why is so much fine art just naked people?doesn't it get old seeing a naked person for the millionth time?i don't know how anyone could possibly give a shit about yet another generic naked person posing in a funny way.
you need to be 18 to post here
in the past it made sense because of the mythological or allegorical subject of the works, but later it's just people following tropes or mocking it, and now it's just because artists are too lazy to draw clothes and background so they just paint the familiar figures from figure drawing classes.
If you try to make porn but can't make it arousing it becomes fine art
Retard
>>7908153diversify you media consumption habit bruh, there is like a whole world of fine arts out there, from landscape to still life to architectural paintings. frog post seem appropriate because you sounds like someone who lives in the bottom of a well.
>>7908186i can recognize that way to many paintings are generic naked models while still enjoying art that doesn't fall into that category. these things are not mutually exclusive.
>>7908153The human body is probably one of the most beautiful things anyone could paint.
>>7908164Thats hillarious, I love drawing clothing precisely because it helps me mask my lack of knowledge of anatomy.
>>7908153Photographic technology didn't exist, so how do men see a naked lady without actually dishonouring a lady's virtue by seeing her actual naked body? A Painting of course!Besides, people are just generally more interested in people, so painting of people are always going to be more popular than say... landscapes or fruit studies.And sex sells, making you richer, the galleries happier, and your customers and patrons hornier.
