But why the change? Was it that, in an art scene increasingly driven by fads, drawing became du jour simply because it hadn’t been for a very long time? Or were other, less obvious factors at work?

In fact, the re-emergence of drawing was far from market-driven, and its increase in profile a far slower process than any newly voguish status might suggest.

To understand something of its current impact, it’s necessary to look back at the closing years of the 20th century. A time when, to the eyes of many, the art scene looked very different indeed.

Throughout much of the 1990s visual austerity and a certain restraint governed the work of a new wave of artists; many of them British, many high-profile.

Figures such as Darren Almond, Damien Hirst, Martin Creed, Rachel Whiteread and a re-discovered Allan McCollum typified an art scene driven by hands-off, conceptual practice and stringent theoretical undertow.

Even artists whose work, by contrast, seemed more ludic and theatrical – Maurizio Catellan, the Chapman brothers, an ever-enduring Jeff Koons – shared a taste for slick, expensive, mechanized output. And in fact, looking back, there’s a certain synchronistic poetry to the fact that Marc Quinn’s ‘Self’ portrait, a principal icon of the era, quite literally froze the blood.

Further tendencies underpinned the general sense of pristine, chilly surface. Graphic design in the late 90s exulted in the hard edges of its newly perfect digital genesis, while on a popular level, serious flirtation with ‘minimalism’ induced homeowners to replace comfort with pristine surface and spacious void.

Clearly, any attempt to rapidly define a moment in art history is doomed to over-simplification. A vast array of artists stand in lush counterpoint to Hirst’s surgically steely cabinets or Whiteread’s pale, negative spaces. The work of Peter Doig, Marlene Dumas, Daniel Richter and Jörg Immendorf – to name just a few – all manifest an obvious delight in exuberant mark-making or absorbed, painterly gesture.

Yet it’s certainly true that what generally made the headlines – the dissected sheep, the on/off lights, the unmade beds – were essentially ‘conceptual’ works that side-lined direct artistic intervention. And it’s also true that, with the internet truly coming of age in the ’90s, such highly publicized aesthetics became instantly and widely accessible for the first time in any history. In the mass public eye, art had gained a hard, new edge.

Yet elsewhere, a wildly contrasting vision was being far less well documented. On America’s West Coast, in particular, the long-gestating seeds of a brimming alternative scene were beginning to bear considerable fruit. Its influences were multiple and diverse, yet shared the fact that all lay well outside the contemporary mainstream.

In LA, for example, the ‘underground’ drawings of Ray Pettibon – linked initially to the rock scene then distributed through short-run zines – had garnered fervent admirers throughout the late ’70s & ’80s. A major exhibition in 1992 succeeded in raising his profile both throughout the States and abroad.

Yet Pettibon’s work was merely the best-known facet of a burgeoning counter-culture. One which, since 1986, had found a major advocate in the now legendary La Luz De Jesus gallery in downtown LA.

This space, located incongruously above an offbeat gift store, focused entirely on artists whose backgrounds and influences sprang from an array of popular cultures such as illustration, folk art, comics and tattooing. And this output, crucially, tended towards an intricate figurative craftsmanship more closely associated at the time with illustration than so-called ‘fine’ art.

The gallery and its stable of artists proved a speedy and influential local success, and in 1994, Juxtapoz, a magazine founded by Robert Williams (himself an artist and friend of famed underground artist Robert Crumb) also began to showcase this growing wave of alternative art.

Utterly at odds with the rarefied, theory-led aesthetic dominating contemporary practice at the time, this new sensibility came to be regarded as a movement. Its roots and position were defined by not just one label, but two: Low-Brow, or Pop Surrealism.

Resolutely populist – bordering, even, on kitsch – its appropriation of popular style and content within a fine art context questioned long-held assumptions regarding the parameters of art itself. Revisiting the earliest tenets of Pop Art, it nevertheless totally dismissed that movement’s later associations with Warholian mass production.

And in San Francisco, too, similar trends were at work.

In the 1990s a group of artists including Chris Johansen, Clare E Rojas and Barry McGee emerged to form a distinctive new scene. Their work, though sharing much with the Low-Brow phenomenon, differed in several important respects and became known as the ‘Mission School’ in recognition of its essentially San Franciscan flavor.

