This HAS to be THE crapiest box art EVER!!!!

[Dann Tier]

9 minutes ago, MrObsessive said:

I LITERALLY burst out laughing at this!!

LOL...me too, if you have to ask if this is art, then...……...

[Dann Tier]

3 hours ago, MrObsessive said:

OK........I gotta say that I LIKE this! Whacky as it is, there's something about the color, and the cartoon nature of it. MUCH better than that '61 Ford box!

I agree 100%, but you probably knew that already....lol

[StevenGuthmiller]

43 minutes ago, MrObsessive said:

I LITERALLY burst out laughing at this!!

It is funny, but at the same time, it illustrates my point that virtually anything can be considered a "work of art".

Galleries across the world are filled with this sort of garbage so that a bunch of self aggrandizing boobs can stand around sipping champagne & oohing and aahing and acting like they know something that the rest of the "troglodytes" do not.

So this is respectable art, but the box art that this thread is about cannot be?

I don't particularly care for this box art either, but to pretend that it's the worst thing I have ever seen is facetious at best.

I'll admit that I'm no art critic & I don't even much care for what constitutes a work of art these days, but I don't much care whether a model kit comes in a Rembrandt influenced Fabrigege egg, or a plastic grocery bag.

I purchase them to build them, not to put them on a shelf in a hermetically sealed room & analyze them.

I think it's evident by the nature of the prices that these kits command these days that the box art holds little sway with the people who are buying them.

 

 

Steve

 

 

Edited August 4, 2018 by StevenGuthmiller

[StevenGuthmiller]

28 minutes ago, Dann Tier said:

LOL...me too, if you have to ask if this is art, then...……...

Maybe this one is better.

It sold for 32.1 million dollars!

Willem de Koonig's "Untitled VIII".

 

I wonder why it's untitled?

 

 

 

Steve

[Casey]

29 minutes ago, Dann Tier said:

LOL...me too, if you have to ask if this is art, then...……...

...you don't understand that art is neither good nor bad, and that no single person can decide what is and what isn't art.

The above is more or less what I learned from Harry discussing this very topic on the forum a few years ago. I feel he had a pretty good grasp on what it means to be an artist, and I certainly learned a great lesson from him. 

[lordairgtar]

1 hour ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

Wow!

I guess differing opinions are not acceptable in this topic!

Sorry, I guess that I did not know that I was talking to a "talented artist", so I guess that means that us lowly dregs should have no opinion.

Did I say I knew everything?

I don't recall that.

I likewise don't recall hurling insults at anyone.

I only offer my opinions, which is what a forum is supposed to be for.

 

The world is full of trash that masquerades as art & people sell it every day.

Just because you consider yourself an artist does not make you the premiere authority on what constitutes a piece of art.

 

Is this art?

Or this?

Maybe this one?

 

I'll bet that all of these people think that they were "born with talent" as well!

 

Do you know who I consider a talented artist?

A Doctor who performs a triple bypass & saves a life.

A master carpenter that can build a beautiful home that will last for generations.

A scientist who makes daily advancements in cancer treatments.

 

Maybe we should just lighten up a little.

It's a model kit box for crying out loud!

 

Thank you.

I will wait patiently for the next barrage of denigration & disparagement.

 

Steve

 

 

 

 

Another self taught artist here. Art has always captured the mundane and the beautiful. Before cameras and phones, the artist put onto canvas nature's beauty and to honor the beauty of  the human form. Art told the tale of the hunt from early cave dwellings to 18th century paintings of hunting dogs with a bounty of pheasant. It told the news, taught history, and entertained us. We decorated our homes and bodies with art. Art also can be political. Art became a  way to provoke thought or incite emotion. The first picture is art. I do not know what the original artist thoughts were when he or she did the work but I see Taz in a good mood. The second piece is gross, but it does what the artist meant it to do...revile, evoke a response? The third is art as well, it captures a moment in that person's life. It also humanizes the wearer of that military armor which is to take away the soft human side and replace with a non feeling machine appearance to fear. But what we are discussing is box art. Is it art? I prefer to use the term illustration. Commercial illustration meant to sell a product. When I go to a car show and draw someones car, is it the same as an advert of the same car? No, it is not. My drawings add such personal touches as number plates and added mods well apart from the ads of the same car...so that would be art in it's true sense. I captured a moment in time, I paid tribute to the designer's eye of the car. I captured it's beauty.

[StevenGuthmiller]

11 minutes ago, lordairgtar said:

Another self taught artist here. Art has always captured the mundane and the beautiful. Before cameras and phones, the artist put onto canvas nature's beauty and to honor the beauty of  the human form. Art told the tale of the hunt from early cave dwellings to 18th century paintings of hunting dogs with a bounty of pheasant. It told the news, taught history, and entertained us. We decorated our homes and bodies with art. Art also can be political. Art became a  way to provoke thought or incite emotion. The first picture is art. I do not know what the original artist thoughts were when he or she did the work but I see Taz in a good mood. The second piece is gross, but it does what the artist meant it to do...revile, evoke a response? The third is art as well, it captures a moment in that person's life. It also humanizes the wearer of that military armor which is to take away the soft human side and replace with a non feeling machine appearance to fear. But what we are discussing is box art. Is it art? I prefer to use the term illustration. Commercial illustration meant to sell a product. When I go to a car show and draw someones car, is it the same as an advert of the same car? No, it is not. My drawings add such personal touches as number plates and added mods well apart from the ads of the same car...so that would be art in it's true sense. I captured a moment in time, I paid tribute to the designer's eye of the car. I captured it's beauty.

I appreciate your definition of what art is, but who is to say that the person who did these kit box "illustrations" did not feel the same reverence for the what he was doing as what you feel for your art?

He also may have been trying to "incite emotion" or "evoke a response".

I don't think that any of us know who the "artist" was or what his thought patterns were when he designed these boxes.

Did he fail?

Possibly, but that doesn't mean that his attempt is any less worthy of being described as an artistic endeavor, just like the 32 million dollar painting above.

 

For the record, I wouldn't give a plug nickle for either one, but I might be interested in spending a few bucks on one of the Flower Power kits for the contents.

 

Steve

[lordairgtar]

2 minutes ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

I appreciate your definition of what art is, but who is to say that the person who did these kit box "illustrations" did not feel the same reverence for the what he was doing as what you feel for your art?

He also may have been trying to "incite emotion" or "evoke a response".

I don't think that any of us know who the "artist" was or what his thought patterns were when he designed these boxes.

Did he fail?

Possibly, but that doesn't mean that his attempt is any less worthy of being described as an artistic endeavor, just like the 32 million dollar painting above.

 

For the record, I wouldn't give a plug nickle for either one, but I might be interested in spending a few bucks on one of the Flower Power kits for the contents.

 

Steve

You are somewhat correct, but it is advertising ilustration that required a bit of artistic talent I imagine. During the time these were made, that kind of art was evident everywhere, in clothing ads, rock band posters and album covers...so I guess I know a bit of what the artist was trying to evoke. Most here just don't think it was any good. I will tell you that when these were current, I bought em. LOL

[Xingu]

I believe this has gone on long enough. Art is objective, when two people start arguing about it, there will be no winners.

Locked