people y'all chill, happy accidents during the painting process are just as artistic as staged and elaborated structures and set ups. Are we going there ? yes Pollock was skilled but half of his body of work is filled with happy accidents, there is no doubt he tried it on countless of canvasses.
@rydernkzoo If you think Pollock's work was "random", you really don't understand it. Every line, every splash, every drop of paint he put on a canvas went where he wanted it to. It *looks* random because he *wanted* it to look random--which requires skill. As for this artist . . .In my opinion, he's hoping no one has heard of Jackson Pollock. He's *good*, but he should really give credit where credit is due.
@rydernkzoo nothing POLLOCK... did was random...... there is no doubt this man is inspired by him. nothing wrong with that, every artist is inspired by what we see. its kindof ignorant to imply that one of the most succesful abstract expresionists didn't have skill.
by the way you probably could find all this out on wikipedia or some shit. try it sometime.
i prepaired a long reply to the ones on here who want to challenge my original comments, but i chose not to write it... so i suggest you go back and read my original comments, all of them and see my problem with this gook was his comment that he invented this tech, and my comment about reading a book was in response to someone who has no idea of what she was talking about. im honestly done arguing about someone who has little talent like mr long beard here. you all enjoy urselves...
so in closing, dont come onto utube and call me rude for stating the obviouse, and for another thing, many centries of artists, yes even those who painted on walls in caves, had critics, if you want to be an artist, and want to post shit on the net, then learn to take critisim. or dont fuckin do it... go open a book and read before u come at me and single me out. cause i bet if he and i were put together in a contest, i would tromp his ass... no JOKE.
Your comment contradicts itself because you say people have the right to their opinion and to critique, yet you freaked out when someone debated and critiqued your opinion. "Go read a book before you debate me" is a desperate attempt to make someone feel stupid, I say desperate because it makes no sense to read a book before you post a comment on youtube.
or maybe type in the name jackson pollack, and you would see that this so called tallented individuall that you love so much was nothing more then a idiotic crackpot.
you know funny thing is (TheVanessaRae) i have studdied art, at three of the top colleges, i have won multiple awards for my art, i have one man shows with my art, which is a had thing to acheive, i think that you spoke before you realy knew what you were talking about. and as far as this pecker wad that your defending, i along with other youtubers, were commenting on his statment that he invented this tech, which if you were to open a book, and actualy read some about history of art,
YES! THATS OUR POINT EXACTLY...LOL our point was that he said he came up with, invented, created this technique. if i walked up to you with a stick with hairs on it and told you look at what i invented, now its the year 2010 and the brush was created many many many many years ago, and perfected through all the artists our the centries. what would u say to me? most likely dude ur a fuckin idiot, its already been done, if i went around saying i invented this brush i would deserve the critisim.
@bearsdaddyjrspap wow you are a really rude person. Gurmej Singh is such a talented artist and he is a one of a kind artist. I bet you could not be 1/3 of the artist he is.
He may be talented, he may be a kind man. HE IS NOT ORIGINAL. He did not invent this "technique." he loves to sell that bullshit becasue he is clever/shady enough to know that when you tell an uneducated audience that you are "original" and present yourself as an artist (which I believe he is) it helps you sell stuff, Period. hes a hack and hes not original in any way.
What he's picked up on is that the hacks make the most money in the art world, to substantiate your comments about an MBA, he is interested (obsessed) in how he can turn art into money. He hasn't figured it out yet, but he has figured out how to draw attention to himself. Many artists fail at that.
This drip painting is becoming popular again. This is great! Its like texture painting without having to mess with oils and or plaster. Love your form!
ANd the Pee Wee Herman of acting. Trying to convince himself,and convince others that hes this deep, thoughtful eccentric art type whis just discovered dripping (Pollack) and spinning (Damien Hirst) paint onto things. Nope, busted dumb fuck.
i bout wanted to smack that 2 ft beard off of his face when he said he invented or came up with this new tech.... wtf, id love to catch him riding a unicycle in my college park cause id find the nearest stick and throw it in his spokes.
u know the funny thing is i watched this vid, and when he said he come up with a new technique i about vomited. jackson pollock was the first to make this way of painting to become noticed and drove the fore front of this type of artistic movement. all this dick did was take what pollock did and used the paint to draw a picture, what a rip off.