Local influences contributed to a more whimsical, looser approach to image-making than LA tendencies at the time. Street art such as graffiti formed an intrinsic part of the scene, but was generally refined into a figurative rather than textual medium. The legacy of underground comics pioneered by the likes of Robert Crumb was also evident in cartoon-like characterization and a witty, humorous edge.

More importantly still, while painting lay at the heart of the Low-Brow movement, drawing was much more widely adopted by the Mission School artists.

In a nod to the hand-drawn agitprop and pyschedelia of ’60s Haight-Ashbury, they revived techniques such as detailed patterning, hand-lettering and découpage. Materials, too, were frequently unconventional; ball-point pens, markers, recycled paper, wood or metal all found a part in the Mission School look.

This ‘regional’ distinction was clearly underlined in publicity for a 2000 show at LA’s New Image Gallery:

SAN FRANCISCO DRAWING SHOW curated by: Alicia McCarthy and Chris Johanson. May 19 – June 17, 2000.

Straight out of San Francisco, drawings of over 15 artists will be exhibited …. Currently there are important artistic trends developing out of San Francisco. Drawing is at the root of this development.

Meanwhile, however, America’s East Coast found itself forced (for once) to gradually acknowledge a nexus of creativity occurring elsewhere. While many commentators, curators and gallerists became increasingly aware that some kind of real cultural shift was taking place, others seemed slow or simply unwilling to recognize its impact or legitimacy.

Yet the growing appeal of Low-Brow and related work – especially amongst a generation of new and emerging artists – was undeniable. New galleries opened to deal exclusively in the genre, and Juxtapoz, along with many of its featured artists, began to acquire a cult following. Its international distribution and the broad reach of the internet helped ensure that this new sensibility filtered beyond the US.

The ‘unofficial’ Californian scene gathering pace in the ’90s was intrinsically linked to a rejection of prevailing artistic practice – the notion, as Fred Tomaselli later put it, “…that people are a bit tired of the over-rationalism (sic) of the art world, this idea that you can get to everything through the cerebral.”

Yet its ethos was otherwise hugely democratic and unifying, a statement of validity for neglected or side-lined art. There can be little doubt that its emergence provided an impetus behind the current interest in drawing.

But this interest – and with it, the resurgence of a particular kind of artistic engagement – was not, of course, solely confined to America’s West Coast.

Elsewhere in the States, Laylah Ali’s first major show of meticulously patterned, faux-naif works took place at Chicago’s MOCA in 1999 (she had been featured, along with Chris Johansen, at New York’s Drawing Center in the summer of 1998).

Julie Mehretu, likewise emerging towards the end of the ’90s, fused painting with drawing in a myriad of complex mark-making, while Canada’s Royal Art Lodge, formed in 1996, produced whimsical drawings, paintings and objects reminiscent of the Mission School’s output.

In Europe, similar trends were also underway. As the 20th century drew to its close, Sweden’s Jockum Nordstrüm was gaining recognition for his beautifully rendered, twisted tableaux of far from ordinary life. Switzerland’s Marc Bauer produced vigorous drawings that exemplified the medium’s strength, and in Britain the hand-drawn zine was adopted by Olivia Plender, albeit in a highly polished form.

While drawing, obviously, had never disappeared entirely from the gallery, these artists represent just a few of those contributing to its rapidly growing visibility towards the end of the ’90s. A resurgence now so evident that, though prompted by certain definable factors, it nevertheless seems organic, almost essential; a phenomenon that quite possibly identifies as well as answers very current needs amongst today’s young artists.

And what are they?

Well to start with, drawing is cheap. For those struggling with the high costs of studio space and materials, it’s a medium that’s financially viable as well as a manageable means of production.

What’s more, it’s hugely inclusive. Everyone, at some point, has experienced the act of drawing at some level, a participation which affords even the most casual observer a sense of involvement in the medium; a visceral engagement in its use that conceptual art forms often lack.

Yet despite this refreshingly egalitarian glow, it also appears that much of today’s output seems directed towards highly individual, even arcane expression, a practice exemplified by intricate, almost obsessive mark-making.

On the one hand, this wholly supports an ethos by which today’s artists seem to demand an intimate, personal and evident engagement with their art.

Painstaking detail and labor-intensive mark-making represent artistic endeavor for which the artist alone is responsible. No third-party construction teams, no assistants on hand to dab a brush as directed. This art is about making in the purest possible sense.

