Fine Art America - Art - Prints - Canvas Prints - Framed Prints - Metal Prints - Acrylic Prints

Every purchase includes a money-back guarantee.

312-238-9009

CART

SHOP

SELL

CREATE

LIMITED

TOUR

Fine Art Discussions

Keyword Search  | Main Menu

Search Discussions

 

Decorative Art Vs. Fine Art

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/10/2012 - 4:04 PM

In several threads I have posted and others, I have noticed a big difference in opinions on what art is. On the one hand, decorative artists and the other those who do Fine Art. The following are my opinions alone that I have picked up on FAA.

Decorative artist

They do art for the money. They seem to use whatever they can to come up with for a finnished image. (public domain, clip art, paid for images) Not in all cases but many. These artists first decide on whether they can sell a work before they do it. One artist compares selling his work to that of selling toasters.

Fine Art

"Art for Arts sake". Money is good but not the prime motivator. Thse people do Art because that is what they do. Quite often for a lifetime.
Their attitudes are not all that different from a monk or priest.

There are, of course, many other factors in doing art but the above seem to cause a great deal of dissent on FAA.

What do you think?

To quote Vivian " I think what you're trying to differentiate is the artist's INTENT" Yes Vivian this is my INTENT

Please do not post vids or images.

 

Most Recent Reply

Posted by: Robert Kernodle on 12/12/2012 - 7:05 PM

Mark,

Yes, dichotomies make for interesting discussions. Many times, however, they trick us into making absolute divisions where, really, there are none. I have fun disrupting this human tendency - to choose one side or the other - just as you have fun entertaining this human tendency. Hey, I think I just implied a dichotomy there (i.e., dichotomizing vs. not dichotomizing) (^_^).

Gray, some of the world's highest paid fashion models can't sing, ain't that pretty, and have very thin legs. Maybe you missed your calling.

- Robert

 

Posted by: Gra Howard on 12/12/2012 - 4:47 PM

The art that sells is boring for me to produce...The art I enjoy doing doesn't sell.
I despair that people are don't like me...
Oh well, can't help bout the shape I'm in. Can't sing, ain't pretty and my legs are thin. :0)
Merry Christmas One and All.

 

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/12/2012 - 3:18 PM

Robert K. Good observation. Not bad at all. But then, I refer only to faa, not the "real world". I like to throw ideas at the wall and see what sticks. If it sticks, I try to find out why.

 

Posted by: Robert Kernodle on 12/12/2012 - 2:44 PM

"Decorative Art" vs. "Fine Art" = false dichotomy.

I do not accept the premise.

"Decorative" indicates a CHOICE concerning what to DO with art.

"Fine" indicates an ATTITUDE concerning how to THINK about art.

Olympic swimming vs. Fish swimming. There is NOT a "vs." that sensibly applies.

- Robert

 

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/12/2012 - 1:50 PM

From Marlene Burns

Subject:
decorative vs fine art

Message:
hi mark!
i cannot post in the forum or use the intermail system for a year...but i did want to comment on your thread. i have been in business over 40 years and i openly claim to do both.
i call my fine art, my serious work....that is the stuff i do daily...what is coming out of me, my process. if i end up with a product at day's end, it is a bonus.
my decorative work is what i do that is :
1. light hearted
2. less costly
3. often in this season's designer colors to serve as an adjunct to their beautifully designed homes that need finishing touches AND
4. most custom work ( since the color rendering removes my element of spontaneous creation )
and there you have it...feel free to quote this banished person from the kingdom. lol

 

Posted by: Enver Larney on 12/12/2012 - 6:55 AM

It's tough at the bottom....

but worse at the top.....

 

Posted by: Lawrence Supino on 12/11/2012 - 10:23 PM

do an "exorcist" head turn...
see...you're not alone ;)

"on it"...not "of it".

 

Posted by: Penny M on 12/11/2012 - 8:54 PM

Thanks Lawrence,
RJ can't talk now, we are packed up and only have my computer out, besides he's reading Tolstoy,
but I have been reading the posts to him and he laughed and said,
Yes Lawrence, it's lonely at the bottom...

