Why today's art doesn't have the same mystique old master's art have?
>>7856587Looks like AI dark souls.
>>7856588lol
>>7856587because you didn't decide to make it
>>7856587I agree. Since ends are the result of means, it must have to do with the adoption of methods that didn't exist in the past. Photography is easy, cheap and ubiquitous now; it didn't exist for the masses until almost 1900, and was a lot more cumbersome and limited than now. You have 3D models, digital painting software, photobashing — and all of that is before AI, which is the worst crutch of all. That is on the production side. On the consumption side, artists like everyone else are inundated with visual stimuli. If you look beyond the obvious, first-level effects of these things, the end result is that artists' powers of imagination and invention are underdeveloped compared to the artists of past centuries. That is why even the "classical realist revival" painters who teach and train at ateliers are so dependent on their models and seldom produce imaginative pictures, and nothing on the level of historical/mythological paintings that were once a base-level requirement to even gain entry to the British or French academies.