A parallel explosion in use of craft elements – beading, glittering, collage, embroidery – as well as the growing popularity of zines and artists’ books – mirrors this quest for hands-on, highly personalized involvement.

Yet more intriguingly, demands for creative ownership may well serve needs besides a revision of artistic involvement.

Art, of course, has always been about reflecting and interpreting the world, but the early 21st century seems to have experienced a particularly profound re-appraisal of exactly what the world involves. The outlook is an uneasy one, marked by a growing sense of schism and dislocation, and in particular, the notion of circumstance veering out of control.

To return briefly to Pop Surrealism, true to its ’surrealist’ label the movement is marked by subversion of apparent reality. Typically, this takes on disturbing, anxiety-ridden form; bio-morphed figures inhabit scenarios laden with threat; an undertow of violence is darkly enhanced by imagery plucked from childhood.

And importantly, unlike Surrealism, which investigates the interior spaces of the human psyche, Pop Surrealism obliquely focuses on physical, actual realities. Those genetic hybrids, ruined landscapes and constant simmer of threat don’t merely exist in our nightmares. They’re with us now.

The movement itself may have had its day as far as the art market is concerned, but the zeitgeist it portrays is clearly here to stay.

Consider, for a moment, Jean Dubuffet’s famous description of L’Art Brut

“Those works created from solitude and from pure and authentic creative impulses – where the worries of competition, acclaim and social promotion do not interfere – are, because of these very facts, more precious than the productions of professions. … we cannot avoid the feeling that in relation to these works, cultural art in its entirety appears to be the game of a futile society, a fallacious parade.”

Though written in the 1950s, the proclamation reads now like a perfect manifesto for the kind of anti-establishment art scene we’ve been discussing. Yet quite apart from epitomizing a ‘purer’ alternative to the mainstream, the kind of art Dubuffet describes now carries connotations far beyond those of his original assessment.

The ’simplicity’ of naïve or folk art harks back – in popular nostalgia at least – to carefree, less complex times in which a sense of place and purpose were clearly defined. It’s little wonder that its revival coincides with acute apprehension regarding our own, turbulent times.

By contrast, much outsider art is clearly associated with not belonging – a characteristic most evident in its embrace of art produced by the mentally ill.

Yet here again there’s a definite connection. Such work often originates through its use as a therapeutic tool; a fact that throws interesting light on the intricate, involved delineation of much recent drawing and painting. Indeed, in its conspicuous efforts to order, pattern and negotiate space, such complexity provides almost casebook examples of conflict-solving Gestalt.

More interestingly still, a significant proportion of contemporary practice doesn’t just seek to interpret complex realities, but actually sets out to create them through construction of highly personal, alternative worlds.

Paul Noble’s well-known drawings of fictional ‘Nobson Newtown’ are devoid of human figures, yet imbued with visual invention and idiosyncratic textual comment. A clear intention is to provide a reflection of the mind of their maker: as Noble himself puts it, “town planning as self-portraiture”.

Other artists’ fictional worlds provide similar arenas for grappling with issues that echo or parallel our own.

Michael Whittle, a recent graduate from the Royal College of Art, creates intricate drawings melding religious iconography with motifs garnered from heraldry, alchemy and science. The resulting images, snapshots of impossible states, underpin the artist’s own desire to “make sense of reality” while also investigating “… man’s attempts to come to terms with existence”.

Camille Rose Garcia (whose practice, though largely identified with painting, includes much drawing) is well known for deceptively enchanting visions of what amounts to a near-dystopia. A recurring cast of characters battle to save or destroy a poisoned, dying world. The baddies, unfortunately, seem to be winning.

Art today appears to be grappling with a spiritual, political and therapeutic function that arguably, it hasn’t reflected quite so clearly for centuries. And the fact that drawing, the most immediate and spontaneous of mediums, forms a vital aspect of the interpretation of a complex world should come as no surprise.

Postscript: Drawing right now – who we’re liking

The energy of the California scene continues apace, with San Francisco still arguably the epicentre of new drawing – check out the wonderful work of Sara Thustra, Sacha Eckes, Andrew Schoultz and Simone Shubuck (a San Francisco native, though now resident in New York).