I live three blocks from this load in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Hes a fucking loser who drives around in a little pick up truck which hes done the same thing to. Theres NOTHING original about him. He does public access tv saying that hes the original this and the original that. you can claim anything when you target an ignorant audience. problem is, those people cant buy art, their fucking broke. They live on the same block. He sells shitty picture frames that fall apart.
As far as I know, he lives next to a cemetary. Very good chance those people no longer deal in art. I'd have to refute your claim about originality...I've never seen anyone paint a pick up truck in that style....and this loser has an MBA if that counts for anything....owns a house, if that counts for anything...eats right, doesn't smoke or drink, if that counts for anything....has genuine passion, if that counts for anything...is friendly with everybody, if that counts for anyting.
Having true passion DOES count for something. I applaude him for that.Everything else many people have and are phoney too. He lives in a dump (Ive been in there) so Im not sure exactly what his MBA has done for him. People get MBAs to chase money or the challenge of building a business which brings the money.Him being friendly with everyone is his biggest gift to us. If thats enough, cool. I believe it is. Being a good man is a HUGE accomplishment. HE IS NOT ORIGINAL. Hes not, His works not.
Who is original? Everyone borrows something from other artists, but they do it in their own way and they borrow different things from different artists and that makes them original. Who did you learn the technique you're using from? Yourself? Or some other artists?
I agree with you. Now tell this guy the same thing. I never claimed to discover or invent something thats been done for decades. He has and continues to do so. I learned my techniques like anyone else, through personal experimentation and discovery and from the professors and teaching artists at the Chicago Art Institute. Thats where I studied/worked. Could of went to Cooper Union or SVA. Got scholarship offers from both. How bout you?
LOL. Thats great. You see, I can and will put my credentials against anyone. ANYONE. So you want to get away from the point that this guy is telling the world that he created something "never seen before" to my poor grammar? Now your embarassing yourself. Im glad (and proud) hes a good man. NOT ORIGINAL.
I never said he was original, I'm only saying that no one is. Also, the reason I mentioned your poor grammar wasn't to insult you. My point was that anyone can comment and put whatever they want on youtube whether it's true or not. So your "credentials" mean nothing. On the other hand I obviously believe in what I see and that is your poor grammar. So at the end I ask myself: this guy says he finished so many great schools yet his grammar sucks. How's that possible?
Because I didnt go to school as an English major. Ill bet your the little pain in the ass that says because most doctors handwriting is illegible he must be illiterate or unqualified to perform his/her duties as a physician. It would be the same principal. The bottom line is that your defending this guy in THIS video saying hes just discovered or invented a new technique. I am with you in the fact that nothing is really original anymore. "Credentials?" LOL your a cunt. That I'VE seen.
Again, very poor grammar from a guy with such great credentials. Very sad. Oh and calling me a cunt is another good one. Well actually you didn't call me a cunt you said my a cunt. Whatever that means.
I didn't go to school as an English major either and I know your abasement should have been written "you're a cunt". Also, "The bottom line is that you're (not your)..." Here is a bottom line: YOUR work probably lacks impact because YOU'RE cantankerous and otherwise depressed. In addition, YOUR assessments reek of jealousy, not of Artist Singh or his skill level, but of his success attracting attention. You can't do that because you lack the ability to smile. :)
No, Im sorry if I offended anyone. what Im saying is, this guy drips and splashes paint on a canvass or whatever substrate and then says "Its never been done, the way Im doing this..." Is he out of his mind? Then he gets someone who knows nothing about art obviously saying "wow, ive never seen that..." No shit. I believe that buddy. he hasnt seen much of any kind of art on a hihgher or deeper level. Abstract Expressionists have been doing this for decades. Tools are tools.
I am the guy in the video who knows nothing about art. And, it is true, as I have witnessed few artists in the process of actual painting, I had never seen anything like it before. We had a conversation about Jackson Pollock that night. I think what is lost in translation here is that when he says "I discovered" it means, he found out about and wanted to try a technique which was new to him.
Well said and with an educated tongue and some compassion. Im sorry man. I get charged up when people do this because as an artist we hold dearly originality, new voice, technique etc.. He would be better off saying "heres a new take on a chereshed art form that needs to come back and be recogniozed and Im the one to bring it to a new audience, a new generation..."
