/ic/ - Artwork/Critique » Thread #5729463

402KiB, 1280x1665, E0tl4vXXsAYHX7a.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Can we agree those are objectively the best japanese artists of all time?

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 13:28:21 2021 No.5729463 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>5729470 >>5729507 >>5729556 >>5729857 >>5730398 >>5730443 >>5731135 >>5731302 >>5731522 >>5732190 >>5732593 >>5733306 >>5735398 >>5735424 >>5735890

>Takehiko Inoue
>Kentaro Miura
>Naoyuki Kato
>Keichi Koiike
>Yoshiyuki Sadamoto
>Yoshitaka Amano
>Yoji Shinkawa
>Akihiko Yoshida
>Katsuhiro Otomo
>Yoshikazu Yasuhiko
>Hayao Miyazaki
>Akira Toriyama
>Yukito Kishiro
>Itoh Sei
>Kazushi Hagiwara
>Bengus
>Akiman
>Tetsuo Hara
>Tsukasa Hojo
>Masazaku Katsura
>Kazuhiro Fujita
>Hirohiko Araki
>Tsutomu Nihei
>Hiroyuki Takei
>Kazuki Takahashi
>Satoshi Urushihara
>Mamoru Nagano
>Haruhiko Mikimoto
>Makoto Kobayashi
>Kunio Okawara
>Ken Ishikawa
>Kamome Shirahama
>Ryoko Kui
>Akihiko Tsukushi
>Posuka Demizu
>Panpanya
>Nagabe

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 13:31:35 No.5729470 Report

Quoted By: >>5729481 >>5730004 >>5731314 >>5731338 >>5733296

>>5729463
>Can we agree
>objectively
>art
no.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1636322173433.gif, 1MiB, 498x280

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 13:40:43 No.5729481 Report

Quoted By: >>5729615 >>5731535 >>5732174 >>5732593

>>5729470
this nigger still believes in the "muh subjectivity" psyop

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 13:54:28 No.5729507 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729463
>Hiroyuki Takei
Nice and subtle bait

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 14:23:53 No.5729556 Report

Quoted By: >>5732593

>>5729463
I don't see my name on there, so no.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Ping Pong c00 07.png, 402KiB, 1100x1600

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 14:26:29 No.5729563 Report

Quoted By: >>5731692

I only know a couple of those. My faves are
>Katsuhiro Otomo
>Masamune Shirow
>Taiyo Matsumoto
>Katsuya Terada
>Tatsuyuki Tanaka

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 15:12:08 No.5729615 Report

Quoted By: >>5731202 >>5731535

>>5729481
You think subjectivity is a psyop because you aren't smart enough to fathom that there may be contexts in which different things are true.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1620511086836.png, 2MiB, 807x1000

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 15:25:00 No.5729627 Report

Quoted By: >>5729847

There's a wide range of skill in this list. Amano hard mogs almost all of these except for a few
Good list nonetheless, you have a wide variety of styles to get inspiration from so thats great

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 18:01:18 No.5729847 Report

Quoted By: >>5729893 >>5730383 >>5735403

>>5729627
What do you guys like about amano over the other jap artists? Is he like the frazetta of japan?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 18:06:18 No.5729855 Report

Quoted By:

>MISSING YOH YOSHINARI IN ZA LIST
fuck off

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 18:07:15 No.5729857 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729463
a thread died...
FOR THIS?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Yoshitaka_Amano_Maten_p011.jpg, 391KiB, 1280x1809

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 18:29:23 No.5729893 Report

Quoted By: >>5730867

>>5729847
He's a master of color and lines. He is also extremely skilled at making less into more, which leads you to use your imagination whenever you look at his images, which makes it more interesting.
A fantastic artist, period.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 10 Nov 2021 19:33:49 No.5730004 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729470
fpbp
a thread about coping the lack of asian jeans died for this

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 5d2fb4082ff9d9655a417d0948f38f0b.jpg, 498KiB, 2000x1244