LA practice remains particularly diverse, but artists who make exciting use of drawing include Travis Millard, Adam Janes and Gina Triplett.

Elsewhere in the States, we enjoy the work of Carter, Aurel Schmidt and UK-born Dominic McGill (best known for his epic, 65ft ‘Project for a New American Century’).

In Europe, Richard Höglund produces interesting drawings informed by semiotics, and in the UK, artists of note include Sarah Woodfine and Adam Dant (the latter have both been recipients of the Jerwood Drawing Prize.

Most exciting of all, newcomer Laura Oldfield Ford’s creates large-scale, beautifully rendered drawings with astute political commentary at their core, as well as the cult zine ‘Savage Messiah, an extraordinary foray into the psycho-geographic terrain of London.

Fascinated by the business of online advertising? So are we! http://www.clickspiration.com

“If we can’t say it simply, we won’t say it at all” http://www.simplersteps.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Mike_Brennan

On the other hand, art that was created from the 1970s until present time is labeled as contemporary. The reason that 1970 is used as the cutoff time for the two start forms is because terms like Postmodern and Postmodernism became popular around that time. Also, the 1970s was the last time when the last easily classifiable artistic movements occurred. Basically we can say that contemporary artists work on art movements that cannot be classified as the number of artists in any movement is very few to be actually labeled as a movement.

However, it must also be added that when it comes to art, any emerging movement is very difficult to classify. Also, the art of today is considered to be more socially conscious compared to any era in the past. In the last 40 years, the art that has been created has been connected to some issue. In fact, artists have used their artwork to raise awareness about major issues like multiculturalism, globalization, AIDS, bio-engineering and feminism.

About Author:
Pauline Go is an online leading expert in the education industry. She also offers top quality articles like :
Art History Timeline, Artist of the Renaissance

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Pauline_Go

Religious Themes

Contemporary Christian paintings incorporate a wide variety of themes. Some fine art adheres to the iconic imagery seen in religious art throughout the ages – what some might call literal Biblical interpretations. These iconic themes include the Annunciation, the Adoration of the Magi, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, the Stations of the Cross, and the Virgin Mary. Saints are also popular iconic themes in contemporary God art.

Some artists go back to before Christ’s birth; indeed, to the creation of the universe. For example, contemporary fine artist Anthony Falbo’s Genesis Series depicts the first book of the Bible. Through Falbo’s paintings, the creation of the universe unfolds as though it was happening today. Through his abstract style, you can see light emerging, the separation of day from night, the firmament rising, the land appearing, the vegetation blooming, the living creatures coming forth, and the hand of God touching the hand of man.

But just as God created both light and darkness, contemporary Christian artists depict both good and evil. From the shame that Adam and Eve felt after disobeying God in the Garden of Eden to both overt images and subliminal messages of hell, artists depict the darker side of humanity.

A Variety of Styles

Today’s Christian artists employ styles and media as varied as devotion itself. For example, some artists may paint in an Impressionist style, using bold colors, loose strokes, and thick dabs of paint to bring a scene to life. Others express themselves through cubism, the art form that rearranges pieces of objects in such a way that the person seeing the painting gains new insight into the object represented. Still others paint in an abstractionist form, stretching, enlarging, or magnifying figure and form to shed new light on everyday subjects. Some artists, like Anthony Falbo, combine forms like cubism and abstractionism into what could be termed “cubestraction,” and produce remarkable pieces.

Exhibiting Our Devotion

Christians today are embracing contemporary artists by purchasing both original works and limited edition reproductions. Fine art with a spiritual theme – whether it’s the birth of Christ, the creation of the earth, or other “God art” – serves as a reminder of the Creator’s presence in our lives, as well as His importance to our safety and well-being. It also keeps us mindful of the need to express our devotion, to spread the Word of God, and to be thankful for the gifts He has bestowed upon us.

Chris Robertson is an author of Majon International, one of the worlds MOST popular internet marketing companies on the web. Learn more about God Art: Christian Themes in Art.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Chris_Robertson

Contemporary art, also known as modern art has long been a producer of such experimental and innovative displays. Names such as Van Gogh, Monet and Modigliani stand as a testament to the truly unique perspective in visual arts and what it means to both be an artist and to define art itself. That perhaps is the foundation of art. What defines art? By whose standards do we gauge a particular piece and declare it to be worthy of the name and worthy of a purchase for a private or public collection.

