These are bad (some are very bad) paintings of Barack Obama.

Have fun.

I especially like the one that says "I had a dream....and this was it

Ah, what a great opportunity to discuss the good and bad of art!

The part of the title of this thread that I like is the first part "Bad Paintings". Whether it is Obama or any other subject, the debate is not so much what is "bad" but what is "beautiful". Granted I skimmed through those paintings and for the most part I was cringing.

Looking through those paintings I considered several criteria in evaluating, not that they were bad but, why they were not beautiful. There is a difference for me because sometimes ugly is good. Especially when it is intended to be such.

So what criteria do I use when viewing paintings? I use the 12 points discussed by a guy named Andrew Loomis. I like Mr. Loomis because he was an illustrator and a no nonsense cut the bull kind of guy. The following text is an excerpt from his last book which was published after his death in 1959 "The Eye of the Painter". Much has changed since then but I feel that it is still a good basis for critique.

Unity
The oneness which brings all the pictorial qualities together into a single or whole expression; the organization of design, color, line, values , textures, and subject into a combined an total expression.

Simplicity or clarity
The subordination of all material and detail that is irrelevant to the main thought, the reduction of the subject into the fundamentals of design, form and pattern.

Design
The over all relationship of areas, form and color. Design makes the picture.

Proportion
Harmonious relation of each subject and each part of the picture- Distortion is the opposite of proportion, though some distortion may be legitimate, where an idea or an emotion might need greater emphasis.

Color
This is one of the strongest elements of beauty, and in using it the artist can not simply be guided by tastes, likes or dislikes. The relationship of color to values must be understood, as well as the basic principles of mixing and producing colors for realistic and harmonious effects.

Rhythm
Though this is often underestimated or misunderstood, it is a quality that contributes greatly to the beauty of a painting. There is rhythm in all animate and inanimate life. Without it, form is static and lifeless. The repetition of similar colors or of lines or shapes of increasing or diminishing size will create rhythm in a painting just as it does in nature. For instance there is rhythm in the repeating lines of trees with their branches and leaves, or in the lines of a zebra's back, or in the petals or markings of a flower.

Form
The structure of form in relation to the whole is a fundamental art principle. Everything is either form or space (solid or void) and neither can exist without the other. A painting is said to have "form" when the shapes of the objects contained in it are well outlined, well composed, and properly contrasted with the open areas such as a tree against the sky.

Texture
The rendering of surface. There is characteristic surface to all form, and this is as important as its structure. We can not achieve true beauty by painting all form with the same type of surface, as if all things were made of the same material, which is precisely what happens too often in otherwise good painting.

Values
Values and color are inseparably dependent upon each other. Neither can be true of beautiful alone. The proper relationship of values creates the effects of light and contributes to the unity of the picture. Incorrect relationships can do more than anything else to destroy beauty.

Quality of light
An element of prime importance. The quality of the light in a paining blends with the actual light galling upon the picture and becomes part of it. There are many kinds of light- Indoor, outdoor sunlight, diffused light, reflected light. The source of light must be related to the modeling of form, to the kind of brilliancy of color, and to texture. Without a true understanding of light a picture can become mere places of paint an canvas.


Choice of subject
This offers the artist his greatest chance to exercise individual taste. The limitless sources of life and nature are his to tap and from them he can select, design, and produce a concentrated example of his own appreciation of beauty.

Technique
the means of expression rather than the expression itself. Technique includes understanding of surface and texture, knowledge of medium and its many methods of application. It is the personal rendering by which all the other elements are brought together.

I'm rather surprised coming from people who boast that this is an art site that's non-judgmental. Does it say anywere how old the artists who did those paintings were? Maybe they were very young and just beginners.

Hi Rsine,

I don't know who you are referring to when you say that people boast that this site is nonjudgmental. I for one am and I listed my personal criteria for that judgment (critique). Age of the artist is not one of them. I prefer to judge the art and not the artist. Otherwise my judgment would be skewed. The fact that I cringed at some of the works on that site is not to say that it is bad art. It only says that it did not meet my criteria based on my personal opinions and standards (judgment).