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 00:08:38 No.5730383 Report

Quoted By: >>5730867

>>5729847
Amano is one of the greatest IMO for his endless creativity and his unyielding love for the craft. He's be working professionally since he was 14 and even in his twilight years the madlad is just as passionate as he was when he started. He's an artist's artist and my hero.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO C7SpHcmXQAAGtsL.jpg, 387KiB, 1280x1221

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 00:20:10 No.5730398 Report

Quoted By: >>5730878

>>5729463
I would disagree with some like Posuka (her art for Neverland was wonky as fuck and the soul of her colored pieces doesn't really make up for it) but you've got a pretty good list going there. And if you're going to include the likes of Akiman and Bengus I would also include Kinu Nishimura.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO kumg.jpg, 100KiB, 1194x541

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 00:56:37 No.5730443 Report

Quoted By: >>5731207 >>5732593 >>5735586

>>5729463
>Can we... (x)?
No. Fuck you. Fuck off. I could not care in the slightest.
I'm going back to drawing, goodbye.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 07:44:10 No.5730867 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729893
>>5730383
Now that i look at it, he deserves his legendary status. He has worked at many things, a veteran, and his art is very interesting and recognizable

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 08:04:56 No.5730878 Report

Quoted By:

>>5730398
SOVL overload on the design
30 something years later this still looks rad.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 13:04:51 No.5731135 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729463
>bengus
i won't agree with you because your list is shit

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 14:04:30 No.5731202 Report

Quoted By: >>5731236 >>5731535

>>5729615
>tries defending "muh subjectivity"
>still talks that truth is a thing
typical retard. stop confusing relativity with subjectivity.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1636533899951.png, 505KiB, 1024x572

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 14:06:43 No.5731207 Report

Quoted By:

>>5730443

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 14:26:38 No.5731236 Report

Quoted By: >>5731258 >>5735407

>>5731202
>relativity with subjectivity
But art opinions are wholly subjective as without human observers, the entire concept of art doesn't even exist. This is different to math where 1+1=2 even if nobody is there to notice it being true. Positing art as having objective truths is something only retards do.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1636259727687.jpg, 143KiB, 1300x910

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 14:40:02 No.5731258 Report

Quoted By: >>5731271 >>5731535

>>5731236
>the picture I posted shows 2 arms and one skull
still want to argue there's no objective truths in art? or are you going to still argue about subjectivity and say that "this picture shows 4 arms" is also a true statement? because if you agree with my first sentence, then you agree with art having objective truths, if you don't then you're a complete schizo.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 14:53:52 No.5731271 Report

Quoted By: >>5731292 >>5731535

>>5731258
I don't think the picture shows two arms and a skull but it does show a collection of lines and value that a human brain has been trained to recognise and classify as two arms and a skull.
Again, You are probably too low IQ to understand what i'm saying as everyone who claims art is objectively good or bad always seems to do.
I bet you are a christian too.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 15:09:36 No.5731292 Report

Quoted By: >>5731307 >>5731535

>>5731271
>I don't think the picture shows two arms and a skull
proof of being a schizo
>collection of lines and value that a human brain has been trained to recognise and classify as two arms and a skull.
distinction without a difference. What you wrote is exactly what "shows 2 arms and a skull" means. you're not being nearly as smart here as you think you are.
This isn't any different from looking at real arms. both result in light being reflected in patterns that hit the matrix of light sensitive cells in your eyes and those patterns are classified as "arms" and "skull". If you want to argue that this picture doesn't show 2 arms then you'd also have to argue that real flesh and blood arms "don't show arms".
>I bet you are a christian too.
I'm no christcuck, but slow down with the fedora tipping mr rational atheist(tm).