Consider some of the pieces that have caused quite a stir in modern times. Pablo Picasso’s first foray into the use of cubism, peculiar pieces of work presenting the human anatomy from several perspectives yet all of which are combined into one form caused a mixed reaction among critics. Like champagne, cubism is one of those things you either love or hate, there is simply no in between.

Oliver Payne and Nick Relph were innovate thinkers of the contemporary art world. They are called video artists and their work is featured in such galleries as The Institution of Contemporary Arts in London, England. Their progressive combination of modern technology including photography and videography in the production of modern art has earned the artists an eternal and well deserved niche in contemporary art culture.

The use of digital technology in art is now dominating art culture and has done so with the advent of digital computer animation in the way of such children’s productions as Pixar’s A Bug’s Life and The Lord of the Rings. A good decade and a half of digital technology in art has come to pass and the public and critical response has been entirely positive, a first in art history. Is it art? It is contemporary, sophisticated art that is unparalleled and doubtless will be for some time.

Author Hugh Parker

Picture Photos on Canvas is a blog about photos printed on canvas and everything that relates including general photography and photo shop tips so if you want the scoop on the buzz visit us by clicking photos on canvas
Thank you,
Hugh Parker

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Hugh_Parker

Cornerhouse Art Centre was envisaged by the Greater Manchester Visual Arts Trust of which the members were aficionados of visual and performing arts and film. They firmly believed that Manchester was in need of a space for contemporary arts. Therefore, with the assistance of several local organisations the old furniture shop situated on Oxford Road was selected as the place to launch this mission.

In 1985, Cornerhouse opened its doors housing three cinemas, two bookshops and three art galleries. It was made to offer its visitors a place to discover contemporary arts at its best amidst a relaxing ambience. Therefore, this alluring centre for art also comes with a bar and cafe. The bar is known to be a popular meeting place for those who are keen on the pop culture.

This place of information and entertainment offers events and educational programmes each month for those interested in film making. The art galleries showcase modern art exhibitions which mainly include work by innovative and renowned international artists. Cornerhouse also hosts many events and festivals such as Doodlebug Day which is a graffiti festival. Yet another famous event hosted at this fine art centre includes the New Contemporaries which is an exhibition executed by the best recently graduated artists.

Cornerhouse was put in place with an important motive to bring together artists, film producers and audiences. This intriguing centre for contemporary visual art and film has today become a fascinating tourist attraction. There are numerous Manchester accommodation options that provide all the essential facilities for travellers to conveniently explore Cornerhouse.

The vast number of Manchester hotels welcomes guests with warm hospitality, friendly service and a host of modern amenities.

Pushpitha Wijesinghe is an experienced independent freelance writer. He specializes in providing a wide variety of content and articles related to the travel hospitality industry.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Pushpitha_Wijesinghe

While prices for unique works are increasingly beyond the reach of many, limited editions of, say, 150 plus are financially and widely accessible, making it possible to acquire pieces by major artists for reasonable prices.

There can be a downside, however. While little beats the pleasure a signed work can bring, generally speaking, the larger an edition, the less likely it is to appreciate in value quickly – or even substantially.

Nevertheless, the contemporary art market is full of contradictions, and with growing demand at all levels, recent trends have often seen this assumption overturned.

As an obvious example, Damien Hirst’s early prints for Eyestorm consistently fetch $10000-$16000 at re-sale, a very substantial profit on their original price. More recently, prints by Banksy and other urban artists have proved equally lucrative.

In other words, it’s becoming increasingly possible – although by no means a certainty – to make profits quickly with relatively little outlay; although the trick, as always, is knowing what to buy and when to sell.

Buying for fast profit

The art world has a curious attitude to speculation. Buying and selling purely for profit is still regarded as just a little unsavory, even though the entire art market is dedicated to this pursuit. Perhaps it’s because art has such a curiously dual nature, combining aesthetic and cultural worth with a commercial value that can reach very high sums indeed.

Whatever the case, it would be difficult to consistently make money from art without some genuine appreciation and an insight into what will stand the test of time. And many dealers are themselves collectors, at least partly funding their own acquisitions through trading.

Yet it’s certainly true that, with contemporary art consistently showing remarkable returns on investment, it’s also become an attractive proposition to a very wide range of buyers.

