 |                      |
> 1 <
| Author | Message |
Muffins
276 posts |
#10655 2007-06-25 02:22 GMT |
|
explain
|
|
Pink
83 posts |
#10656 2007-06-25 02:27 GMT |
|
Yes. beauty is in the eye of the beholder. shit looks good to flys.not much detail in that. unless ya ate corn
|
|
BrownSugar
137 posts |
#10657 2007-06-25 02:29 GMT |
|
Most certainly. Simplicity is the essence of elegance. Isn't that beautiful?
|
|
BrownSugar
137 posts |
#10658 2007-06-25 02:31 GMT |
|
Yes. Sometimes the simplicity of the shot is what makes it beautiful. Also adding to many details may take away the beauty of the shot.
|
|
vevrca
80 posts |
#10659 2007-06-25 02:34 GMT |
|
Piet Mondriaan who worked with a more contempory or modern art.. his paintings were very simple.. but percise. There wasnt a lot of brush strokes.. he didnt paint trees and boats of scenery.. but his work was beautiful. So well placed and thought out. (Neo-Plasticism is the type of art he worked with to be specific...) Its the type of art i'd have displayed in my home if i lived in a loft in new york! ;)
but to answer your question simply.. i think less is more.. I get lossed in paintings that have too much to them.. |
|
romeo615
71 posts |
#10660 2007-06-25 02:37 GMT |
|
Sure. Think of all those abstract paintings you see. Many of those aren't very detailed at all. They may be colorful, but their abstraction is what makes them unique.
|
|
> 1 <