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 15:17:36 No.5731302 Report

Quoted By: >>5731621

>>5729463
No, there are literal-whos on pixiv who draw/paint circles around all of the above. No I'm not posting them. Yes I'm gatekeeping.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 15:19:46 No.5731307 Report

Quoted By: >>5731535 >>5731622

>>5731292
>real flesh and blood arms "don't show arms".
Real flesh and blood exist without human interpretation to what they are. I don't understand how this is still so difficult for you to get.
The inherent properties of the drawing you posted is just pixels on a screen with no meaning until a concious observer percieves them as a skull and two hands. The drawing has no properties as hands and a skull until a human observer (or a machine trained to classify in the same manner as a human observer) comes along and gives them that. And each human is going to percieve differently based on their experience and brains. Thats what subjectivity means. Maybe you are actually too dumb to understand this.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 15:24:32 No.5731314 Report

Quoted By: >>5731865

>>5729470
At least there's someone left in /ic/ with a brain

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 15:49:28 No.5731338 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729470
>>objectively
>>art
Thank you! The use of "objectively" in these threads was starting to irk me the same way the word "literally" does when someone uses it to mean "figuratively"

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 18:13:24 No.5731522 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729463
>Greatest artists.
>No Asanagi.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 18:22:22 No.5731535 Report

Quoted By: >>5731662

>>5731307
>>5731292
>>5731271
>>5731258
>>5731202
>>5729615
>>5729481
>A materialist and a phenomenologist walk into a bar
>they begin to argue whether or not to order drinks or duck

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 19:49:47 No.5731621 Report

Quoted By:

>>5731302
>all that bullshit missing the point
just how low is your reading comprehension nigger?
let me put it this way: regardless of the observer the image I posted produces the same light patterns as arms and skulls do. Whether there is someone to see them or not is irrelevant, those light patterns still are the same. No one is arguing that the drawing IS 2 arms and a skull, merely that it SHOWS them. And that SHOW part can be objectively proven or disproven. Because that SHOW part concerns light patterns. That's what art is, a thing that produces patterns of light that fall on the matrix of light sensitive cells. And those light patterns will have specific qualities regardless of whether or not the observer is there to notice them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 19:50:54 No.5731622 Report

Quoted By: >>5731673

>>5731307
>all that bullshit missing the point
just how low is your reading comprehension nigger?
let me put it this way: regardless of the observer the image I posted produces the same light patterns as arms and skulls do. Whether there is someone to see them or not is irrelevant, those light patterns still are the same. No one is arguing that the drawing IS 2 arms and a skull, merely that it SHOWS them. And that SHOW part can be objectively proven or disproven. Because that SHOW part concerns light patterns. That's what art is, a thing that produces patterns of light that fall on the matrix of light sensitive cells. And those light patterns will have specific qualities regardless of whether or not the observer is there to notice them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 20:26:04 No.5731662 Report

Quoted By:

>>5731535
Your joke reminded me that people subscribe to different schools of thought on the nature of art (and the world) and that debating that here is largely pointless.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO file.png, 54KiB, 252x234

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 20:33:53 No.5731673 Report

Quoted By: >>5731817

>>5731622
I think you fail to understand anything I typed at all and just default to screaming about objectivity being true even though that is very easily proven.

>that SHOW part can be objectively proven or disproven.
Please tell me how you can objectively prove with no human observer, using facts and logic only that an image contains a specific thing.
Because it's a lot more difficult than you think for the reasons i've already outlined.
If an image could trivially be shown to contain certain objects (for example: a skull and two hands), then it would be extremely simple to program a machine to recognise those things in images.
Please explain why the machine incorrectly classified this as a dog even though there is objectively a cat shown there as you say.
The patterns of light should have been objectively shown to be a cat.
retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 20:44:53 No.5731692 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729563
>ctrl+f
>Tatsu 1 of 1 matches

you did something good today. bought both of his cannabis works books

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Principia_Mathematica_54-43.png, 43KiB, 800x333

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 21:34:41 No.5731817 Report

Quoted By: >>5731837

>>5731673
>If an image could trivially be shown to contain certain objects (for example: a skull and two hands), then it would be extremely simple to program a machine to recognise those things in images.
>if
>trivially
>extremely simple to program
and where, pray tell, did I say it would be easy? I know it's hard af, kinda like its hard af to rigourously define enough of math to say "1+1=2". 4chan has 2k character limit, so its impossible here to define how to prove an image contains a specific thing. But I can give you this youtube vidya series instead https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8D90DkCLhI