The tragedy of his skills in English. Some things come out of his mouth as if they meant something else. It would be nice if he learned how to say it the way you put it. You may agree, artists are a bit ego-centric, if not just eccentric, and want to at least believe they have some kernal of originality in their work. Truth is, it has all been done before (until plastination). Originality can only be differentiated in the way you sell yourself. Tools are tools.
Here is something you've said in the past: Im not trying to insult (I apologize) but the whole point of art is to create,period. He is creating.The fact you dont see it as "true" art is irresponsible. I too am a purist in the sense that Id like my artists to be able to draw, paint, sculpt, write etc, but not all of them can or even want to.
So? Are you holding Artist Singh to a different standard?
Your comment about the whole point of art is to create. Your right. The arguement here and about "Singh" is one of originality in this technique HE has claimed. hes busted. Thats why I called him an Artist. I believe he is. I dont like it and I think its bad but the next person may love it. Thats ok. I like Schnabel, Miquel Barcelo, Larry Rivers and Warhol. There are people who think all of those artists are hacks. Ok. HE and this technique or approach IS NOT ORIGINAL.
Excellent, damned well said. I cant believe this guy. I live by him and he runs around in a college town (Western Michigan University) saying he is this and that. He rides a unicycle and drops paint on paneling and says "viola" or whatever. The 9 people in the park look at him and say "get the fuck outta here, moron!" The art department at WMU has denied his repetitive requests to exhibit with the students and the KIA for years. Im happy for his joy in the process but there is NO originality.
Definitely inspired by Jackson Pollock. However, Jackson Pollock never used his technique to create definitive figures/objects but I bet he experimented with that. Maybe Pollock destroyed them? I don't know, but great video, artwork, and thank you for sharing : ]
LOL Finally. Ive been saying this here in town and people jump all over me. Its true. This guy says "Hey, look at me, no ones ever done this." Does he really think people have no clue about the great Abstract Expressionists? Jesus, thank you for waking people up to this jack-off.
its actually about 50 years old, started with pollock, i like how he is using this technique to have a recognizable image, thats something new to me at least, still its hard to avoid the pollock comparisons when painting like this. I try to only splatter and drip on only a small portion of the canvas. still very cool!
i do that naked
bigaaroncrazycook 2 weeks ago
i can do that
bigaaroncrazycook 2 weeks ago
people y'all chill, happy accidents during the painting process are just as artistic as staged and elaborated structures and set ups. Are we going there ? yes Pollock was skilled but half of his body of work is filled with happy accidents, there is no doubt he tried it on countless of canvasses.
cannoir 3 months ago
This song destroyed everything. And pal, seriously, go read about Pollock. Or at least just about art in america in the 50's.
TheSymonDe 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock
Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock
Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock Pollock
Pure Pollock, Pollock is very very very best, the original is pollock
you copy poor
Guinhoete 4 months ago
why does he have a paint brush on his chin ?
NextLevelGamers1 6 months ago
If you look at Pollack's work it has a random effect. Singh's works contain images which require skill. Try it sometime.
rydernkzoo 1 year ago
@rydernkzoo Much agreed. Pollack's work is abstract, whereas singh's work uses the same concept, it actually produces an image.
ShokanPrince812 1 year ago
@rydernkzoo If you think Pollock's work was "random", you really don't understand it. Every line, every splash, every drop of paint he put on a canvas went where he wanted it to. It *looks* random because he *wanted* it to look random--which requires skill. As for this artist . . .In my opinion, he's hoping no one has heard of Jackson Pollock. He's *good*, but he should really give credit where credit is due.
Frohike1970 1 year ago
@rydernkzoo nothing POLLOCK... did was random...... there is no doubt this man is inspired by him. nothing wrong with that, every artist is inspired by what we see. its kindof ignorant to imply that one of the most succesful abstract expresionists didn't have skill.
by the way you probably could find all this out on wikipedia or some shit. try it sometime.
gosk8petewentz2 4 months ago
one word... Pollack.
LIDxKID 1 year ago
worst song ever... And Pollock did it before...
