Cleaning up

Status
Not open for further replies.

James R

Just this guy, you know?
Staff member
What a mess!

36478.gif


Clean, clean, clean....

36489.gif


Ah! That's better.

More
 
I was hoping people could discover that for themselves, Gustav.

Thanks for taking away the sense of mystery and adventure and discovery, though. Well done.
 
I feel sorry for the guy in row 1 that's all by himself...aww..poor guy....or maybe he was the only pedophile stalker in the park, so he got his own row. :)
 
The question is in what order the OCD sufferer would eat them.
 
I was hoping people could discover that for themselves, Gustav.

Thanks for taking away the sense of mystery and adventure and discovery, though. Well done.

What? You were hoping that people would discover the new heights of OCD by themselves?!


The question is in what order the OCD sufferer would eat them.

This has nothing to do with OCD. It is simply the practice of what we normally do anyway - namely, categorize. It looks challenging, though, once presented in such direct terms.
 
Not exactly what James had in mind (I guess), but it reminds me of OCD as well.
Love it though.


Roman+Opa%25C5%2582ka+Triangulation+Blog+1.jpeg


"Details" by Roman Opałka (August 27, 1931 – August 6, 2011)


More pictures and info here: http://www.triangulationblog.com/2011/09/roman-opaka.html

I can't seem to find any complete views of one of his Details pieces though (it seems that the pictures are all just fragments).
If anyone does, please let me know where.
 
The Economist did his obit [I love their obits]

Basically he just wrote numbers for several years.

Over the 46 years of his enterprise, his technique and materials barely changed. His canvases, 233 in all, were always 196 x 135cm, a good size to work at standing and to carry in outstretched arms. Brush and paint never varied. His figures were roughly a centimetre tall, most made with two deliberate strokes of the brush, and allowed to fade away as his paint ran out, like the trailing tail of a comet. He often said he painted like a man out walking, unaware of his steps unless he stumbled. If that happened, he never went back.

His biggest innovation was to change the background colour. In 1968 he made it grey; in 1972—when, barely able to breathe, he passed 1000000—he decided to add 1% more white to that grey every year. By 2008 the white of ground and figures was virtually the same, except that he thought of the ground as “well-earned white”, arduously brought out of the original black, and except that the newly painted figures would shine out against it until they dried. He approached this invisibility with a sort of exaltation.

http://www.economist.com/node/21526288


sample:

opalka.jpg



I like his self portraits better

688390.jpg
 
how do you know that? is it because the symbols are haphazardly cut off at the borders?

Yes, that, and the fact that the numbers on the far left are not the successors of the numbers on the far right on the preceding line.

"In 1965, in his studio in Warsaw, Roman Opałka began painting a process of counting – from one to infinity. Starting in the top left-hand corner of the canvas and finishing in the bottom right-hand corner, the tiny numbers were painted in horizontal rows. Each new canvas, which the artist called a 'detail', took up counting where the last left off. Each 'detail' is the same size (196 x 135 cm), the dimension of his studio door in Warsaw. All details have the same title, "1965 / 1 – ∞"; the concept had no end, and the artist pledged his life to its execution: 'All my work is a single thing, the description from number one to infinity. A single thing, a single life.'"
http://www.triangulationblog.com/2011/09/roman-opaka.html
 
occam would say intentional but that would conflict with the account of the process
google images is fruitless so i am clueless
 
ahh but wait....

Each new canvas, which the artist called a 'detail', took up counting where the last left off

the sequentiality is b/w canvasses and not within it

"In 1965, in his studio in Warsaw, Roman Opałka began painting a process of counting – from one to infinity. Starting in the top left-hand corner of the canvas and finishing in the bottom right-hand corner, the tiny numbers were painted in horizontal rows.


it is implied but not necessary


??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top