Ap254841 ouil501 cop essay

How has the introduction of different technologies had an impact on Painting?

This essay is going to discuss the art of painting, specifically detailed, classical painting, and whether it is true that painting is in fact, is a thing of the past. It will focus on the introduction of different technologies, looking closely at photography and the invention of the camera phone, as well as social media, the internet including digital software like Photoshop, and how they may have contributed to the suggested death of painting. It will also explore a number of artists and designers who are among the few that still work with a strong focus on detailed and laboured painting. The essay will have three different sections. Section one will focus on the main topic of the essay in more detail, explaining some key terms as well as using relevant quotations to back up the point of the essay.

Section two will look at how the main topic of the essay ties in with Illustration and how the introduction of digital software has changed it as a discipline. Section three will concentrate on specific artists and designers and their works, and the way in which they relate to the topic of the essay. Lastly, the essay will reach its conclusion where the original question will be reflected upon and, if there is one, the answer will be discussed. It will also refer back to the quotations used within and everything that has been discovered throughout the essay.

‘Painting’ is the application of pigment to a surface in order to create and image or decoration and is a form of expression. Painting can be done in many different ways and the outcomes are endless.

For thousands of years, painting has been one of the only ways to document life visually, with portrait painting being the only way to capture a person’s appearance right up until photography was widely available around the year 1839, which is often known as the ‘birth of practical photography.’

Paul Delaroche, who was a very famous French painter, highly skilled within the realms of portraiture, has been quoted as having said ‘from today, painting is dead’ when he first caught a glimpse of the Daguerreotype process, which was the first widely available photographic process to be created. With the introduction of a new technology such as photography, it is easy to see why a

painter like Delaroche would believe that painting had met its premature end, as even now, it is often questioned why anyone would paint a portrait in an age where photography is so widely available.

Archer says ‘There are more images of individuals around now than in any other point in history’ (Archer, 2009). This is a result of the vast majority of the population having access to a camera of some sort. With the invention of the camera phone around the year 2000, photography has become more popular than ever, growing even more with the introduction of the smart phone. Cutting says ‘Thanks to mobile phones, more pictures are being taken than ever before.’ (Cutting, 2011) It is likely that in more recent years this has been a massive contribution to why painting is thought to have declined as it is so easy to document anything and everything in life at the click of a button and not having to spend days, months or even years at a time painting whatever it was a person might have wanted to document. Another way in which the introduction of mobile phones has potentially contributed to why the art of painting has declined is that it is now possible, and common for people to photograph paintings when visiting galleries, before either sharing them online for anyone in the world to see, or perhaps editing them in a way that changes the original meaning behind it. ‘You walk through the Prado and people are snapping images of the paintings on their digital devices without even looking at them’ (Neal, 2013). The surge in the amount of people who own a smartphone has led to it being near impossible to prevent photography in galleries, which means it is extremely easy for people to see images of paintings on the internet that, previously would only be possible to view by visiting the gallery where that specific painting is being exhibited. Take the Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci, for example, which is arguably the most famous painting in history and one which a large minority of the earth’s population are familiar with and can identify, without having seen it in real life. The Musée du Louvre website even offers a feature where you can zoom in so far that you can view the same amount of detail that you would if you were to take a trip to the gallery and see it in the flesh. This is a key example of how the internet has had a massive contribution to the death of painting, as with these types of technologies, unless necessary, there is now no reason to make a pilgrimage in order to see the world’s most famous pieces of art when you can view every last detail

of a painting from the comfort of your own home or on your mobile phone screen. Making a journey to see a painting is in some ways, seen as what makes painting special, as one would travel to a specific area or country to visit a gallery in order to see the painting hanging up and being able to take in all the details and craftsmanship that has gone into a particular piece, as well as getting a feel of the atmosphere that a painting can quite often create. With technology that can show you every last detail on a laptop or phone screen, all of what makes the experience of going to see a painting is taken away, meaning that people don’t see a reason to paint such masterpieces anymore as many people don’t seem to appreciate it as much anymore.