MathyMathy 1 year ago
lol yeah all of jackson pollocks art was no touch and he used similliar tools
Zelda27TP 1 year ago
New technique you came up with? LOL Maybe if you've been living in a cave during the last century
Diranasaur 1 year ago
i prepaired a long reply to the ones on here who want to challenge my original comments, but i chose not to write it... so i suggest you go back and read my original comments, all of them and see my problem with this gook was his comment that he invented this tech, and my comment about reading a book was in response to someone who has no idea of what she was talking about. im honestly done arguing about someone who has little talent like mr long beard here. you all enjoy urselves...
bearsdaddyjrspap 2 years ago
if u want more of an education let me know ill gladly give it to you.... want to know a real artistn real tallent check out michael hussar....
bearsdaddyjrspap 2 years ago
so in closing, dont come onto utube and call me rude for stating the obviouse, and for another thing, many centries of artists, yes even those who painted on walls in caves, had critics, if you want to be an artist, and want to post shit on the net, then learn to take critisim. or dont fuckin do it... go open a book and read before u come at me and single me out. cause i bet if he and i were put together in a contest, i would tromp his ass... no JOKE.
bearsdaddyjrspap 2 years ago
I can arrange a contest between you and Artist Singh. What shall be the criteria for judging?
BeTheFuture 2 years ago
Excellent brother. These fucking people have no clue.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
Your comment contradicts itself because you say people have the right to their opinion and to critique, yet you freaked out when someone debated and critiqued your opinion. "Go read a book before you debate me" is a desperate attempt to make someone feel stupid, I say desperate because it makes no sense to read a book before you post a comment on youtube.
Saint7781 2 years ago
or maybe type in the name jackson pollack, and you would see that this so called tallented individuall that you love so much was nothing more then a idiotic crackpot.
bearsdaddyjrspap 2 years ago
you know funny thing is (TheVanessaRae) i have studdied art, at three of the top colleges, i have won multiple awards for my art, i have one man shows with my art, which is a had thing to acheive, i think that you spoke before you realy knew what you were talking about. and as far as this pecker wad that your defending, i along with other youtubers, were commenting on his statment that he invented this tech, which if you were to open a book, and actualy read some about history of art,
bearsdaddyjrspap 2 years ago
YES! THATS OUR POINT EXACTLY...LOL our point was that he said he came up with, invented, created this technique. if i walked up to you with a stick with hairs on it and told you look at what i invented, now its the year 2010 and the brush was created many many many many years ago, and perfected through all the artists our the centries. what would u say to me? most likely dude ur a fuckin idiot, its already been done, if i went around saying i invented this brush i would deserve the critisim.
bearsdaddyjrspap 2 years ago
@bearsdaddyjrspap wow you are a really rude person. Gurmej Singh is such a talented artist and he is a one of a kind artist. I bet you could not be 1/3 of the artist he is.
TheVanessaRae 2 years ago
He may be talented, he may be a kind man. HE IS NOT ORIGINAL. He did not invent this "technique." he loves to sell that bullshit becasue he is clever/shady enough to know that when you tell an uneducated audience that you are "original" and present yourself as an artist (which I believe he is) it helps you sell stuff, Period. hes a hack and hes not original in any way.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
What he's picked up on is that the hacks make the most money in the art world, to substantiate your comments about an MBA, he is interested (obsessed) in how he can turn art into money. He hasn't figured it out yet, but he has figured out how to draw attention to himself. Many artists fail at that.
BeTheFuture 2 years ago
This drip painting is becoming popular again. This is great! Its like texture painting without having to mess with oils and or plaster. Love your form!
terafortdrum 2 years ago
very cool result...this must be fun...
ainerisa 2 years ago
He's the Harlem Globetrotter of painting
tkduane18 2 years ago
ANd the Pee Wee Herman of acting. Trying to convince himself,and convince others that hes this deep, thoughtful eccentric art type whis just discovered dripping (Pollack) and spinning (Damien Hirst) paint onto things. Nope, busted dumb fuck.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
i bout wanted to smack that 2 ft beard off of his face when he said he invented or came up with this new tech.... wtf, id love to catch him riding a unicycle in my college park cause id find the nearest stick and throw it in his spokes.
bearsdaddyjrspap 2 years ago 2
LMAO... Excellent. What a fucking Dildo this creton is. "Original?" wrong, busted!