So what's your opinion? Did you like the paintings? Do you have a judgment?

Regards,

Wow - those are some really bad paintings. Thanks Cees, they were fun to look at - my favorite was Obama with what appeared to be a mariachi band, some dancing girls and holding a pair of (I think) underwear. I'm working out the message from the artist on that one - had to blow the dust off my Psychology 101 textbooks!

Interesting though, when a person such as Obama impacts the consciousness of so many people, that one of the reactions is to draw that person, to express some feeling (liking, admiration, whatever) through art. People who have never picked up pencil or brush in their life feel compelled to create. I'm reminded of a similar phenomenon after the death of John Lennon - drawings of him - good, bad, terrible - cropped up everywhere. I didn't quite understand it at the time, since in my opinion, as an artist and a musician John Lennon was mediocre at best. But, perhaps it's not so much the talent or actions of the person so much as the affect they have on the general population. Any thoughts?

RJ Blanchette - thanks for the 12 points from Mr. Loomis - I had to scoot over to my gallery and see if my drawings passed muster - they didn't. Is his book still in print? I would like to read it - to be able to say "why" I like or dislike a painting - not just that I do. In the meantime I'll print out the points and stick them in my notebook - good reading and we need more of it.

Thanks again Cees - interesting start of good discussion!

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed on this thread regarding John Lennon are those soley of ncgirl and do not reflect the opinion of Drawspace, its owners, administrators, advertisers or members. Hate mail can be directed to ncgirl.

Noted.

Rsine....you are funny lol always trying to go against the grain .

RJ thank you for the 12 points ....I will try and remember them when I view art ...myself I normaly do like to to cut peoples art ... unless i am asked right out what I think .. then my answer is based on .. what they were trying to achive .. exact lookalike ... reflection ect ..and I comment based on that ....because I have seen art that many would say its a mess ...but I see something in it and many times I end up really liking something most would not notice . No clue what you call a person like me ... I was told once by a member here that I was a feel good person .. I only say things to make them feel good .. its not the case I say what I see .

I did see the paintings of the President ...I did not look at the paintings as bad at all ...some were not as well as others...but you could see the time they put into them ....I kinda feel bad for whomever owns the drawings .. to have another person take that site and post their work under very bad drawings ...I dont know in my opinion that seems wrong .

This was a response made by one of the board administrators Ernest Friedman in a thread someone started in the suggestions forum regarding that person's interest in starting a drawings ratings system...

QUOTE..."Drawspace is a friendly, helpful, inclusive, supportive, noncompetitive, NON-JUDGMENTAL learning environment."

As for the paintings, I won't make any judgment because these people are probably new at drawing and don't have the experience yet. Are you going to tell me that when you first picked up a pencil or brush you created an instant masterpiece? of course not. we all had to start somewere right? In fact, some of my very early works make me cringe so no I'm not gonna judge.

I totally go with RSine and Kim - who are we to judge? I myself am no master and if I am honest - I've seen many drawings or pics that where worse than these.
I don't want to judge, I know what I like and these pics are not such bad - some like it, some not.

Btw what if these paintings had been done mostly by children? and what if one of those children read your posts? This is, what Brenda mentioned in her book - discouraging.

Isn't it more important what those people felt when drawing - proud to be american, happy about the wonderful Mr. President, happy to be a part of "We can!" ???

Criticism must always be constructive and only relate to the artwork and the artist never,
no matter is whether it is a beginner or an experienced act = criticism shows only the opinion of the critique to help to give

( sorry for my bad english )

If someone post a drawing in the Critique thread asking for advice then I see no reason to be honest and open .. and as Raidor has said constructive about their art .. help them make it better give them ideas ...but I really do not care for it myself when a guest or member post a drawing into the gallery and people Critique it there ...most times they are not asking for you to tell them what they did wrong they just are simply uploading to their personal gallery .