 

Posted by: Lawrence Supino on 12/11/2012 - 8:47 PM

All the "pc" quotes on the planet cannot discount the "uniqueness" of personalities / desire / need.

There are "types"...there are "two camps"...etc. among "artists". There are also points in their distinctive differences/similarities that the line between them blends.

Both "types" have similar dealer/decorator crook problems...need for catalogs...etc.

Mark...if I'm not mistaking...is talking about the completely different types of "head" artists (humans) come with, not technical ability or talent an artist can have.

He's talking about the "Leo Castelli" types/days....and...What Soho, NY used to be about before the "decorator" shops took it over!!

But I could be wrong ;)



Penny...

No need to defend/explain RJ to the unknown. ;))

Depending on ones personality…This "fine art" purity club, so many want to be a member of, can be one lonely existence without $uccess to help in playing the true “fine art” game.

And those who relish in it's difficulty do so for a variety of reasons....and many times one of the reasons is fear of being accepted/allowed to wear the "label", regardless of how well it really fits.

You know it's all a game, eh? ;) ....the mind is a game.

Mastering any "game" on this planet requires angst and separation....patience and individuality...whether taking the bus or waiting to get picked up by a stranger or mom/dad.

“Identity” travels by many modes ;))

 

Posted by: Charles Kozierok on 12/11/2012 - 8:25 PM

"I don't sell here."

Ah, so now the problem becomes more clear: you're in the wrong place.

First line of the "About" page for this site: "FineArtAmerica.com has revolutionized the way that artwork is bought and sold around the world."

Not that you aren't perfectly welcome here, but really -- this is like going to a chili cook-off and complaining about all the meat and spices.

 

Posted by: Gregory Scott on 12/11/2012 - 8:14 PM

I want to break down the essence of my art.
The process involves 3 major elements:
Being there
Seeing it
Producing an image of it.
It may ultimately be decorative, or it may not. Technical skill matters a lot. Designing a chair that won't collapse matters a lot, but technical skill never disqualifies art from being "fine art".
To me, the main "art" occurs in step 2, seeing it. But there is a certain art in "being there", the art of love. If you don't care enough to be there, then you can't get involved in a quest for visiont, and you'll never get the opportunity to experience to the "aha" moment of "seeing it".
To me, it is immaterial if "there" is in a machine shop, in the wilderness, in the home, or in the presence of other human beings. If it replicates a vision, it is art. If it does it with the right "je ne sais quois", then it's good art. If it does it very well, then it's fine art. So to me, the fine means not the subject,, the medium, or any ulterior motives, it's "artistic quality".

 

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/11/2012 - 7:58 PM

I don't sell here. At first, I wanted access to 'one at a time' notecards. They wouldn't let me have a "fixed" design so I didn"t use the service. I like the discussion boards. I want to know what the "everything is art and everybody is an artist" crowd is like. I have found that not everyone is that way on faa. Some true artist here. and some others..........................

 

Posted by: Penny M on 12/11/2012 - 7:41 PM

So would the commercial artist advise the fine artist to get off the bus? stop making fine art (which doesn't sell to mass markets) and produce something salable en mass?


FYI
RJ is here cause I sent him here, he was spending way too much time 'in his head', he was on 6 medications taken 8 times a day, having siezures, blackouts, headaches, pain you wouldn't believe, I thought some outside communication would release him from himself, and it has off and on. I am the sell out here, putting him on POD, not him.

Although he is more of a hitchhiker than a bus-type...

 

Posted by: Xoanxo Cespon on 12/11/2012 - 6:59 PM

And some of us think...

"You are perfect in your Uniqueness"

 

Posted by: Dan Turner on 12/11/2012 - 6:47 PM

Absolutely, Charles.

It sounds like Mark is simply mislabeling his divisions. There are Commercial Artists (the term I believe he is looking for) and Fine Artists. Yes, skill sets are similar. But (according to the IRS) one is concerned with auto insurance on his Mercedes and the other is concerned with bus schedules.

 

Posted by: Charles Kozierok on 12/11/2012 - 6:41 PM

There are two types of people in the world: those who divide people into two types, and those who don't.

