“Since 1980s, the art form created by pouring steamed milk into a shot of espresso, or so called latte art, has been widely welcomed within the modern society, which thirsts for elegance and beauty. With the strong need of the society, the Baristas, coffeehouse bartenders, have sought for creativity and evolution for the latte art since then, resulting in plethora of patterns and even variants in the industry.”
Coffee art is a beautiful example of artistic design, whose perfection in creating extraordinary images is ephemeral and temporary.
The beauty of these works, in fact, lasts only the time of exposure to the public, or in this case, to the customer who ordered the coffee.
However, this is not the only thing it is possible to do with a cup of coffee.
“Shanghai-based artist Hong Yi, aka Red, has already impressed us with her sunflower seed portrait of artist Ai Weiwei and even went on to gain worldwide attention with her portrait of basketball star Yao Ming, which was painted with a basketball. Now, the creative artist who “likes to paint, but without a paintbrush” is back with a new inventive portrait project of pop star Jay Chou, made with coffee cup stains.”
She dips the upside-down cup into the coffee grounds and presses it against big paper to finally get a great picture of pop star Jay Chou. So it obviously represents a new way of making the well-known coffee art.
Beautiful, slender, pale skin and perfectly oval face (according to Renaissance), surrounded by a flowing golden hair: it is the most famous image of beauty, as Sandro Botticelli depicts in his most famous work, The Birth of Venus. But the legend tells us that a small defect, in such beauty, there was. A slight tendency of the eye to deflect outwards with respect to its visual axis. As with all legends, however, we will never know if indeed the goddess of beauty had that little defect commonly known as “strabismus of Venus.”
Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres was a french painter. During his life,he realized a lot of work,but heconcentrated his attention on the portraits of women,in which he usually deformed a body part. For example,he realized ”The Great Odalisque” and ”The Valpincon baither”. In both of them,the back of women is not regular.
Have you ever noticed that Hello kitty hasn’t got mouth? Its designer, Yuko Yamaguchi, made it on pourpose. “I want people to be able to project their feelings on her. Kitty looks happy when people are happy and she looks sad when people are sad” - Yamaguchi says – ” If she had a mouth, she would have an expression and nobody could find in her his mood, so I preferred to paint it not.”
The representation of reality sometimes touches on perfection. This is happens in the paintings of Omar Ortiz, an American painter who gives us a series of works that seem photographs and not paintings thanks to the great similarity with reality. Omar loves design and graphic communication and he has gradually shifted to oil colours, reaching a formal perfection level that today many teachers of 60s or 70s could envy, as Chuck Close. If you look his paintings, you will be impressed by the authenticity of reproductions that don’t neglect even a single fold of skin, a little ‘hair or detail of asymmetry. In this way the whole is so alive as to appear real. The painter prefers naked women, that usually are covered with drapes, in which he finds all the elements of classic harmony and beauty. He is surely talented and he is depopulating on the web. I wonder if Ortiz would be able to make beautiful even women less divine than those ones that he paint?
In art, it is very hard to see a imperfect body. For this reason, “imperfect beauty” in Botero is very revolutionary. With his “fat bodies”, he challenges traditional canons of beauty in art, but also “beauty standards” artificially formulated by mass media. Even though these bodies are not perfect and thin, these women are sexy and beautiful anyway.
“Tim White Sobieski has an innovative approach to art, utilizing digital mediums to skew and beautify images in unexpected and refreshing ways. Drawing inspiration from digital images and cinematic stills, Sobieski deconstructs reality and rearranges it in an artistic, painterly fashion”.