In general, non-specialist speculators often trade in the work of artists whose frequent media coverage makes them well known to the public. And as shown by the two examples mentioned above – Hirst and Banksy – this can certainly reap substantial rewards.

But it’s also important to remember that, in an increasingly novelty-driven world, the next big thing is usually just around the corner. ‘Celebrity’ artists often take on the nature of a trend, and fads can become outdated with dramatic speed. Knowing when to sell such work is vitally important.

Ups and downs in the market aren’t just related to artists with familiar public profiles, of course. The art world itself frequently generates its own, ‘flavor of the month’ buzz. A few years ago, Martin Kippenberger’s prices rose dramatically, then leveled just as quickly. Chinese and now Indian contemporary art have been subject to the same kind of intensely fashion-led markets.

Clearly, money can be made through quickly identifying and speculating on trends, but you’ll need to have your finger firmly on the pulse. Knowing what’s considered exciting is essential, but you’ll also have to determine how long this excitement is actually going to last.

Long-term investment – knowing your artists

When it comes to collecting art, you’ll often read the following: the safest way to build a collection is simply to buy work you really like.

Such advice seems tailor-made to shield less knowledgeable collectors from potential disappointment, and perhaps even encourage sales of less desirable work. Buy a piece you love and if the value falls no harm has been done. If it gains in price, that’s a bonus.

I prefer to look at buying art a little differently.

Of course it’s important to purchase work you want to own and view.

But since contemporary art presents real investment opportunities, it makes sense to think carefully about what to add to your collection. After all, look at almost any online art site, and you’ll see that prices for fairly standard pieces are often equivalent to what you’d pay for work with far greater investment potential.

Although there’s obviously no way of predicting future value for sure, the key is to familiarize yourself as much as possible with the background of artists you’re drawn to.

How long have they been practicing? Is there a theme or thought process behind their work? Has this evolved coherently over the years?

Artists with at least some degree of complexity and persistent ‘vision’ are generally more likely to gain steadily in appreciation and price.

You’ll also want to know if the artist has achieved some kind of recognition. Is their work held by collections, galleries or museums? Has it been exhibited consistently?

Professional opinion is yet another important factor in trying to determine an artist’s long-term prospects. If a large number of critics and academics coincide in their high opinion of an artist, this is another good sign that they will retain or even gain value.

Mid-career artists can be judged much more easily in relation to their existing work; and after all, good art isn’t just about something that happens to look nice on a wall.

It’s about a certain kind of commitment and an obvious path of development. If all these factors are present, buying probably makes sense. Limited editions by Jeff Koons, for example, were relatively inexpensive 5 or 6 years ago, but with recent record-breaking prices for major works, have also shot up in value.

Even artists who disappear temporarily from the art market radar are much more likely to re-emerge at a later point if they show the ‘right’ kind of commitment and passion.

Emerging artists and the schlock of the new

New young artists are often fizzing with ideas, many of which can seem ground-breaking or even radical, but the problem is that they have yet to prove their long-term worth.

This said, you can certainly gain an insight into potential by applying the criteria above. It’s especially important to determine if they have something genuine to express or are simply employing methods that could, over time, increasingly be seen as just a gimmick.

Of course, if you’re looking to make a high return on investment, rapidly emerging artists can prove highly lucrative.

In such cases, it’s probably a good idea to invest in as substantial a piece as possible, although as we’ve seen, editions and multiples can also prove money-earners.

But keep a close eye on auction prices and signs of market fatigue. Such artists might be the talk of the town right now, but will they fulfill their early promise?

If, after a few years, their work appears stuck in a rut and prices seem to be leveling or even dropping, it’s time to think twice about their long-term appeal. On the other hand, if they do continue to create great work, any pieces bought for relatively low sums at the start of their careers should steadily rise in value.

Spreading your bets

If you’re lucky enough to have substantial sums of money to spend on art, newer artists, as we’ve just seen, can produce significant return on investment.

But perhaps the best way to offset the risks that they may never fulfill expectation is to ’spread your bets’ across a selection of up and coming names.

Buying the work of several different artists might mean settling for less significant works, but with the right kind of knowledge – and luck – hitting a jackpot is still potentially viable.

If you’ve done your research, the chances are fairly good that at least one – and hopefully more – of your chosen artists will gain in recognition.