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
u know the funny thing is i watched this vid, and when he said he come up with a new technique i about vomited. jackson pollock was the first to make this way of painting to become noticed and drove the fore front of this type of artistic movement. all this dick did was take what pollock did and used the paint to draw a picture, what a rip off.
bearsdaddyjrspap 2 years ago 3
I live three blocks from this load in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Hes a fucking loser who drives around in a little pick up truck which hes done the same thing to. Theres NOTHING original about him. He does public access tv saying that hes the original this and the original that. you can claim anything when you target an ignorant audience. problem is, those people cant buy art, their fucking broke. They live on the same block. He sells shitty picture frames that fall apart.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
As far as I know, he lives next to a cemetary. Very good chance those people no longer deal in art. I'd have to refute your claim about originality...I've never seen anyone paint a pick up truck in that style....and this loser has an MBA if that counts for anything....owns a house, if that counts for anything...eats right, doesn't smoke or drink, if that counts for anything....has genuine passion, if that counts for anything...is friendly with everybody, if that counts for anyting.
BeTheFuture 2 years ago
Having true passion DOES count for something. I applaude him for that.Everything else many people have and are phoney too. He lives in a dump (Ive been in there) so Im not sure exactly what his MBA has done for him. People get MBAs to chase money or the challenge of building a business which brings the money.Him being friendly with everyone is his biggest gift to us. If thats enough, cool. I believe it is. Being a good man is a HUGE accomplishment. HE IS NOT ORIGINAL. Hes not, His works not.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
Who is original? Everyone borrows something from other artists, but they do it in their own way and they borrow different things from different artists and that makes them original. Who did you learn the technique you're using from? Yourself? Or some other artists?
Saint7781 2 years ago
I agree with you. Now tell this guy the same thing. I never claimed to discover or invent something thats been done for decades. He has and continues to do so. I learned my techniques like anyone else, through personal experimentation and discovery and from the professors and teaching artists at the Chicago Art Institute. Thats where I studied/worked. Could of went to Cooper Union or SVA. Got scholarship offers from both. How bout you?
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
Me? I have no need to tell strangers my ambitions, but I know it's "could have" and not "could of".
Saint7781 2 years ago
LOL. Thats great. You see, I can and will put my credentials against anyone. ANYONE. So you want to get away from the point that this guy is telling the world that he created something "never seen before" to my poor grammar? Now your embarassing yourself. Im glad (and proud) hes a good man. NOT ORIGINAL.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
I never said he was original, I'm only saying that no one is. Also, the reason I mentioned your poor grammar wasn't to insult you. My point was that anyone can comment and put whatever they want on youtube whether it's true or not. So your "credentials" mean nothing. On the other hand I obviously believe in what I see and that is your poor grammar. So at the end I ask myself: this guy says he finished so many great schools yet his grammar sucks. How's that possible?
Saint7781 2 years ago
Because I didnt go to school as an English major. Ill bet your the little pain in the ass that says because most doctors handwriting is illegible he must be illiterate or unqualified to perform his/her duties as a physician. It would be the same principal. The bottom line is that your defending this guy in THIS video saying hes just discovered or invented a new technique. I am with you in the fact that nothing is really original anymore. "Credentials?" LOL your a cunt. That I'VE seen.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
Again, very poor grammar from a guy with such great credentials. Very sad. Oh and calling me a cunt is another good one. Well actually you didn't call me a cunt you said my a cunt. Whatever that means.
Saint7781 2 years ago
I didn't go to school as an English major either and I know your abasement should have been written "you're a cunt". Also, "The bottom line is that you're (not your)..." Here is a bottom line: YOUR work probably lacks impact because YOU'RE cantankerous and otherwise depressed. In addition, YOUR assessments reek of jealousy, not of Artist Singh or his skill level, but of his success attracting attention. You can't do that because you lack the ability to smile. :)
BeTheFuture 2 years ago
So wait a minute, does that mean that everyone who uses brushes ripped off the first painter that used a brush?
Saint7781 2 years ago
No, Im sorry if I offended anyone. what Im saying is, this guy drips and splashes paint on a canvass or whatever substrate and then says "Its never been done, the way Im doing this..." Is he out of his mind? Then he gets someone who knows nothing about art obviously saying "wow, ive never seen that..." No shit. I believe that buddy. he hasnt seen much of any kind of art on a hihgher or deeper level. Abstract Expressionists have been doing this for decades. Tools are tools.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
I am the guy in the video who knows nothing about art. And, it is true, as I have witnessed few artists in the process of actual painting, I had never seen anything like it before. We had a conversation about Jackson Pollock that night. I think what is lost in translation here is that when he says "I discovered" it means, he found out about and wanted to try a technique which was new to him.
