4
The "overpainted details ruin art" hot take I keep hearing at gallery walks
Last month at the Mesa digital art fair, I saw three people walk past a piece and say the artist ruined it by overworking the highlights. I mean, I get the idea of knowing when to stop, but that piece had this intentional hyper-detailed style that made the whole scene feel alive. Has anyone else felt like the "less is more" crowd just has a different taste, not a better eye?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
hugo_bennett1mo ago
Thirty-seven layers of glaze on a single highlight in a digital painting isn't ruining it, it's just a style that isn't minimalist. I saw a piece last week where the artist spent so much time on every single raindrop on a window, and people said it looked "messy." But that's the whole point of photorealism, you know? Some folks want that raw, loose brushstroke energy, and others want to see every pixel of sweat on a runner's face. Both are valid, it's just about what kind of visual language speaks to you.
7
and actually i read this article a while back that talked about how photorealism is basically the digital equivalent of those dutch still life painters who spent months on one grape lol. like if you zoom in on those old paintings the details are insane, but nobody called them "overworked" because they were just doing the style. i feel like digital art gets judged harder because people can see the time invested in a way that feels "extra" but it's literally just a different approach to making. some of my favorite pieces at shows are the ones where you can tell the artist got lost in the tiny stuff, like every strand of hair or crack in the pavement. it's not about better or worse taste, it's just that some people want the experience of finding new details every time they look.
5
betty_palmer1mo ago
My friend watched someone hate on a hyper-detailed leaf for ten minutes straight yesterday lol.
2