In 1874 Monet painted a picture that will become very famous and today it is known as the symbol of Impressionism. The painting was called “Impression: soleil levant“, and was included in a show that a group of painters such as Sisley, Pizarro, Cezanne, Renoir, Boudin and Monet himself had organized against the prestigious “Salon des Artists”. In his review, Luis Leroy, a famous critic, called these painters “impressionist” in a derogatory sense, and, speaking about the painting of Monet, he wrote that even a preliminary drawing for a wallpaper pattern seemed more accomplished than a seaside landscape. Today art history tell us that this man made a big mistake, but if we are honest it is a mistake that is understandable if we take into account the fact that the average taste of the time prevented him from considering a masterpiece in a framework when there was no detail and in which the strokes were just sketched.Besides, it wasn’t possible to think that a painting “en plein air” painted in one or two hours could be more important than a landscape painted in a studio during many days of hard work and research of the particular. For this reason, the works of those artists called “impressionist” were systematically denied to the “Salón”, which was organized at the Louvre every two years.Thinking about a photo, we can ask what is it a perfect photo. Of course, perfection is a philosophical assumption, but the naturalistic photography has always looked for the photo virtually perfect, understood as the highest possible definition, diffused light that enhances the contrast and highlight detail, crisp, depth of field. There were even famous photographers and magazines that, twenty years ago or more, considered the sharpness as a rule, a “conditio sine qua non”.This rule applies even today, judging from what we can read on books and magazines. Sharpness, contrast, saturation, the contribution of focus: the Perfect Photo. But we can’t say that perfection is synonymous of expression or that it gives emotions, because perfection doesn’t always excite. Searching the Perfect Photo, we risk to forget that photography, as a figurative art, must express and excite, because otherwise it may only affect its author and not someone else. Perfect photos often are too clean, unreal and maybe as archetypes. These photos describe an interesting reality because they show what is not normally accessible to our senses, but without any emotions. So the emotion doesn’t pertain to the sphere of knowledge, but to the feelings and experience. Perfection and emotion don’t always get along. Maybe the definition is wrong, we can’t give a definition of perfect photo because a photo or a picture can give an emotion that is not measurable and it is different for each one. We can say that a photo is perfect when it gives an emotion to people. It’ s a weak definition, but that’s all we can really say.
“The Photo Drips series, by German-born, Brooklyn-based Markus Linnenbrink, is pure rainbow-colored goodness. His pieces are positively dream-like and are explorations in color and texture all rolled into one. This series, pigment-tinted epoxy resin on photo-mounted wood panels, allows for brief moments of the photo to peek through the vivid paint lines, almost like memories fading in and out. The dripped lines of resin down the front of the panels appear like raised ridges that create depth throughout each piece. I love how the drips of resin have dried at the bottom of the panels like they were ready to drip off onto the floor. His work is simply mesmerizing” (Source: http://design-milk.com/markus-linnenbrink/).
AFTERTHERAIN(71), 2009, c-print, epoxy resin on wood, 48 x 72 inches
MEINWILDESHERZ, 2011, 6 x 10 feet, c-print, epoxy resin, pigments on wood
Split Screen, 36″ x 54″, oil on canvas, 2011, Private Collection
“Inspired by fashion and the history of painting, my work examines the image as a mirror of our desires. Amidst today’s cultural fascination with beauty and persona, my paintings critique our digital obsession and question the consequences for human intimacy.
When the viewer first glances at one of my paintings, the image and viewer lock eyes. The image stares back with a shifting, slivered gaze, appealing to the viewer to seek resolution of its ever-elusive form. Confronted with irreconcilable fragments or impenetrable blind spots, the viewer struggles to answer the image’s plea. Savoring the seductive exchange, the viewer and image become entwined in an active portrait of the experience of looking.
I begin my process by culling images from fashion magazines and art history books, intrigued by the similarities I see between contemporary fashion photography and historical portraits of society’s elite — images intended to fuel a spectacle of desire with feigned promises of intimacy and truth.
Cropping the image into a portrait, I re-print the image on to a surface to which the ink does not adhere, photographing the print as the fluid image morphs and dissolves over time. I then compose a new image from fragments of these photographs. I paint this final image as a large-scale painting, the shifting, slivered fragments offering yet denying the viewer resolution of a now elusive form.”