I don’t mean photorealism, but most art throughout civilizations has been highly stylized – each period and culture can pretty much be told apart by the art style, whereas today there’s infinite variation between individual artists. Shouldn’t realism be the first thing people try since it’s all around us? How did seemingly all art in history from different periods and cultures become so homogenic and specific to their eras?
In: Culture
1. Paint is stupidly expensive. Only in modern times have people been able to access industrially-produced paints at a cheep price, and even more recently, digital art tools. Before then, practicing was difficult at best.
2. A lot of times, the studies of light, optics, anatomy, and such were also unavailable. Most photo-realistic paintings of people come from artists who have a very extensive understanding of the positioning of muscles, bones, fat, skin, etc. and how it all influences the shape of the body. Ancient painters rarely had access to that sort of information and could only copy surface-level details.
* The more exotic something is, the less likely the painter is to have an actual reference to work with. That’s why you often get such distorted animals.
3. Certain styles were popular. If your patron doesn’t care about photo-realism, then why go to that extreme?
4. Humans love symbols. As long as the meaning of a piece of art is conveyed, it is a good symbol. It doesn’t matter if it’s realistic.
Latest Answers