Featured Bob Ross's first tv painting goes on sale

I try to get to the Art Institute in Chicago as much as I can. On one trip, they had a display of Ivan Albrights self-portraits done monthly over a period of a couple years as he was approaching death. As you can expect, his skill and appearance deteriorated markedly over this time period. It was a moving exhibit. Albright was known for his grotesque meticulous depictions of the human body but, in the end, was reduced to depiction in an almost child-like manner.

Albright painted himself dozens of times over the years. This is an example of one of his earlier self-portraits in the final series.


This is one of his last.

 

Yes, this is so very true. In fact so much of what goes on at many levels of the art market, be it a local artist being hyped up - a genre can be elevated to mythic levels. An honest way to look at art is when it's creator is unknown and we look at it for what it is. Some of my favorite paintings I've bought off Ebay for $30. to $150. Some (not all) are very interesting and well done. At the end of the day, the piece has to speak to you, so be decerning when the description reads like a novel and includes the word 'investment'. As for Ross - his work never spoke to me, but that's just me.

 

Weird happenstance: the night after I read this thread, I was in bed, watching the telly...and I fell sound asleep. I woke (sort of) about 3:30am, to the soothing voice of one Bob Ross. Whom I had never seen before. And whom I had never heard of until the day before!

Came back to this thread and saw the additions, and NOW I understand the "wet on wet" referred to earlier. As someone who has trouble even depicting cats, I found all his tricks with paint, brushes, (and branches), very interesting.

However, the end result, while pretty, looked like someone had bought it at Walmart to go above the fireplace in his Vermont vacation house. $$$$$$ =

Back to my cat...

 

Hahaha so it could be one or more of these:

It's the concept/cultural/historical/etc. value and not aesthetic/technical ability alone.

It's been targeted by the Art Dealers and Agents as an artist to promote to the ultra rich as a portfolio asset to store their wealth in. Some good documentaries out there on this method and the Art Market Bubble.

It's a money laundering device. Super common with high level corruption.

It's a scam inflated price, wherein the artist or agent is actually the one that purchased the piece at an inflated price in order to set a precedent worth to attract buyers of the above type. See Damien Hirst's diamond skull scam.

The art market, like any other market, becomes a game of the ultra rich.

 

Especially ultra rich drugs barons and other criminals.

 

If said criminals want to sink millions into NFTs or similar junk, I consider it a good way to get the money back into legitimate hands. The criminal gets worthless dreck and the artist gets money to live on.

 

When I was married, my MIL moved in with us for a few years , back around the turn of the millennium. She wanted to put her multiple Kinkade prints on the family room walls but I put my foot down.

 

SAME. Although as you would expect, it's grifters in on it who are making the art or NFTs in the first place. The NFT thing also most certainly ruined some lives as most scams do. Every time you think art being valued high is going to benefit an artist, it turns out there's some middleman or scam artist really making it. Ugh.

AS YOU SHOULD. My grandmother loved them too. I generally don't mind what speaks to other people in their home, but in my own? Nooooooo. I'm glad you won that fight!

 

The NFT bubble has burst. They're all worthless now, and the buyers are left with nothing.
Serves them right. Buy real art, and buy it from the artist if you can.

 

Ivan Albright's best known painting is probably the one he did for the movie "Picture of Dorian Gray", a patch of color in an otherwise black and white film:


And then there's Louis Wain who started off painting pictures like this:


and ended up doing pictures like this:


but that was a descent into madness.

I've often wondered if someone with training in painting traditional landscapes could take a typical factory painting and "finish" it, to show the difference between what it was and what it might have been.

There are people who buy factory paintings and embellish them:

 

I rather like THAT factory painting. And both Wain kitties - wonder what that says about me?

 

You happen to like Muppets? Wain's late stuff is a bit too much for me, but in general I appreciate his work.

 

I learned to read from Sesame Street, so I like muppets. Watched Snuffie before everyone could see him. Worse, I'm a quilter and that kitty looks like really good quilt fabric. Maybe Louis Wain missed his calling? Textile design.

 

I love textile arts but do none myself. I have a few family quilts from fore-mothers and am reading a book on the history of quilting right now. I could definitely see that Wain image as a patchwork piece!

 

It's useful skill in cold climates, and for those who have always made use of leftover pieces.

 

The original painting is at the Art Institute of Chicago. I've seen it there. Brad saw an exhibit there of Albright's self-portraits. I'm assuming that was not one of them. Or was it, @verybrad ?

 

The Picture of Dorian Gray is always on exhibit. There are usually a self portrait or two on exhibit as well. What I was referring to was a special exhibit of self portraits done the last two years of his life. The majority of Albright's works are owned by the Art Institute. He rarely, if ever, let any works from his possession and left them to the museum on passing.

 

I find his paintings pretty ugly. But for sure would be an amazing conversation piece

 

Also remember that Bob Ross's paintings were a sign of the time the early 80s so they have dated a lot if he was painting now he would be showing all his different techniques that people who are amateur painters like to see but stylistically it would be more of a 2023 look.