really the bad guy? us or them"?
Or perhaps using visual emotional queues to make the player have a shallow spurge of emotions?
Its pathetic.

Lol I also unironically think this. Don't bully, you snobs.

I agree. This guy's art is the pinnacle of the entire medium.

Dark Souls raised some interesting thoughts about Eternal Recurrence and Anti-Natalism tbqh

Typical Scandinavian faggotry.
>Hey dude I'm from Italy, we whites gotta stick together aren't we?
NO U FAGIT U NO WHITE ONLY PURE VIKING WARRIOR BLOOD IS WHITE U HALF TURK SHITSKIN
>10 minutes later
STUPID NEGROS U ALL LIVED IN STRAW HUTS WHILE WE TRU WHITES WERE BUSY INVENTING CIVILIZATION IN GREECE AND ROME, ALSO CHECK THESE NICE FRENCH WHITE BUILDINGS LMAO U STUPID MONKEY SHIT
Totally two-faced cunts, you are worse than fucking muslims.

Some of the japanese shinto shit is impressive as fuck actually

>comparing a monk who was more a scribe than an artist to actual artists

> art should challenge you
440. The job of an artist is obviously to make us feel, that of the philosopher to think, and yet subhumans believe it is the other way around. And that is why they are forever drowning in bad art and bad philosophy, since they can't even figure out the purpose of any of these things.

>Art should challange you
Art has existed all over the world for hundreds of thousands of years and nobody has ever thought that "art should challenge you" before the 20th century and even that only in the West.

Quit trying to impose your narrative/ideology on art and just enjoy it.

No the role of the artist is non existent and irrelevant to the art itself.

Are you kidding me? Statuary was anatomically accurate long before paintings were.

See roman era statues.

You misunderstood him.

...

Photo-realistic art reached its peak in the 19th century romanticism. It declined specifically as a reaction to the wide spread adoption of the camera.

People's attitude became "why should I spend all this money on an artist when you could just take a picture?"

Artists' attitude became "why should I devote myself to a lifetime of anatomy lessons and figure painting when I could just buy a camera?"

Fine artists' attitude became "what can I do with a canvass that I couldn't do with a camera?" Hence the rise of the impressionism and post-impressionism and the rise of art built around pure artistic style

>cherrypicking

yeh u rite tho

Or, you know, it could just be drawn well.

This.

The role of the artist is to make art you fucking retard

>Buddhas and such
I'd say this qualifies as photo realistic.

Those statuettes aren't postmodern. It's some of the most ancient art, nostalgist shitheel, and the basis upon which later art innovated..

>woodblock paintings are the only art Japanese produced
kys senpai
This wasn't funny years ago and it's not funny now. Not to mention ukiyo-e is fucking baller and has style, amateurs with terrible skill cannot produce good examples of it.

>buddhas and such hardly match this
At least put in some effort.

Ask yourself why that is so.
Perhaps because it was politicised? Like propoganda using photography painting and cinema?
It started influencing the world, it became political.
Why? because social nad political change has accelerated and media became availabel to the masses and thus what t shows and how it shows it effects social consiosuness.

Showing superman flying around kickcing ass, when viewed by hundreds of millions effects society, or perhaps dulls it. makes it childish, entranches the ideas that media and art should be entertaining from one's depressing life.
well, if art has so much pwoer now, why shouldnt it be revolutinary, helping us improve our lives instead of helping the status quo?

Instad of being "entertainment after a hard day of work", maybe it should be challanging this very devision and trying to make the day of work not so lifeless and depressing?

Art has the power to either make society worse or make it better.
By thinkign art should be entertainment we fail to understand that art has the power to bring new modes of thinking to bare. to present example of society working in a different way. To create and present a better yet possible reality.

I used to like Adorno too, man. You'll grow out of it eventually.

Holy shit, so much ignorant idiocy concentrated in one post...

Great argument. thanks for contributing.

Of course we have to think about the interpretive power of individuals. One has to have the mental tools to even think that art has the power to make change and that any art does cause chage and we have to take control of it.
the idea of limiting or controlling art goes back to the ancient greeks.