The introduction of new technologies have also had a massive impact on the illustration world as well, however it could be said that it has been a more positive impact, rather than the negative impact it seems to have had on just painting. ‘Illustration’ is the creation of an image in response to a set brief and can take many forms. An illustration can be drawn, painted, photographed, sculpted and now, because of technology like the internet, an illustration can be made digitally. Since the development of computer technology and the arrival of digital software such as Photoshop and graphic tablets, illustration has changed massively. This has allowed many artists to make a vast amount of money by creating fresh and original illustrations by working digitally, as software like Photoshop enables them to edit, animate and even draw and paint an extreme amount of fetial without needing to even pick up a pencil or paintbrush. Whilst this has been a positive thing for many as it has introduced a whole new way of producing work, for many who have never learnt how to use these types of technologies or for those who prefer to work in a more traditional manner such as physically painting or drawing, the internet and digital software may have not had the best impact.

In many cases, a lot of illustrators who are extremely skilled within drawing and painting and prefer traditional ways of working have had to adapt in order to carry on working as an illustrator. Ford says ‘Numerous people kept telling me that I could achieve what I was doing with paint so much easier

and much quicker using a computer, but of course I resisted this as long as possible’ (Ford, 2006). The introduction of software like Photoshop has meant that pieces of art that would have previously taken a painstaking amount of time and skill, can now be created within a fraction of the time a detailed oil paint portrait, for example, would, whilst not requiring less or more skill, just a set of completely different skills entirely. Digital art is often overlooked or even frowned upon by a fair few artists who are still working using traditional methods as some think it requires a lot less talent and skill to make a digital piece of art. Artist Paul Burgess says of art made with digital software; ‘everyone has a computer, everyone has the same software and everyone thinks that they can stick a couple of butterflies onto a twiddly background and 'hey presto' they have an illustration. You don't have an illustration; you have decoration - there is a big difference’ (Burgess, 2006). It seems that here, Burgess is implying that anyone with digital software is able to create digital artwork which in turn, implies that it does not require any skill or talent in the way that he refers to digital illustration as ‘decorations’. Steve Wilson however disagrees with this when he says ‘It is really all about trying to produce work that is distinctive and original, whatever that is, and work shouldn't be judged on the levels of technology involved in making it’ (Wilson,2006). Wilson’s statement backs up another point on what has had an impact on painting. Over time, tastes change and evolve and it is in human nature to grow and change as without it, everything would remain the same forever. This is the same within the art world, people are always trying to do something new and original to get them noticed, and in the process we leave behind old styles and ways of working as more up to date pieces and trends within art begin to form. An example of how taste changes within art is the fact that the now world famous Vincent Van Gogh only sold one painting during his lifetime but since his death he has gone on to have made work that is now some of the most sought after on earth. This just reiterates how art has changed and how people view art, as Van Gogh’s work was not at all popular whilst he was alive, meanwhile artists such as Whistler and Eakins were in the spotlight. The work of Whistler and Eakins was more impressionism and realism based, whilst Van Gogh was expressionism, which was not fully established until around the year 1913, which was 23 years after his death. ‘Writer

Jonathon Jones says ‘There is no such thing as artistic "progress"; just change.’ (Jones, 2013). This quote from an article in The Guardian newspaper directly sums up what has been discussed in this section of the essay, as it implies that art has changed, and the way in which people make art has changed, yet it does not progress. What is already there will always remain and it will always be possible to work in ways that are not as popular in this day and age.

There are few artists who are famous for their focus on highly detailed paintings in this day and age.