We Moderators and Administrators of Drawspace are as stated and quoted above ..helpful, inclusive, supportive, noncompetitive, NON-JUDGMENTAL.

and this is why so many people love this community!

Ernest is correct in his statement! The website Drawspace.com is exactly that, non judgmental. He did not say that the members were not free to judge art on the site. This is why we have a Critique Thread. This is necessary for all levels and especially for young or inexperienced artists.

I think it would be interesting to hear what you think about the art. One reason being that your posts in this thread give the impression that you found the paintings to be childish or amateur. I'm not sure that this is an accurate assessment of what you think?

To answer your question : "Are you going to tell me that when you first picked up a pencil or brush you created an instant masterpiece?", the answer is YES!

Granted that not everyone that critiqued it agreed. My Mom liked most of it. So much so that she displayed it where everyone could see it. On the fridge. Others thought that maybe it was better to just tuck it away in a draw. What I can say is that the critique was never about me, except in maybe my Mom's case. It was only about the art. Each time my work was judged I learned more about the way I communicate visually. Did the viewer understand the message I was trying to communicate? That is the question I always ask myself.

Kind regards,

Hello Ncgirl,

That book is out of print. A used copy would probably run you 4 or 6 hundred dollars. His books are now collector items. You may be able to find some scanned versions on the Internet if you Google his name.

Try Scribd.com, there are a lot of scanned books there.

I'm all for critiquing art and I will if the artists who painted them asks for my opinion but this thread was started specifically to mock the art by those individuals who painted them hence the thread's title. It's obvious that there's a lot of snobbery in the art community as a whole. Many professional artists tend to look down on those who's skill levels are below theirs (I know this from personal experience). For a site that prides itself on offering one of the best online art instructions and lessons on the web, this thread is pretty sad.

There's no legit critiquing here. Just "Hey! Take a look at these and laugh!"

As I stated... How do you know these weren't done by children?

This whole thread is BS.

I agree with Rsine on that this thread was started specifically to mock the art by those individuals who painted them ....some here are trying to make a good point ....I love the masterpiece your mom adored ...my mom did as well its funny to because I can look at a childs art and see something that was creative ...a bit of personality ...at times I can see a underlying talent ...but then I use to collect childerns drawing lol .

A part of me wants to lock out this thread but a part says no keep it here so people can speak their minds ..no harm done ...but then I go back to whats been said " There's no legit critiquing here. Just "Hey! Take a look at these and laugh!" and it makes me feel bad because that is NOT what this site is about ...and if anyone has noticed the one who started the thread has not spoken ...so maybe they feel they should have not created it .

I hesitated to comment on this topic but I think there is something that needs to be said. In my dictionary the word "bad" is defined as "inferior in quality or performance". While I do not know what the person who started this tread intended when they used the word, I can judge some of the works on the link inferior in quality. Bad or inferior is a relative term that means one work is considered inferior when compared to another work.

Bad is merely discriptive of the works and is an opinion. Some times the word bad is used to belittle or in a derogatory way. From reading only the words used by the person who started this thread I do not find evidence that suggest they were belittling the works. Works of art can be inferior to others and still be funny and enjoyable.

Bobby.

We'll have to agree to disagree then.

I am afraid I started this thread in the wrong way. Reading through all the comments I think I have to clarify. In the topic I used words that are also in the name of the site (http://badpaintingsofbarackobama.com/). I should have chosen my wording better. Something like 'art or not art?'

It was never my intention to give a judgement because I do not think I am qualified to do so. My only intention was to ask your attention for a specific website, related to art. This is what I regularly did in the passed and hope you will allow me to do in the future. If I made a mistake here I can only hope you will accept my appologies.

If the title was "Good Paintings of Barack Obama" would that change the nature of the debate?

Perhaps. It would have been considered as positive and/or encouraging critique?

Not for me because I would say the same thing. That many of the paintings look as if they were done by children who are just starting to learn how to paint and draw while a couple of them look good enough to have been done by professionals.

The fact that someone started a website specifically to mock the work by others demonstrates the type of snobbish attitude that's prevalent in the art community as I mentioned.