>implying those are adorno's ideas and not bejamin's

but realism is so boring. Check out the boner on this Moche ceramic sculpture.

just gonna flood this thread with obscene Moche pottery.

...

...

...

lol it's art but very low on the totem.

...

...

Those are 2 guys wtf

I'm interested in the art culture of non-European nations during the Renaissance and other other major eras for art in Europe. Did they train them from a young age? Did they spend months at a time on a single piece? Was it treated as a major profession or just a hobby? Does anyone have sorces to expand knowledge on this?
>I've made a mistake.jpg

this is a representation of the chief god of the Moche, The Decapitator Ai Apaec. He drinks your blood, cuts off your head and fucks you.

The concept of "Art" as we understand it, is invented in the Renaissance. By art we mean the creations of a singular artistic genius, generally working for himself or in the employ of a patron. The renisance saw Art distancing itself from the church and religion, though the major churches of europe often patronized artists.

In most other non-european cultures, artistic endeavors were subjugated to religion or government, there were no "free" artists trying to hustle work.

also, meant to post this image with this picture, in this post, is Ai Apaec the decapitator

another image of Ai Apaec the Decapitator.

more of Ai Apaec the Decapitator

here are some line drawings based on representations of the Decapitator.

From Wikipedia:
At least 500 Moche ceramics have sexual themes. The most frequently depicted act is anal sex, with scenes of vaginal penetration being very rare. Most pairs are heterosexual, with carefully carved genitalia to show that the anus, rather than the vagina, is being penetrated. Often, an infant is depicted breastfeeding while the couple has sex. Fellatio is sometimes represented, but cunnilingus is absent. Some depict male skeletons masturbating, or being masturbated by living women.[8]
External video
Moche earrings.jpg
Pair of Earflares, Winged Messengers (Moche Culture, Peru), Smarthistory[9]
Moche Portrait Head Bottle, Smarthistory[10]
Because irrigation was the source of wealth and foundation of the empire, the Moche culture emphasized the importance of circulation and flow. Expanding upon this, Moche artwork frequently depicted the passage of fluids, particularly life fluids through vulnerable human orifices. There are countless images of defeated warriors losing life fluids through their nose, or helpless victims getting their eyes torn out by birds or captors. Images of captive sex-slaves with gaping orifices and leaking fluids portray extreme exposure, humiliation, and a loss of power.

forgot the picture.

>Some depict male skeletons masturbating, or being masturbated by living women.[8]

How do you do that without flesh?

This is from a ceramic pot. You can see on the bottom row that two guys are getting their heads cut off or necks stabbed or something.

Not sure I have an example of that, but I've seen numerous skeletons with dicks in moche art. Check this guy out.

...

But seriously, fuck realism. This image is from an aztec codex, made by aztecs. It's created with european paper and pigments that the aztecs acquired, and likely the style influenced by catholic manuscripts the aztecs had seen.

another aztec codex. dunno wtf is going on here. Probably people killing each other or something.

>the pinnacle of art is realism

Photorealism is less challenging to do than lots of other sorts of stylization that requires half a brain rather than just autistic patience. You'll notice plenty of people can get very competent at being a human photocopier pretty quick, but they can't create jack shit without a reference.

Of course, no quality 19th century paintings are photorealistic.

more cool art, that isn't realist. This is a chinese painting depicting the "Burning of Books and Burying of Scholars" an event in which the chinese emperor burned a bunch of books and killed a ton of confucian philosophers.

another cool book burning painting by Pedro Berruguete. St Dominic's books are being burned, but then miraculously his book leaps out of the fire.

>upper right corner
They appeared to catch deer men in a rain of pokeballs after weakening them with spears

top right corner obviously is a pokemon battle

noice

LOL, i had never looked at it that way. Fuck yeah, Ancient Pokemon, it's the truth.

But did anyone catch it?

not an expert, but I believe the red dots in these are calendar dates, or at least years.

Its the story of creation
im not sure which part though

look at this youtube.com/watch?v=jyYm0BsdgYA

omfg, only five minutes into this, but the animation is fucking awesome.

Again, fuck realism. Check out this masterful animation.