(Old joke.)

Look, there are things that people like to make, and things that people like to buy. If you're talented and lucky, you find something that intersects those sets that you enjoy and you're good at. Otherwise, your only choices are marketing or adapting to make things that people want. Most artists fall somewhere in the middle and use a combination of these approaches.

There is no simple, strict division of artists into two camps. The entire idea is nonsense.

Or, look at it this way: if someone was just trying to make money, would art really be the easiest way of doing it? And on the other hand, if an artist really doesn't care about money, what is he or she doing on a print-on-demand site?

 

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/11/2012 - 6:17 PM

I think decorative artist think quite differently than those in the fine arts. Decorative artists have a different intent to the way they work even thought the skill sets needed are about the same. For instance: Do you need to pay attention to the average available room above a couch? Art you concerned what decorators are currently using for color? What predominate colors in your images sell best? What subjects sell best? Endless marketing questions, and so forth.
The Fine Arts are different. Different problems. They could care less about the above. They need a dealer. Artists usually don't deal their own work. They need a different dealer. (the current one is a crook) They are working on the next show or they are hanging a show. Working on a catalog. Hanging out in coffee houses and art bars. Living the life style, in some cases anyway.
What I am saying is there is a big difference in the two directons in art. Of course there are many shade of grey but I wonder if there is any real communication.


T

 

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/11/2012 - 4:15 PM

Wing................. Did you bother to read the beginning of this thread? Take care of it.

 

Posted by: Philip Sweeck on 12/11/2012 - 4:12 PM

Wise men speak because they have something to say, fools because they have to say something - Plato

 

Posted by: Penny M on 12/11/2012 - 4:08 PM

This requires critical thinking skills, something the U.S education dept is not good at teaching...

 

Posted by: Wingsdomain Art and Photography on 12/11/2012 - 4:06 PM

 

Posted by: Robert James Hacunda on 12/11/2012 - 3:58 PM

from Mark;
There are, of course, many other factors in doing art but the above seem to cause a great deal of dissent on FAA.

What do you think?

To quote Vivian " I think what you're trying to differentiate is the artist's INTENT" Yes Vivian this is my INTENT


I think it's all right here guys he asking you to look at INTENT and where you see the lines drawn.... he asks" WHAT DO YOU THINK?" his first part is his own take and when he says " Of course , many other factors" he is admitting it....SO WHAT DO YOU THINK? is there a division do to INTENT? or is it purely a popularity contest?

 

Posted by: Dan Turner on 12/11/2012 - 3:49 PM

Mark, if you're looking for different responses, then you need different bait.

 

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/11/2012 - 3:46 PM

issues Dan................ I don't mean your internal issues.

 

Posted by: Charles Kozierok on 12/11/2012 - 3:45 PM

When I'm serious people complain; when I'm light-hearted people complain. Can't win. :)

Mark, what exactly *is* the point here? What is it you are trying to say?

I thought I expressed earlier that I thought your dichotomy was nonsense. If you have a specific thesis to put forward, do so.

Big Skip

This is a very popular discussion with 130 responses.   In order to help the page load faster and allow you to quickly read the most recent posts, we're only showing you the oldest 25 posts and the newest 25 posts.   Everything in the middle has been skipped.   Want to read the entire discussion?   No problem: click here.

 

Posted by: Vivian ANDERSON on 12/10/2012 - 6:30 PM

Very broad categories...........Idealist Purist versus Aggressive Opportunist.

IP can be a snob, too, claiming to produce only "fine" meaningful Art for the serious to understand. Sometimes 'legends in their own minds', btw.

AO can be well-intentioned, with an added intent for commercial success/acceptance outside the high-art collectors, more for the larger (faa) audiences with perhaps less need for perfection and perhaps indulgent of the current trend for instant gratification.........not a bad thing......they like, they buy........good for them, good for faa.....

RJ.........care to elaborate on IP vs AO ? I've only scratched the surface.

 

Posted by: Penny M on 12/10/2012 - 6:24 PM

Do you really think that Mark is analyzing the results, do you think you get brownie points, allowed in the club, not voted off the island?