And to answer your dumb question about why the machine incorrectly called a cat a dog: that's because its imperfect. And its imperfection is completely irrelevant here. It getting it wrong is no evidence that its impossible to objectively determine what light patterns represent what thing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 21:45:05 No.5731837 Report

Quoted By: >>5731852 >>5735408 >>5737431

>>5731817
You're still wrong. I give up on explaining subjectivity to a dunce.
Maybe understanding subjectivity isn't as easy for you as it is for me. There's a reason all philosophers on phenomenology have high IQs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 21:50:37 No.5731852 Report

Quoted By: >>5731857

>>5731837
>you're wrong but I won't tell you why
>also people who agree with me have high IQ but I won't post any proof either
Why am I not surprised. Eh, whatever, lets both get back to drawing. Assuming you even draw in the first place, because you seem like a huge crab.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 21:54:02 No.5731857 Report

Quoted By: >>5731945

>>5731852
thats not what being a crab means but i agree, lets both get back to drawing

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 21:59:36 No.5731865 Report

Quoted By:

>>5731314
Definitely not. Idiot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 11 Nov 2021 22:46:06 No.5731945 Report

Quoted By:

>>5731857
you're right, it just kinda started functioning like a generic insult, kinda like nigger or faggot

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Nov 2021 01:27:10 No.5732174 Report

Quoted By: >>5733238

>>5729481
Careful with that. Objectively speaking, manga art is shit. Within a subjective context, OP’s names are decent. But without that subjectivity, anime/manga cannot compete; it’s good for momentary titillation, but not much else, and rings hollow in meaning and substance. Objectively, it’s junk food for the soul.
Even within that context of subjective framework, series like “Nagatoro” are bottom of the barrel, beneath it even, and disrespect the conversation. Objectively.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO E3GigEXXwAYkuJz.jpg, 147KiB, 760x1080

Anonymous Fri 12 Nov 2021 01:41:42 No.5732190 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729463
>Doesn't include Hiroyuki Kitazume...

Pathetic op.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Nov 2021 07:53:32 No.5732593 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729463
Meds
>>5729481
Meds
>>5729556
Meds
>>5730443
Based

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Nov 2021 18:30:17 No.5733238 Report

Quoted By:

>>5732174
stop using words you don't understand

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Nov 2021 18:59:40 No.5733296 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729470
Art is objective you kike

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 12 Nov 2021 19:05:57 No.5733306 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729463
>objectively
>best
>multiple choices

just say you like anime and stfu

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO noriyoshi-ohrai-movie-posters-9.jpg, 416KiB, 800x1132

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 02:07:01 No.5735398 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729463
>didnt mention Noriyoshi Ohrai

You are a failure, quit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 02:08:27 No.5735403 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729847
Fuck no
Amano is nothin like Frazetta

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 02:10:25 No.5735407 Report

Quoted By: >>5735450 >>5735919 >>5735957

>>5731236
Believe it or not, there is a difference between what you like and what is good.

What you like is subjective, what is good is not. Retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 02:12:51 No.5735408 Report

Quoted By:

>>5731837
You couldnt have said anything gayer than this, its phisically impossible

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 02:28:50 No.5735424 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729463
Yoh Yoshinari should be there

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 02:58:31 No.5735450 Report

Quoted By: >>5735957

>>5735407
>objective good and bad
We're not in the christian dark ages anymore, we know better than that line of philosophical thought

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 04:40:10 No.5735586 Report

Quoted By:

>>5730443
based

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 11:17:34 No.5735890 Report

Quoted By:

>>5729463
No mention of Riochi Ikegami...nigga please...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 12:13:43 No.5735919 Report

Quoted By: >>5735957

>>5735407
This is what this retard Mauler inflicted to art commentary. Now we have countless kids thinking "good" can be ascertained objectively.
Mentally getting back to pre-1800's before the fucking enlightenment just because popular art is a bit too woke.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 13:03:06 No.5735957 Report

Quoted By: >>5735972

>>5735407
>What you like is subjective, what is good is not.
Correct.