I wonder if the artists who did those paintings realize that their work is being put on a website for this purpose.

Cees thank you for bringing these to our attention, I enjoyed them just like I enjoy a lot of the topics you bring up here. I never sensed anything but a "lighthearted" attempt to share a "hot topic" with us. I think Mr. Loomis 12 points are good for us to consider when we look at our own works so we can attempt to improve our skills. Looking at others works and using the 12 points helps us learn as well, we can avoid some mistakes before we make them. I don't think being a snob is the intent of most people in the art community, but an effort to give constructive critism in order to help others improve on their skill levels, being over sensitive to what others may say will just hold you back just learn to take it or let it go.

Cees I also enjoyed browzing the link you provided. It's interesting seeing many different people's interpretation of the same individual. Thanks.

Nancy you make a good point - I took this thread to be light-hearted too - not to mock or deride anyone's work. Anything that opens discussion and debate in my opinion helps us grow and learn. The 12 points by Mr. Loomis that RJ Blanchette submitted are good reading for anyone. I would love to see this thread as an opportunity to discuss why we think some works are pleasing and some jangle the nerves, not to discuss the snobbery of the art community and how we shouldn't judge these works (or any works). Instead, let's focus on expanding our views and listening to others, knowing that we will agree with some people and disagree with others, and accepting that as positive - something to think about.

As for being judgmental - I have to paraphrase one of the best astrologers I've ever encountered Mark Husson (the best astrologer I've ever known is now happily retired in NC and working on her art career) He said that as human beings we are hard-wired to be judgmental. It's a survival skill. From our early days, we had to make judgments - do I run across the savannah to get away from the lion or try climbing a tree? We are constantly making judgment calls and it has evolved from survival only to like/dislike. I like tomatoes, my husband doesn't. I didn't like the paintings from the link, rsine and kim did (? or bobby? can't remember). Doesn't mean that the paintings are good or bad - it's just the way we judge them based on our preferences, social/cultural framework, etc. I will freely admit that I make judgments every second of every day, and have no problem expressing my opinion. To those who are thinking that that makes me a bad person - you just made a judgment. Welcome to humanity. If anyone wants to encounter some real snobs - try the astrological/psychic community. I'm still trying to grow my eyebrows back from the last convention.

RJ Blanchette, thanks for the lead on the book - too expensive for me right now - maybe I'll hit the lottery this week. Also, loved the story of your first masterpiece. Your Mom is a good person to support you in such a way! All of my works are judged to be masterpieces by my husband!

Hi Cees,

Wow what an interesting discussion good or bad art.
In my opinion there is no good or bad art, all art is good, without art what a dull boring world it would be.
How does one evaluate art, it is highly subjective, it depends on the evaluation criteria, and your own personal point of view. If one examines the techniques of the great masters through the ages including new age digital art there are common threads which run through all the work of truly great artists.

Emotive content... all great art is created to elicit an emotional response.
Technique,…a deliberate calculated knowledgeable manipulation of the media to elicited an emotional response.
Creativity….. the spark of difference that makes the work unique eliciting an emotional response.

Truly great artwork lasts forever you will visit it time and time again through the ages, because it touches you in a personal way that is unique to you.It evokes an emotional response from you that the artist intended to create, through a deep understanding of his craft, his or hers own psychological makeup and the human psyche.

The works under discussion of Barack Obama are diverse, they fall into different categories of art, including Naïve, Poster ,cultural,and some pieces that are not representative of Obama at all, How does one judge the artwork, again it depends against which criteria you are judging. Some artists create work that is deliberately created to leave you totally repulsed by the work produced, that is their message to the world. It has created an emotional response…..good or bad.

No response at all, is an indication of art that has not achieved its objective, but then again there is a school of thought that is anti- art, to elicit no response. That itself could be art at its highest form, depending on your personal point of departure.