Perhaps he is just starting a conversation...

 

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/10/2012 - 6:22 PM

"the Idealistic purest verses the aggressive opportunist" Robert Can you enlarge on this? Seems to be a little more than apples and oranges.

 

Posted by: Barbara Middleton on 12/10/2012 - 6:22 PM






Art, fine art, decorative art, all art is an expression of the urge to create.

 

Posted by: EricaMaxine Price on 12/10/2012 - 6:13 PM

I think Mark should stick to his day job and not try to analyze people without a degree.

Who cares why someone paints dots and someone else paint mountains?

You have no clue as to why people do what they do, but for your information it IS all art.

 

Posted by: Robert James Hacunda on 12/10/2012 - 6:08 PM

Mark your intro paints two categories of thinking : the Idealistic purest verses the aggressive opportunist ..these two classifications in themselves tell a lot..

 

Posted by: Peter Chilelli on 12/10/2012 - 5:54 PM

I guess I'm a fine decorative artist...or is it decorative fine artist??

-Peter

 

Posted by: Charles Kozierok on 12/10/2012 - 5:41 PM

"I think it doesn't matter. Dissent is caused by differences. Differences should be valued as much as dissent."

Hear, hear.

And by the way, Mark, singling out the use of "public domain, clip art, paid for images" as being indicative of anything is bogus. There's plenty of "fine art" that uses those elements, and plenty of art made solely for the sake of making money that doesn't.

 

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/10/2012 - 5:39 PM

" Differences should be valued as much as dissent" Tony Differences need to be understood before they can be valued.

 

Posted by: Tony Murray on 12/10/2012 - 5:25 PM

"There are, of course, many other factors in doing art but the above seem to cause a great deal of dissent on FAA."

"What do you think? "

I think it doesn't matter. Dissent is caused by differences. Differences should be valued as much as dissent.

 

Posted by: Marcio Faustino on 12/10/2012 - 5:24 PM

Fine artists create.
(methods, style, ideas, tools, concepts, philosophy, technics, etc).
It evolves investigate, philosoph, risk, tries, etc

Decorative artists reproduce.
(reproduce what exist already, what "works", what they know will work, including their on feelings and expression).
No risk, no investigation. Just copy what they like and keep reproducing what work for them.

Simple like this.

 

Posted by: Xoanxo Cespon on 12/10/2012 - 5:08 PM

Hmmm, Mark I honestly thought you would understand!!!...Have you seen the video?

 

Posted by: John Crothers on 12/10/2012 - 5:07 PM

I take pictures of things I want to take pictures of AND things I think someone else may want.

I also use my graphic design edukation to try to come up with ideas that may be considered "decorative art" because the only reasons I do them is to practice with my Adobe products and sell. I am working on a few ideas now. Here is the first in a "series" I am messing with. Will anything come of it? Who knows. But it is not something I would make for myself.

Art Prints

 

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/10/2012 - 5:06 PM

That's great X............... Can you clarify? How does that apply to this thread?

 

Posted by: Xoanxo Cespon on 12/10/2012 - 5:01 PM

From xoanxo.com About Xoanxo:

Who am I ?

A father, a brother, a son?

Or none?

A painter, a poet, a man?

Or none?

A lover, a husband, a friend?

Or none?

Am I a person, a concept, a name?

Or none?

I am who?

If we are One,

I can only be You.

From my Bio here:

"The best definition I was ever given of myself was from my good friend Aziz that once said to me 'You are what makes this moment possible'.

From my Personal Information at my Artist page in Facebook:

"If you want to know me, give me freedom to be myself and break the prison of the judgements with which you created me"

From my own definition of Art:

I consider Art to be a process, An Artist he/she who enters such process and The Work of Art, the result of such process (material or not, can of course be a performance).

To me, there are "Artists" and there are "Pretenders"

Art requires from the Artists:

Courage,
Sincerity,
Integrity,

And I won't be their judge, only oneself really knows:

This is a question I asked myself a while ago:




 

Posted by: Mark James Perry on 12/10/2012 - 4:58 PM

"I'm an "Art for Art's Sake" artist, Mark, but that doesn't preclude me from being 'decorative'." Vivian. A lot of Fine Art is decorative. Just not a requirement. The decorative work in Fine Art isn't done to match the drapes.

