Here's a pendulum.
Is there a portion of this arc between these two extremes where you like the art pendulum to swing?
I’m only applying this to representational art by the way.
At one end, the pendulum would swing to hyper realism.
Perfect in every detail.
At the other end it would find a caricature of exaggerations so extreme that recognizing anything would be a bit of a challenge. But it’s there if you look hard enough, or know what you’re looking for.
Hyper realism is too far off in one direction for me.
It loses believability because it’s so realistic, if it isn’t actually moving, something seems terribly wrong. It looks lifeless and frozen in time.
Exaggerations that almost become completely abstract don’t do it for me either. If there's anything worth looking at, it's lost on me.
Growing up I would find Michelangelo books and Bugs Bunny cartoons equally engrossing.
Imagine my excitement to learn that Leonardo made cartoons!
When I got to see some, I was quite disappointed.
Not what I had in mind at all!
What Michelangelo and Chuck Jones had in common was a keen observance of natural truth, and just the right amount of exaggeration to breathe vibrant life into their very different handiwork.
Of course Chuck Jones needed to push the pendulum further towards the exaggeration end of the spectrum to achieve his goals, but even so his work always remained in some sense believable.
So I suppose for me, when the pendulum leaves the realm of believability (even for Bugs Bunny!) it also leaves me cold.
I find art always needs some emphasis or slight exaggeration to feel life-like.
For my tastes, the optimal amount depends on the medium.
And how far you go determines your personal taste and style.
Or vice-versa.
That's all folks!