BeTheFuture 2 years ago
Well said and with an educated tongue and some compassion. Im sorry man. I get charged up when people do this because as an artist we hold dearly originality, new voice, technique etc.. He would be better off saying "heres a new take on a chereshed art form that needs to come back and be recogniozed and Im the one to bring it to a new audience, a new generation..."
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
The tragedy of his skills in English. Some things come out of his mouth as if they meant something else. It would be nice if he learned how to say it the way you put it. You may agree, artists are a bit ego-centric, if not just eccentric, and want to at least believe they have some kernal of originality in their work. Truth is, it has all been done before (until plastination). Originality can only be differentiated in the way you sell yourself. Tools are tools.
BeTheFuture 2 years ago
Jackson Pollock anyone?
GaryWisePhotography 2 years ago 3
Thank you. Finally an educated opinion and this guy is busted.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
This is beautiful. Elegant ....I love it excellent work, impress
bunny2u101 2 years ago
Nothing new here!
Glass232499 2 years ago 11
Thank you. You know art.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
Here is something you've said in the past: Im not trying to insult (I apologize) but the whole point of art is to create,period. He is creating.The fact you dont see it as "true" art is irresponsible. I too am a purist in the sense that Id like my artists to be able to draw, paint, sculpt, write etc, but not all of them can or even want to.
So? Are you holding Artist Singh to a different standard?
BeTheFuture 2 years ago
Your comment about the whole point of art is to create. Your right. The arguement here and about "Singh" is one of originality in this technique HE has claimed. hes busted. Thats why I called him an Artist. I believe he is. I dont like it and I think its bad but the next person may love it. Thats ok. I like Schnabel, Miquel Barcelo, Larry Rivers and Warhol. There are people who think all of those artists are hacks. Ok. HE and this technique or approach IS NOT ORIGINAL.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
dude... you should read some art history before you claim urs is a " new" idea...
samysar 2 years ago 14
Excellent, damned well said. I cant believe this guy. I live by him and he runs around in a college town (Western Michigan University) saying he is this and that. He rides a unicycle and drops paint on paneling and says "viola" or whatever. The 9 people in the park look at him and say "get the fuck outta here, moron!" The art department at WMU has denied his repetitive requests to exhibit with the students and the KIA for years. Im happy for his joy in the process but there is NO originality.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
Definitely inspired by Jackson Pollock. However, Jackson Pollock never used his technique to create definitive figures/objects but I bet he experimented with that. Maybe Pollock destroyed them? I don't know, but great video, artwork, and thank you for sharing : ]
Cr3ativity 2 years ago
New technique?
Try looking up Jackson Pollock who mastered this technique centuries ago you idiot.
sectamill 2 years ago
LOL Finally. Ive been saying this here in town and people jump all over me. Its true. This guy says "Hey, look at me, no ones ever done this." Does he really think people have no clue about the great Abstract Expressionists? Jesus, thank you for waking people up to this jack-off.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
It was fun to watch - beautiful work.
londonartgirl06 3 years ago
...it's not a new technique. It is centuries old, but new to you...
Spread PEACE
1higherground 3 years ago
its actually about 50 years old, started with pollock, i like how he is using this technique to have a recognizable image, thats something new to me at least, still its hard to avoid the pollock comparisons when painting like this. I try to only splatter and drip on only a small portion of the canvas. still very cool!
Zach3066 2 years ago
Excellent commentary.
stinkriverstudios 2 years ago
Nice work! Keep it up.
blankcanvas53 3 years ago
thats an extreamly innoventive idea... i think they should introduce that into art classes... also schools
08smacvicar 3 years ago
yeah, but pollock he is not!!!
not bad but not jp.
psychodelicdragon 3 years ago
this reminds me the painting of jackson POLLOCK... is really great!!
rotech19 3 years ago
SUPER!!!
POLSKAdjconan 3 years ago
wtf...in a good and bad way...
salaminfred 4 years ago