>>5735919
>>5735450
If you retards think that there is no such thing as good and bad art, I guess there's no difference in quality between the art of a 5 year old kid playing with crayons and the art of Da Vinci. It also means that improving as an artist is impossible, since you cannot make better art because all art is of equal quality. Kill yourselves.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 14 Nov 2021 13:25:11 No.5735972 Report

Quoted By: >>5737273

>>5735957
You are conflating good/bad and technically proficient (what you call "quality").
Some art that is technically incompetent can look "good" either by pure luck
or by an idea/aesthetic that connects with people.
In the same way, competent art can be "bad" because it's has an aesthetic/idea that is alienating to people.

And I guarantee that every standard you are gonna come with to measure good art "objectively"
is gonna come down to either your personal preferences or an appeal to standards that were themselves settled with consensus.

>B-but if everyone agree it's good
That makes it good by consensus and consensus just means a lot of subjective preferences have found common ground.
Doesn't make it magically objective.

>NOTHING MATTERS Gllrflglglrlgrlgrlglrgrl
This is always the last line of defense for the "objectivity" in art schizos.
Consensus, standards, appeal, are all things that are real, not being objective metrics don't make them irrelevant.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 10:35:57 No.5737273 Report

Quoted By: >>5737368

>>5735972
>trying oh so hard to sound smart yet failing miserably
your arguments are boring weak shit faggot, gtfo

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 11:58:54 No.5737368 Report

Quoted By: >>5737373

>>5737273
Understanding the word objective doesn't make me smart, it just makes you look mega retarded.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 12:04:06 No.5737373 Report

Quoted By: >>5737397 >>5737401

>>5737368
you wish. go back to your modern art museums faggot, that's the only art dipshits like you are ever able to create.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 12:05:57 No.5737377 Report

Quoted By:

It's another "retards discussing semantics" episode

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 12:20:37 No.5737397 Report

Quoted By: >>5737431 >>5737545

>>5737373
Every now and again I stumble across a poster that reminds me that low IQ people use 4chan too and I should really leave this place. This is one of those anons.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 12:26:22 No.5737401 Report

Quoted By: >>5737431

>>5737373
We can both post our work and see if my "post-modernist woke" worldview produces
better art than your "objective metrics in art" worldview.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 13:07:02 No.5737431 Report

Quoted By: >>5737545

>>5737397
>>5737401
you're just like that schizo >>5731837

but go on, post some work that you totally didn't just download from somewhere 5 seconds ago. 100$ it'll still follow conventional beauty standards completely defeating your argument...
...Actually, wait, if you're so hard on "muh subjectivity" then why do you want to compare whose work is "better"? Freudian slip?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 13:42:17 No.5737470 Report

Quoted By:

>ctrl+f hokusai
>no results

lol
before you say The Wave is normie tier, realize it's not even his best/most influential work. If you know what I'm talking about, you know he was and still is grandmaster-god-king of /ic/, and we all owe him a debt of gratitude.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 84949481354684.jpg, 257KiB, 563x826

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 14:50:54 No.5737545 Report

Quoted By: >>5737575

>>5737431
>100$ it'll still follow conventional beauty standards completely defeating your argument...
"Consensus, standards, appeal, are all things that are real, not being objective metrics don't make them irrelevant."

I said that to you. You are making my argument for me. Of course standards matter. Art being subjective doesn't mean nothing matters all of a sudden. Your are spiraling into a schizo rant against modern art for no reason.

