Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 10-31-2019, 07:58 AM
AncientHumanoid's Avatar
AncientHumanoid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Quantum foam
Posts: 24,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
In the first place the BART system doesn't include the trolley cars.

Now that I've got the killjoy business out of the way:

No, he would have been Thomas Kinkade...


Yeah, I know. Frankly, I'm surprised this nitpick took so long!
__________________
That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.
  #52  
Old 10-31-2019, 08:29 AM
Ludovic is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,478
With regards to Ross vs creators of modern art, Ross is more of a lifelong session musician versus a one hit wonder. He didn't make great art because he wasn't trying to make great art. The one hit wonders were trying to make art but usually failing, but their total output was more because you only have to succeed once.

For every museum quality piece you see in a modern art wing there are probably a lot more that just aren't up to that quality for many of the artists, and they certainly couldn't make them in 30 minutes. (With the exception of Pollock I suspect, as every museum seems to have its own Pollock so there are probably lots to go around.)
  #53  
Old 10-31-2019, 04:41 PM
TimfromNapa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
I remember catching Bob Ross on PBS when flipping channels back in the 90s, and being just mesmerized: by his hair, his voice, his application of Prussian Blue and Van Dyke Brown and Sap Green with a two-inch brush to make a happy little tree in front of some mountains atop a crystal lake.

The dude was a pot brownie in denim, and he made gorgeous landscapes somehow magically appear out of nowhere upon an 18x24 canvas, gently brushed with liquid white. Let me be clear: I have no artistic ability so I may be easily impressed. Also, I may have smoked my fair share of marijuana while channel surfing between the years of 1995 and 1999.

I've begun watching these shows with my son and daughter on Hulu, and I'm still as mesmerized by ol' Bob Ross and his fluffy 'fro and happy little clouds, but his art reminds me of something you'd see hanging on the wall of a Ramada in Jeff City Missouri or being sold along the back wall of a Goodwill in Fowlerville Michigan.

So, I've come to the conclusion that Bob Ross is: 1) Relaxing and inoffensive to listen to, 2) An interesting character, and 3) A technically good painter. But, he's basically a really shitty artist. He spits out these generic landscapes while lulling his viewers into a sense of wonder, making you say "Holy shit dude, that's a fucking pine tree. How did he do that?" And he did it all while wearing the same clothes for like 30 seasons. God bless him and his technique, but he basically sucked as someone who created ART, right?
You can't fairly judge Bob Ross as an artist on the basis of what you saw on his show. The purpose of his show was instruction. He demonstrated basic techniques that could enable anyone to paint a convincing landscape. He was not there to show the world how great an artiste he was and blow viewers' sox off.
  #54  
Old 10-31-2019, 05:41 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 11,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by dontbesojumpy View Post
Some people here ask if he painted other things, like people. His son is quoted as saying he never wanted to paint people.
At least one painting has a person.
  #55  
Old 10-31-2019, 06:21 PM
terentii's Avatar
terentii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Moscow/Toronto
Posts: 18,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darren Garrison View Post
Looks like a scene from Bambi.
__________________
"Makes you wonder why we bother, eh, Fawlty?"
"Didn't know you did, Major."
  #56  
Old 10-31-2019, 07:19 PM
carrps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 919
Quote:
Originally Posted by RealityChuck View Post
Ross was an art teacher. He never claimed to be an artist and never made a living doing fine art. Before the show, he made his money from painting on souvenir gold-mining pans in Alaska and from selling art supplies.

His talent was for teaching and showing people how to create a passable amateur painting. That's not easy.

I personally preferred Bill Alexander -- the guy who taught Ross all he knew -- and, of course Jon Gnagy. I found Ross boring.
I never watched Bob Ross...too old for his demographic but I watched Jon Nagy all the time as a kid. I think his show was only 15 minutes? I remember it being on before the Mighty Mouse cartoons on Saturday mornings.
  #57  
Old 10-31-2019, 07:32 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 11,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by carrps View Post
I never watched Bob Ross...too old for his demographic
Yeah, that is gibberish.
  #58  
Old 11-01-2019, 07:36 AM
Gorbag is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyjoe View Post
Webster's definition of "scientist" simply states that it is someone who possesses expert knowledge in the natural or physical sciences.

Being a scientist doesn't mean you have a degree.
Being a mechanical engineer means you've studied Chemistry, Physics, and Calculus, and that you use the scientific method to test hypothesis with regards to mechanical devices, oftentimes needing to have deep knowledge of the physical properties of all of the substances used in the products you are testing (ie how much force can we place upon thi metal rod before it bends? breaks?) Anyone telling you a mechanical engineer is not a scientist is woefully misinformed.
There is, in fact, a difference between science and engineering, which has to do with the goals of the two professions, and thus, how that knowledge is employed (or which branches of knowledge are learned).

Engineers start with a goal - something they want to build, and a set of specifications, parameters or characteristics they wish to achieve. They then look at the stuff they already know about, and figure out how to combine those things in order to get what they want. This may involve inventing something new.

Scientists start with a thing - something they observe, and try to determine the relevant characteristics about that. That is, they try to derive principles, laws, or relationships from something that is unknown or at least not fully known.