Semmick......... That is a fair and honest comment.

 

Posted by: Marilyn Smith on 12/10/2012 - 4:47 PM

oooops!

 

Posted by: Marilyn Smith on 12/10/2012 - 4:45 PM

I think I am a "Fine Toaster Artist"! I paint because it's in my heart and is just part of me. But I am always looking out there to see the type of art people are interested in and I am sure that affects what I produce at times. It's always great to make a sale!

 

Posted by: Semmick Photo on 12/10/2012 - 4:43 PM

I dont belong in either category. I am not a fine artist and I am not a decorative artist. I just create images and I hope people buy them because I do it for the money and I do it because I just want to create images.

 

Posted by: Vivian ANDERSON on 12/10/2012 - 4:37 PM

Yes, sorry Charles, I shouldn't have even bothered addressing you - we all know where that leads.

Back on topic, but not me.

 

Posted by: Jeff Kolker on 12/10/2012 - 4:34 PM

I don't do this for (art) for the money. I consider the fact that I've sold anything a minor miracle. So, in those terms I would be a "Fine Artist". So what happens to "fine artists" who start selling a lot? Does that mean they are no longer "fine"? If the "fine artist" makes a living at his chosen field of art, what then? The artist needs to make a living, so there has to be some concern for sales. My head hurts....

I know why I do what I do as for creating my artwork. I enjoy it.

 

Posted by: Charles Kozierok on 12/10/2012 - 4:31 PM

"EDIT: Oh well, too late......you've done it again, Charles.....nothing to contribute but negativity......seems to have found an audience. Too bad for the thinkers here, with literate opinions, as requested...........same old, same old, same old..............back into my room now. Boring,repetitive,same old..........too bad, Mark."

???

I wrote a four-word, light-hearted joke. No idea what you are so upset about, honestly.

 

Posted by: Vivian ANDERSON on 12/10/2012 - 4:18 PM

EDIT: Oh well, too late......you've done it again, Charles.....nothing to contribute but negativity......seems to have found an audience. Too bad for the thinkers here, with literate opinions, as requested...........same old, same old, same old..............back into my room now. Boring,repetitive,same old..........too bad, Mark.

 

Posted by: I F A Shores on 12/10/2012 - 4:14 PM

What Charles said

 

Posted by: JC Findley on 12/10/2012 - 4:13 PM

What Charles said...

But, at least I fall under the "fine artist" in your definition. Though, since I only sell prints, that would make me a decorative artist. hmmmmm

 

Posted by: Vivian ANDERSON on 12/10/2012 - 4:13 PM

I'm an "Art for Art's Sake" artist, Mark, but that doesn't preclude me from being 'decorative'. I think what you're trying to differentiate is the artist's INTENT..........and I see nothing wrong with the intent to be decorative, to sell, and being so doesn't preclude decorative work from being Fine Art...........it's a strong supposition to think decorative artists are motivated by selling rather than the need to create.

The 'toaster' types have their own modus operandii and from what I gather - their INTENT is to make sales - but that doesn't make their work less of value...especially to all those buyers who order on a regular basis that 'toaster' art..........it is yet another sort of Art, I suppose.....but, a creation nevertheless.......just perhaps not 'fine' art....the toasters don't care if they're considered 'fine artists', I believe........might be wrong (it's been known)..........room for all, I guess.

@Charles.........yes, and hopefully, would you mind, please don't let's make this all about you AGAIN....if you're disinterested, stay out of it, for a change, please, thank you.

EDIT: Oh well, too late......you've done it again, Charles.....nothing to contribute but negativity......seems to have found an audience. Too bad for the thinkers here, with literate opinions, as requested...........same old, same old, same old..............back into my room now. Boring,repetitive,same old..........too bad, Mark.

 

Posted by: Charles Kozierok on 12/10/2012 - 4:10 PM

I think: "Here we go again!"

LOL.

 

This discussion is closed.