Regards Wayne O

obama my interpretation...lol good or bad it is what it is..


hello wayneo, welcome home

WOW...who knew hunh cees? well if nothing else it got everyone talking..
I enjoy very much the way you have a special id for me here at drawspace..you are my mysterious friend who pops in from time to time with great articles, links and fun stuff. PLEASE DONT STOP..

I think that this whole thing may have been taken out of the context intended. easy to do.
the title cees put up is not his title but the title of the link..thats all..he did not claim any badness or goodness.

i for one enjoyed it..and all the levels of the artwork too..i am one of them that sees the effort i guess and not so much the tech..i admire effort cause i myself am in constant struggle and put forth much effort in what i try to draw..most are what some would consider bad, but i see it and say wow kay you have really grown..

anyhoot just wanted to pop in and say to cees to never stop giving us the links you do..most of us enjoy them.

Well Thank you Cees for clearing this up for me ...as when I read it I thought the same as some others that it was just displaying Bad art ....nothing was said in the defence that it was not ...so again Thanks you .

Yes it did get people talking ....some of those that are quiet even came in for their two cents worth lol thats always a good thing when a topic can be calmly discussed and you can get others points of view .

Hallo,

my two cents? In school ( I know its very long ago) I was told that the meaning of bad is not always bad. Its meaning can be: I am a member of a group with the same interests or so. The example was the song from Michael Jackson "I'm bad". Its a "slang" word and meant in his case a gang. I don't know if its true, but for me there was no point to discuss.

Ulrike

I agree. And there is very little room for snobbery on drawspace. Whenever you feel like poking fun at someone else's art, go find someone that's much better than you. Here's who I use: http://cataclysm-x.deviantart.com/gallery/?372509

Don't you think that most the work on drawspace is as "bad" to someone with Cataclysm-X's talent as the Obama paintings appear to us?

Mechtonia,

I think if you take the time to read through the posts again you will realize that no one is, or intented to be, "poking fun" at the Obama paintings.

Even though the intentions of the creator of that site can be questioned. I don't think it should be the main point in this thread. What would be interesting is to hear your input on how you evaluate art?

Regards,

I look at something and either like it or not. I don't really evaluate art any more than that. I'm a professional engineer so I spend much time analyzing things and using the "left side" of my brain. To me, art is a diversion from thinking and evaluating.

I thought ....that when the thread was made that it was to poke fun at the art ....no one made it any clearer then that ....I feel that if the thread was to ask how you evaluate art...then it should have said just that in the begining .

It is really silly for this to go on in the direction it is .

I would also like to add that the opinions of some of the members and guest here in this thread DO NOT reflect those of the Administration or owners of this site .

RJ Blanchette, thanks for the lead on the book - too expensive for me right now - maybe I'll hit the lottery this week. Also, loved the story of your first masterpiece. Your Mom is a good person to support you in such a way! All of my works are judged to be masterpieces by my husband!
[/quote]
Hi Sandy,
I have all of Loomis' books in pdf form, I downloaded them from a blog, I will get the address and get back to you.
Best wishes,
Trish

Dear RJBLANCHETTE,
It would be good to discuss the 12 Loomis critreria on this famous work, taken from the ref
http://www.clioetcalliope.com/oeuvres/pein...sso/avignon.htm

wow...talk about picassoish..i dont know what mr. loomis would say, but i say, it does not appeal to me, but that is abstract artwork. not my cup of tea.it kind of looks to me like each time the artist was distracted and would go back to his work he would say, hmmm now where was I, and just pick up anywhere..
i guess my brain prefers to view something with order so it doesnt have to work so hard i suppose, i dont even like the way the colors were used together, i guess i simply have no taste in or for what is called the finer arts.

The one with Obama and the world with the lights coming from it scares me. It makes me think of him as the future anti-christ. Uniting the world under one giant socialist government. First the United States, then the world! I really hope it's just my imagination and Obama will turn from his big government ways.

A bit short on time at the moment, but don't wait for me. Go for it.

All the elements are in this painting. I agree it would be interesting to see how they fit. Starting with the point of proportion.

Seeing that this thread has been closed, we can start a new thread with a more meaningful title.