Consider the difference between computer science, and computer eningeering. The former takes an abstract typically logically defined notion of a "computer" and derives principles from that. For instance algorithmic complexity, the advantage of qbits, etc. They are not concerned with the difference in heat dissipation of 64GB memory modules, and often can do much of their work without any actual computer at all. In many ways actual computers get in the way of the science - the interest isn't how a particular DELL computer runs a search algorithm, but how quickly the memory usage grows as the size of the problem approaches infinity (something that would never be realizable on any physical machine).

Computer engineers, however, are very concerned with the construction of actual computers, and thus make engineering trade-offs, e.g. power dissipation vs. signal delay on a bus, etc. These are factors typically ignored by computer scientists. Now you might argue knowing CS helps do CE and understanding CE can allow CS's to build new kinds of machines to model or measure (for instance, processor in memory architectures, graph machines, etc.) that may not fit traditional von Neumann architectures. I'm not disagreeing with that. But the way they look at the world, the kinds of papers they will write and the contributions they make are different at a fairly fundamental level.

That some engineers may do some science in the course of their efforts, and many scientists do some engineering (to build tools, or even build a new thing they want to observe) of course can and will happen. But that doesn't make the two titles interchangeable, nor the sets of knowledge that enable those approaches interchangeable.
  #59  
Old 11-01-2019, 11:10 AM
tullsterx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
Bob Ross was a great artist in exactly the same way that Bill Nye is a great scientist.
Yeah, that seems about right. I do wonder if he had his "real" art somewhere and his show art was just for the show.
  #60  
Old 11-02-2019, 06:22 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by RealityChuck View Post
More important is the attitude of the painters in the painting. None are painting it, a sign they don't see it as anything special.
We can only really see what TurbanDude is painting, and it doesn't even appear to be any of the paintings in front of him. So I think you're reading way too much into that aspect of it.
  #61  
Old 11-02-2019, 11:01 AM
terentii's Avatar
terentii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Moscow/Toronto
Posts: 18,348
A Science major says "Hmmm, let's find out how that works."

An Engineering major says "Hmmm, let's find a way to build this."

A Business major says "Hmmm, let's decide how to finance this."

A Fine Arts major says "Hmmm, let's put a happy little tree right here."

And a Liberal Arts major says "Hmmm, would you like fries with that, sir?"
__________________
"Makes you wonder why we bother, eh, Fawlty?"
"Didn't know you did, Major."
  #62  
Old 11-02-2019, 12:34 PM
Alessan's Avatar
Alessan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 24,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
There is, in fact, a difference between science and engineering, which has to do with the goals of the two professions, and thus, how that knowledge is employed (or which branches of knowledge are learned).

Engineers start with a goal - something they want to build, and a set of specifications, parameters or characteristics they wish to achieve. They then look at the stuff they already know about, and figure out how to combine those things in order to get what they want. This may involve inventing something new.

Scientists start with a thing - something they observe, and try to determine the relevant characteristics about that. That is, they try to derive principles, laws, or relationships from something that is unknown or at least not fully known.
And that's why there were no scientists working on the Manhattan Project or on the Apollo Program.

Last edited by Alessan; 11-02-2019 at 12:35 PM.
  #63  
Old 11-02-2019, 01:59 PM
Sir T-Cups is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 8,796
Bob Ross taped every one of his shows at my college. Going to the studio where he painted was definitely a surreal and cool experience.
__________________
Want to see more of my adventures in Orlando? Follow Mrs. Cups and me @theorlandoduo on Instagram. And check out our blog too: TheOrlandoDuo.com
  #64  
Old 11-03-2019, 02:42 PM
msmith537 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rough Draft View Post
I think this sums it up nicely, and I see it as a compliment to both men.
I would agree. Not Leonardo da Vinci or...Leonardo da Vinci. But guys who made art and science approachable for the masses.
  #65  
Old 11-03-2019, 03:03 PM
RealityChuck's Avatar
RealityChuck is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Schenectady, NY, USA
Posts: 42,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
We can only really see what TurbanDude is painting, and it doesn't even appear to be any of the paintings in front of him. So I think you're reading way too much into that aspect of it.
Look again.

The people in the center are painting an object on the left wall.
The people by the urn can't see the Mona Lisa due to their angle.
The woman to the right has her back to it.
The three people in the doorway can't see it, either.

All have been more impressed by other artwork on the scene.

Morse clearly didn't give it any more prominence than any other artwork in the room.

Last edited by RealityChuck; 11-03-2019 at 03:03 PM.
  #66  
Old 11-03-2019, 03:25 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 36,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by RealityChuck View Post
Look again.

The people in the center are painting an object on the left wall.
The people by the urn can't see the Mona Lisa due to their angle.
The woman to the right has her back to it.
The three people in the doorway can't see it, either.

All have been more impressed by other artwork on the scene.

Morse clearly didn't give it any more prominence than any other artwork in the room.
This is not a logical conclusion to draw from what is depicted in a painting.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.
  #67  
Old 11-04-2019, 03:23 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,541
Quote:
Originally Posted by RealityChuck View Post
Look again.