And given the phenomenal increase in prices for contemporary art, if that happens, eventual profits could far outweigh the costs of initial purchases, even if other works fail to make the grade.

It’s worth remembering that many well-known collectors buy huge amounts of work by new, ‘promising’ artists.

Charles Saatchi is a particularly good example, and although he is famous for the apparent strength of his collection, a sizable proportion consists of artists who have now faded into obscurity (you won’t see these listed on the website).

However, the phenomenal rise in value of those who became major names – Peter Doig, for example – have reaped him many millions of dollars in profit at auction.

And if those are the rewards, you can probably afford to make the odd mistake.

Mike writes for modernedition.com, a resource providing articles and news on contemporary art, as well as limited edition prints and multiples by leading contemporary artists.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Mike_Brennan

Traditionally, an artist’s older works garnered higher bids and more frenzied requests. However, painters like Brice Marden are changing the status quo with a whole collection of recent, sought-after work.

The top 10 contemporary artists, whose works sold for over $5 million at auction, are as follows: Lucian Freud, Jasper Johns, Jeff Koons, Brice Marden, Bruce Nauman, Robert Rauschenberg, Gerhard Richter, Richard Serra, Frank Stella, and Cy Twombly. Other artists (in the $1 – $4 million range) to look out for include: Chuck Close, David Hockney, Ellsworth Kelly, Anselm Kiefer, Claes Oldenburg, Robert Ryman, and Wayne Thiebaud.

Jasper Johns, one of the highest paid modern artists, can’t seem to keep up with the demand. He paints two projects each month (which will sell for no less than $1 million), but the waiting list is still long. Entertainment giant David Geffen paid $40 million for “Gray Numbers” a few years back and New York City’s Metropolitan Museum of Art allegedly paid over $20 million for “White Flag.”

John’s colorful paintings touch upon Americana themes — with lots of flags, maps and targets – with subtle messages that affect every onlooker differently. If a collector is fortunate enough to find a Jasper Johns in an art auction house, then there’s no telling how much it’ll sell for.

One can’t help but wonder about what accounts for the noticeable trend towards modern art? Most of the buyers (42%) at the Sotheby’s contemporary art auction continue to be Europeans, with the US trailing at 19%, and Asia / Middle Eastern sales at 12%.

It seems that the high price of the pound is hurting many Americans more than the credit crunch, but London’s weekend auctions saw many advances from interested Indian and Chinese buyers looking for a piece of cultural heritage. For instance, two bidders fought over Yue Minjun’s “Execution” for six minutes, which finally sold for a record breaking $2.93 million. Likewise, one of Putu Sutawijaya’s paintings (“Silent Road”) sold for $350,000 (11 times its estimated price) at the Borobudur Auction!

The art world is changing from the traditional swanky event, complete with fine wine, cheese and fashionable attire – to one of sitting behind the computer screen, credit card in hand. While it may seem impersonal to some, it’s advantageous to others, who have the ability to hop between sites, checking the fair prices for the particular work they’ve got their eye on. After browsing online catalogues, art lovers can get a good idea of what’s available in the up-to-date marketplace, and then make the best purchase later at a contemporary art auction.

369 Niches Rolled Up Into 1 Product

Turn any hobby into a business. Discover 24 totally unique business models.

[http://businessmodels.netbizint.com.au/index.php]

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Mike_Selvon

Jayadev’s lush, exotic and luminous textures sprawl somewhere between the sonic freefall of bloody Valentine, folktronica, famous dutch landscapes and a hymnal, Spiritualized-ish quality, but always with an eye on beyond and subtlety. Despite his preference for tweed and brogues, The Young Jayadev is just another exponent of brittle Indian new-wave upcoming contemporary artist with attitude. There are a million ways to combine concept, style and technique, but the Young Jayadev seems to interested in discovering any uniqness from them, to play with them and if you visit his workplace ,you just cann’t deny all these arguments, he is surely one of upcoming mainline young painter in Indian contemporary art market now, just looking like using all his Borodian skill to amaze art lovers and art critics.This most recent work ‘COMPASSION’ indicates his new development of supra-national power structures and the radical social changes.

