If Richard Prince can claim to be an artist, it’s pretty much an open field. His “art” is taking photographs of other people’s photographs - he calls it “re-photography”.
I would say he is a great craftsman, but it is unclear whether he is a great artist given that work.
Rockwell was a great craftsman and a great artist because he used his craft in service to illustrations that speak volumes with no caption, etc…
This man is what I’ve been aspiring to my whole life.
How many ball point pen colors are there?
In the article I read it stated he used 6 for the portrait in the OP’s link. He says he uses up to 8.
Lawyer, he does this for a hobby.
I agree to an extent. It’s easy to conflate technical skill and illustrative/rendering talent as works of fine art.
Don’t get me wrong, him and others who perform amazing feats of illustration using unusual mediums are certainly talented and is considered art, but as far as “fine art” goes, there’s not much more substance there other than it’s stunning and an example of what can be done by a skilled illustrator no matter what medium they choose to work in.
If this were done in acrylic, oils, pastels, etc. it’d hardly be as noteworthy. It’s the fact it was done using ballpoint pen, which many consider a very utilitarian, clumsy writing utensil, that brings out a greater reaction as far as accomplishment.
In technique and illustration, he’s pretty much mastered it; which is absolutely nothing to sneeze at; it’s excellent and interesting work.
I see where xanthous is coming from. Without getting into the whole “art/not art” thing, the guy’s got some incredible technical skills, but he’s still not making very interesting images. If these were photographs, they’d be utterly unremarkable. The sort of pictures that come in wallets, or as default desktop wall paper on mid-range PCs. The tiger, in particular, wouldn’t look out of place silkscreened onto a t-shirt.
In the thread Dr_Doom linked to, there was some scoffing over the description of a work of art having a “soul.” I don’t know any better way to illustrate the term than in comparing this guy’s Girl with a Pearl Earring with the original by Vermeer.
I don’t have a problem with calling him an artist. But it does kind of bother me that the OP’s title implies this is the epitome of art as opposed to some other unspoken thing.
Sorry, I had just read the thread about the amateur artist who fix the fresco, and remembered this dude. So the title was a response to a set up that existed in my head. I do that sometimes.