BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mosca" data-source="post: 1728476" data-attributes="member: 69162">solitaryVSongI don't think this thread will turn into an argument but it is interesting to hear what people think and feel about the subject and I'm pleased it has cropped up. I would say I was more disappointed than bothered with the quote I used. clearly they are doing good work and offer a great opportunity. I just feel there is no need to put down one style of art work for the sake of explaining why another is good. They are different and not like for like styles. Also to have a good understanding of wildlife artwork I would have thought a person would have to understand all styles, even the ones they might not personally like very much to get a more panoramic understanding in that area of work?I chose the *Duchamp example not because I particularly like his work but to try and explain (and probably badly) the "is it art question". I thought that was relevant here as realistic type/photo/ drawing was getting a bit of a hard time from being compared to field/sketch/ type work. The working process, philosophy and finished piece are not really comparable. Sort of chalk and cheese.ed, Out of curiosity do you feel the same way about a human portrait, for example, or is it specifically bird and wildlife art?* I think we will have to disagree on that one though. |:d|</blockquote>