While global cities are forming into a new economic world order, capital, people, ideas, pictures, and goods move around the world with ever-increasing speed, setting up a network of communication, production, and consumption that spans all continents,Young Jayadev Biswal is looking to add some more features towards its rapidical progress.He is coming with some new contemporary concepts with amazing handelling and flowless coloring techniques on canvases.

The Ashok Art Gallery is internationally known for one of its most important holdings: more than 2000 major works by the world’s most significant Artists.Over the past years, as Ashok Art Gallery has become a major centre for contemporary visual art, the Gallery has built a strong collection of contemporary work of different artists Ashok Art Gallery: Visit Our Art Gallery http://www.ashokartgallery.com

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Ashok_Nayak

It is fortunate enough to win various institutional patrons. Besides, public funded museums, there are commercial galleries, private collectors, corporate patrons and contemporary art museums. The artists run spaces has also been taken an important role in sale of their works. Thus they are supporting themselves, though there are grants and awards for them. There exists a symbiosis between public museums and commercial galleries. The commercial sector, often, earns maximum profit on the works of the creators who has been popularized by extensive exhibition by public sector. Besides, to enhance brand values, often corporations lend their premises or house at their premises exhibitions. Moreover, support of these organizations is evident in sponsoring awards and building up ware house of contemporary creations. Endeavors of these business houses on collecting plethora of corporate art are quite encouraging. Thus it is gaining popularity, too.

Which Art is Contemporary and which is not – institutional viewpoint

* Creations after 1960’s and 1970’s to till date are counted in the category.
* Crafts like paintings on ceramics and textile designs have strictly been excluded from the category.
* Creations by present day self-taught painters and sculptors, though lack historic inheritance, is literally contemporary.

Prizes

There are several prizes on this practice. The most eminent ones can be enumerated as follows:

1. Named after J. M. W. Turner, Turner Prize is for British painters and sculptors under 50 years of age.

2. Whitney Biennial exhibition is for less known American enthusiasts, arranged in New York City by Whitney Museum of American Art.

3. Hugo Boss Prize is annually sponsored by the Hugo Boss Clothing Company for individual or group working on any medium from anywhere of the world and it is administered by the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum of New York.

4. The most coveted Dutch prize is Vincent van Gogh Biennial Award for Contemporary Art in Europe. It has been initiated by The Broere Charitable Foundation and hosted by Stedelijk Museum of Amsterdum.

5. The Winifred Shantz Award for Ceramists is awarded by the Canadian Clay and Glass Gallery of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.

6. Each year, Ricard Prize for French painters and sculptors under 40 years of age is bestowed by a committee of French Collectors.

You are welcome to visit Private Art Museum for contemporary art Mumbai.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Jacob_Taylor

Although it may seem like a provocation, the contemporary Indian art is very old. It has about forty years and is still contemporary, though, of course, has been changing over the years. An unwritten history of Indian contemporary art pick up his powerful birth in the mid of sixties, and its classic moment during the seventies. The paradox is purely terminological, since here we use the term contemporary, not their sense of current, but in a generic sense that slowly is emerging among sociologists, historians and art theorists, but without there being less unanimity. The use of contemporary in the sense that it proposes seems to us a convenient and rigorous action to collect a wide variety of families and individuals. There is a big contribution from the Indian artists to grow the contemporary art in the past and present days.

Within the panorama of indigestible contemporary art confluence of two trends. The first has to do with aesthetics as practiced during the modern period, based on the experience of formality as something that transcends the real and natural. The second is more related to the experience of enjoyment, as a principle an art of the difference, an art budgets and aspirations different to modern art. In contemporary art, there is a combination of philosophy and psychoanalysis. The perception aesthetics goes hand in hand of psychic structure, driven by parental authority imposed by the institutions (school, museum, etc) and into the instinct of pleasure and desire of self, both facing in the sand as possible and the indefinite.

If one were to summarize very bluntly what contemporary art is well understood, we should say it is one that departs from the ancient tradition of Western art, breaking with a history museum that Indeed the vanguards had continued candidly, and adopts a reflective stance that takes no account of the work or the artist as the essence of artistic practice.

Hari Sharma is a painter for Artflute and it is an endeavor to build the contemporary Indian art of Indian art gallery. It’s a best platform to share the views and ideas of emerging artists to give the best of their art work. Approximately it has the complete collection of Indian art gallery and bagged the great artists in their community.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Hari_Sharma