When asked to name a famous artist in the present day, people answer with names such as Tracy Emin and Damien Hirst, both of whom are not famous for any sort of detailed painting. Many talented painters do not find fame, not that this is needed to be a successful painter, and often have to promote their work themselves via social media like Instagram or Facebook in order to get any sort of recognition at all, let alone any commissions. John Stark is a painter from London, England who has a growing reputation yet is still fairly unknown. Those who know John Stark and admire his work know him best for his extremely laboured and detailed oil paintings that depict all sorts of otherworldly scenes, often featuring immersive landscapes and eerie figures. Stark’s paintings are usually done in oil and the focus of them lies on varying themes such as witchcraft, alchemy, imperialism and even shamanism. Stark is solely a painter and says of his work ‘I see painting as a way of being, it is at least a mystical path and I believe in its power as a pursuit for truth where notions of the self are reflected upon’ (Stark, 2012). The fact that Stark says he sees ‘painting as a way of being’ implies that Stark himself is one of the people who don’t believe painting is ‘dead’ or ever will ‘die’, as he is effectively saying that it is his life. Jones, in another article featured in The Guardian Newspaper about painter Richard Wright can be quoted as having said ‘Painting has not died. Instead, it has been set free.’ (Jones, 2013) This quote contrasts with the idea that new art forms, particularly those relating to modern day technology, is killing painting. Jones if anything, is saying that painting is just as relevant now as it ever was. The words ‘set free’ imply that painting no

longer has to live up to a specific standard or be painted in a specific way. It also suggests that as well as the fact that ‘painting is not dead’, it is for everyone. Anyone who wants to paint can paint, as it doesn’t need to be an impressionist piece that took several years to create. Although art in the present day may seem to revolve around things that are made digitally and in a fairly small time frame, there is still room for painting that requires a lot of labour, as there are still people who enjoy this type of painting in comparison to more modern styles of painting.

In conclusion, it is clear that painting is definitely not ‘dead’ and will not die, however tastes within art simply change over time, as they do with every aspect of life. While new trends appear within the art world, be it a specific way of making work or a colour that is suddenly popular, painting will still exist, and even thrive, as new style of painting many also become popular and put a whole new spotlight on the art form. Writer David Killen says ‘Painting seems to be back in fashion.’ (Killen, 2013). The way that Killen says it seems to be ‘back in fashion, implies that for a time, painting merely wasn’t as fashionable, it did not ‘die out’ or deteriorate, it was just put on a shelf for the people who always appreciate painting and do not follow the more popular trends that many people in the world do. There are many times throughout history where painting has been declared ‘dead’, only for it to be ‘reincarnated’. A quote from an article in The Brooklyn Rail by James Kalm firmly backs this up as he opens the piece of writing by saying ‘Painting is dead. No painting is alive. No it’s dead, no it’s alive, no dead, no alive, dead, alive, yada yada yada’ (Kalm, 2004)This quote suggests that it was wrong of Delaroche, who is one of the most famous artists to be quoted as saying painting died at the hands of new technologies, to state that painting was ‘dead’. It is interesting to see how the viewpoint of people who are interested in art changes along with the changes in new technology and art forms, as from the research within this essay it would seem that when a new piece of technology, such as a photographic process or the introduction of digital software like Photoshop, people are quick to assume any art form or way of working from the past, in particular

painting, is no more. It is even more interesting how after having said this, many then turn round and say ‘painting is back’, like the quote from Kalm says. All in all it is clear to see that a particular art form like painting won’t and cant’ necessarily ‘die’, and that a few people like Delaroche declaring painting dead does not mean it actually is, as fashion constantly changes and things that were once popular do nearly always recycle and grow in popularity once again. Really, it is up to the individual to decide whether they believe painting to be well and truly dead.

Bibliography http://www.creativebloq.com/ http://www.salon.com/ http://muddycolors.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/digital-art-is-not-real-art.html http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/blogs/tate-debate-whats-next-painting http://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/11633/1/john-stark-apiculture http://johnstarkgallery.co.uk/news.html https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2009/aug/24/portrait-art-painting http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20150217-is-painting-dead Painting Now, Suzanne Hudson, ©2013 Thames & Hudson Art of the 20th Century, Ingo F. Walther 'The Future of Painting', Kenneth Clark, 2 October 1935 ‘Painting’, in Lambert 1938, pp.99–104, William Coldstream