>>5737397
That's not me but big truuuuuue

Show me your super objective art now.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 2021.11.06 weirdo tribe girl6(wi (...).png, 764KiB, 735x1080

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 15:22:47 No.5737575 Report

Quoted By: >>5737635

>>5737545
>rant against modern art for no reason.
no reason, yeah, its not like every time gaslighted cultists try to defend a literal black square they resort to "muh subjetivity" arguments. How out of touch you are? Whenever someone says that modern art is all a huge scam they always immediately say "but its subjective!!1!". There is a very real connection between fags that defend modern art and "muh subjectivity" fags.
>hur dur, low iq because they dont agree with me
>not me but big truuuuuue
how gay can you get?

your entire idea behind "lets post our work and compare" presupposes that there is some objective ground for comparison. Otherwise on what basis would you justify saying my drawing is worse/better than yours?(assuming it even is yours(yes I am aware I cant prove my art is mine either, fuck off))
If there is no such thing as objective quality then why should anyone care? You say that quality being subjective somehow doesn't make it irrelevant despite the fact that subjectivity means "no point in arguing because there's nothing to argue about" to like 99% of the population. Every time someone wants to shut down a conversation about a value judgement they use subjectivity. "Subjective, therefore lets stop thinking about, some people just like it, y'all. Let people like things and don't criticize what they like or think about it critically." Besides, you're arguing about "accepted standards" and shit, which is completely irrelevant to me. Some art is good even if everyone on Earth says it isn't. Some art is shit even if everyone praises it. Consensus IS irrelevant when it comes to judging quality of something. You desperately want to have your cake and eat it too. You want to claim those standards are subjective but still cling to them and use them.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO mate.jpg, 612KiB, 1199x957

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 15:58:48 No.5737635 Report

Quoted By: >>5737756

>>5737575
>your entire idea behind "lets post our work and compare" presupposes that there is some objective ground for comparison
You want me to restate the same fucking point a third time ?
Standards are not objective, that doesn't make them irrelevant.
Standards still leave ground for personal taste, objectivity is a matter of scientific fact.

>assuming it even is yours
Mate

>subjectivity means "no point in arguing because there's nothing to argue about"
Standards still matter. I'm not interested in defending modern art.
All of popular art (vidya, movies, publishing, music) has standards, you think art directors make "objective" choices for their DA ?
What does objective music sound like ?

>Let people like things and don't criticize what they like or think about it critically.
Media critique is subjective, that's what makes it interesting.
It's impossible to critique objectively something that is, inherently, a subjective piece of art.

>Some art is good even if everyone on Earth says it isn't
>Some art is shit even if everyone praises it.
This is what Mauler does to your brain.

>Consensus IS irrelevant when it comes to judging quality of something.
This is the most important metric in art, which doesn't mean the most popular art is the better one btw.
Niche appeal is fine too, the important part is that it has to make at least some people feel something.

>You want to claim those standards are subjective but still cling to them and use them.
Yes, where is the contradiction here ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 15 Nov 2021 18:06:51 No.5737756 Report

Quoted By: >>5738610

>>5737635
>You want me to restate the same fucking point a third time ?
I don't want you restating shit, its been a bad argument the first time and its not gonna improve by repeating it. Your whole idea about objectivity is some standards and I don't care about standards, but physical reality. And that's what you fail to understand. Your oversimplified understanding of science shows you've got no clue what you're talking about.
>What does objective music sound like ?
Thats not how this adjective works, you absolute retard. This is comparable to saying "heavy blue". No. That thing can't have the quality your adjective is describing. Blue is neither heavy nor light, same with music and being objective. Jesus, if this is your level then there's really no point in saying anything to you. You can't even connect a noun and adjective properly. The adjective about which this whole argument is about. Go fuck yourself honestly, maybe you're good at fundies but your brain is absolutely rotten. Every single time anons start patting themselves on the back for their """high iq""" they always turn out to be retards or at best midwits wanting to feel intelligent, and you're no different. I'm done, this is a waste of my time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 16 Nov 2021 06:04:49 No.5738610 Report

Quoted By:

>>5737756
>Thats not how this adjective works, you absolute retard.
What does objectively good music sound like ?
There you go now you can engage with the argument instead of fixating on a grammatical mistake.

> I don't care about standards, but physical reality
How do you describe art with "physical reality".
Have you developed a new scientific method to quantify the quality of art ?

>maybe you're good at fundies but your brain is absolutely rotten
Nah nah, as is the rule in /ic, if I have better fundies, I'm right and you are wrong.
It's hilarious how angry you are over this btw.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches