Seeing what juries select for exhibitions and the works that judges select for awards is interesting to me. It seems that pure realism had been overlooked often in favor of more "expressive" representations but that trend might be loosing ground; not dramatically so but somewhat. Often though the results can be telling of the preferences of the decision maker(s). Personally, I enjoy being part of the American Artists Professional League because they emphasize realism (even though my work is nearer the back of the pack than the front). That of course is my personal taste. That said, what would you think of categories that were less medium specific and more style specific. Say something like: 3D Abstract versus 3D realism and the same with 2D? (excluding the obvious like photography for jewelry)
You need to be a member of Art Fair Insiders to add comments!
Comments
Realism is alive and well, but it has it's own corner of the art market. Groups like OPA and AIS are thriving, and members who get accepted to their shows get into good galleries. I have been rejected from art fairs because the jurors didn't like realism, but when I do get in, I make a lot of sales. I think the public in general still loves realistic painting.
Len, first let me say that I checked out your website and I truly love your work. It's awesome. I know how you feel when realism has been overlooked in favor of other more expressive artistic representations. As a wildlife photographer, I feel some what as though I'm in the same "boat." Many, what I call elitist, artists do not consider photography to be art. A number of art associations do not even open their membership to photographers. As for wildlife photography, it would seem to be at the "bottom of the barrel" in the world of photography. All I can say is, keep up the great work you are doing.