The people in the center are painting an object on the left wall.
The people by the urn can't see the Mona Lisa due to their angle.
The woman to the right has her back to it.
The three people in the doorway can't see it, either.

All have been more impressed by other artwork on the scene.
Like I said, TurbanDude is facing that wall, but he isn't painting any of the paintings on it. So I don't think you can infer anything from which way people happen to be facing. Even if this were a photograph, which it is not.

Quote:
Morse clearly didn't give it any more prominence than any other artwork in the room.
That tells us only about Morse's attitude, not art circles in general.

Especially since that is not actually a painting of what the room looked like, but just Morse cramming copies of paintings onto one canvas as a project.

Last edited by MrDibble; 11-04-2019 at 03:26 AM.
  #68  
Old 11-04-2019, 03:33 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,541
More on the painting.

Note that many of the figures are likely actually just Americans Morse knew in Paris and put into the painting when he finished it back home in America, not random people who happened to be in the Louvre copying paintings one random day in 1831.

Note that Morse does pick Mona Lisa as one of 38 paintings to include.

It absolutely doesn't support RealityChuck's argument in any way, shape or form.

Last edited by MrDibble; 11-04-2019 at 03:35 AM.
  #69  
Old 11-06-2019, 12:23 AM
Ale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 5,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Bob Ross is an excellent artist. But his artworks aren't paintings. His artworks are TV episodes of painting. Even if the paintings he produced were absolute garbage (they're not), the show would still do a very good job of conveying the emotions he wished it to convey. He's calm and peaceful, and when you watch his shows, you become more calm and peaceful. That's art at its best.
A definition I use for Art is: a masterful display of skill.
What you described was his skill, the whole thing not just the picture on a canvas at the end, and he was pretty masterful at it, no doubt.
  #70  
Old 11-06-2019, 06:05 AM
pkbites's Avatar
pkbites is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Majikal Land O' Cheeze!
Posts: 11,006
Is there any truth to the stories online that he was a Master Sergeant in the Air Force for 20 years and a real hard ass?
  #71  
Old 11-06-2019, 06:31 AM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is offline
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 37,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
Is there any truth to the stories online that he was a Master Sergeant in the Air Force for 20 years and a real hard ass?
(Wayback Machine)
Before they were famous, Airman edition
By Senior Airman Michelle Patten
Air Force Public Affairs Agency
Quote:
Who knew those “happy little trees” were based on those seen around Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska? Ross developed his quick painting techniques to finish works of art while on breaks from work, before bringing his skills to “The Joy of Painting” television show where he taught others how to paint. Known for his soft-spoken and caring nature, it’s not surprising Ross did not enjoy the times in the military which required him to yell or that he served as a first sergeant. Ross was in the Air Force for twenty years before retiring as a master sergeant.
  #72  
Old 11-06-2019, 07:01 AM
Nava is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 42,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
There is, in fact, a difference between science and engineering, which has to do with the goals of the two professions, and thus, how that knowledge is employed (or which branches of knowledge are learned).

Engineers start with a goal - something they want to build, and a set of specifications, parameters or characteristics they wish to achieve. They then look at the stuff they already know about, and figure out how to combine those things in order to get what they want. This may involve inventing something new.

Scientists start with a thing - something they observe, and try to determine the relevant characteristics about that. That is, they try to derive principles, laws, or relationships from something that is unknown or at least not fully known.
That's a limited definition of both. Engineering disciplines are part of what is called "applied sciences" in some languages. An engineer can start from figuring out how something works or came to be (if it is man made, this is called "reverse engineering"), a scientist can start from principles and general procedures discovered by others to create something new (such as a new substance, composite or alloy). Not every engineer is a builder and not every scientist is a researcher in the purest or "basic"* form of their field.


"Basic": "we don't know what it's for yet, but we hope it will someday be for something."

Last edited by Nava; 11-06-2019 at 07:02 AM.
  #73  
Old 11-06-2019, 10:32 AM
DesertDog is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mesa, Ariz.
Posts: 5,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
"Basic": "we don't know what it's for yet, but we hope it will someday be for something."
Back when lasers were a brand new thing (around 1967) Popular Science ran an article on them prompting a few months later, a letter asking, "What good are they, aside from popping balloons so long as they aren't red?"

The editors' reply was basically, "People are working on that very question."
  #74  
Old 11-06-2019, 11:56 AM
terentii's Avatar
terentii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Moscow/Toronto
Posts: 18,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertDog View Post
Back when lasers were a brand new thing (around 1967) Popular Science ran an article on them prompting a few months later, a letter asking, "What good are they, aside from popping balloons so long as they aren't red?"

The editors' reply was basically, "People are working on that very question."
I'd've thought that question was answered in 1964 with Goldfinger.

"Do you expect me to talk?"

"No, Mr Bond. I expect you to die."
__________________
"Makes you wonder why we bother, eh, Fawlty?"
"Didn't know you did, Major."
  #75  
Old 11-06-2019, 01:35 PM
sitchensis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: revillagigedo
Posts: 2,796
I'm still waiting for a wealthy socialite to tell me if it's art.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:22 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017