• Live chat
  • Order
 
Menu
Live chat
 

Comparison of Two Pieces of Artwork

Buy custom Comparison of Two Pieces of Artwork essay paper cheap

This paper is a comparison of various creative aspects found in Greek vases as depicted in their appearance. It is a correlation between different aspects from the black figure-figure Panathenaic amphora with wrestling (‘pankration’) scene by the kleophrades painter and red-figure amphora: youth singing and playing the cithara by Berlin painter. Panathenaic price amphora is an outstanding paint inscribed with words from “the games in Athens.”  This piece of art was created in the period between the periods of 525 to 500 BC.  It was presented as a prize in the Panathenaic games. The artwork is a carefully curved pot inscribed with attractive words “from the games of Athens.” The painting was done by a Greek artist called Kleoprades Painter. The red figure amphora, on the other hand, is a ceramic vase painting. It is regarded as one of the most famous paintings in classical Athens. The artists who crafted this piece of art is accredited as one of his balance and soft of the work. This artwork was created by an artist called the Berlin painter. Both paintings are on display in the Metropolitan museum in, New York (Beazley, 61)

In the red figure amphora with the musical scene, women have been presented in the scene.  They are donned in detailed outfits rehearsing for a musical extravaganza.  In the scene, a woman is shown sited while holding a barbiton. A lyre is hanging directly above her head. To the extreme right, she is facing another female figure holding a something that looks like a flute in her hands. There is a third woman holding a cover of the box. When one critically looks at the woman, he or she is likely to perceive that box near the third woman is enclosed with roles of sheet music. To the viewer, the paint brings a sense of leisured and partly educated society of a wealthy Athenian woman. On the opposite side of the vase, we have three women dressed in peculiar dressing.  For a Greek perspective, these women seem to be preparing for their rituals in their cult (Beazley, 2000).

The three women are holding branches where as the woman in the centre is holding a spot light. From another perspective, these women are like to be the ones who were on the front though but there is no suffiient proof for that. When the viewer sets eyes on the ceramic vase, one gets the impression that the artwork is a typical work of art because of woman has been proportionately crafted.  Women have been carefully drawn to look as if they were life; nothing contracted nature in the painting. The red figure amphora image may at the same time look like an abstract painting. It was as if the artists were experimenting with colors in their works. Closer observation of the vase reveals an intriguing aspect in the Niobid painter’s artwork, even though the artist strived to maintain balance. Some images women are not proportionate. The figures overlap each other. Without a closer observation, it is difficulty for one to identify the shapes.

In terms of color, both paintings are flawless save the few marks on the Panathanaic amphora. The paint portrays a traditional figure of Greeks traditional goddess leaning forward. This form of paint is both theoretical and real. Abstract in the sense that kleoprades wanted to explore various artistic skills in his work. The woman on the paint has been represented as the vocal point. She is placed at the center of the painting predominantly. The colors have been applied perfectly to achieve a desired texture on the paint. The manner in which the woman is portrayed brandishing her spear has been achieved as a result of the artist’s ability to balance light aspects on the paint. The artist further went in for colors that are permanent to produce permanent visual images. However, the artist could have been more inventive in using lines so as to achieve an appropriate texture. Lines can give the paint a compelling texture if they are properly applied. The artist overall performance on the paint was above average. The only problem is that the paint does not make meaningful lessons to a person who is not from Greek. It was a traditional paint.

The manner in which visual elements have been displayed in the painting is quite artistic. The artist went in for acrylic paint in order to produce durable image. When the viewer looks at the paint, he or she sharply gets the exact image that is in the painting despite that fact, the paint seems old. Murals were also applied they fasten lightly compared to other mediums of painting (Howell, p23).  The artist wanted to give viewers an impression that the objects in the painting are live. Objects are in two dimensions. Images can only be seen from limited angles. The painting is a portrait. The artist was careful in choosing the paint to apply in his artwork. He went in for airbrush to which blends quite well with the surface. The artist used an air brash to create sharp live objects.

This artwork might have been produced in the early five to six centuries ago. This is depicted in the manner in which the artist brought out the image. The manner in which people are dressed in the painting tell viewers that it might have been long time ago. The use of boats in the way they had been a portrait in the image also suggest to the viewer of when the artwork was made (Leonardo, p46).

The painting by an Italian Vitorro Carpaccio gives an impression of struggle. The manner in which the artist positioned people with their hunting objects immediately tells the viewer that there is a struggle over something. I think the artist wanted to come up with an image that shows how people struggle in the society. In my opinion, the artist ought to have used lines to create an appropriate impression. Lines have the potential to give the right impression if properly used. For instance, in the first image, Kleophrades Painter ought to have used texture to make objects appear live (Howell, p12).

In my opinion, the artist failed to balance the tone in the paint. In as much as he went in for more permanent paint, the paint contrasts sharply with the background. The scene in the background has been overshadowed hence it does not blend well with the rest of the paint. I further argue that the surface was not quite suitable for the medium of paint applied. Ethyl-silicate paint would have been the best paint for this nature surface. Even though it is costly, ethyl-silicate forms a perfect bond with wooden or concrete surfaces. Again, the artist would have been more innovative when it comes to choosing a more permanent paint. Acrylic is quite durable, but it does not produce sharp images as solvent based enamels. I suggest that the artist failed to balance various elements in his paint simply because he was not innovative in choosing the best medium of paint (Leonardo, p108).

Buy custom Comparison of Two Pieces of Artwork essay paper cheap

← Comparison of Travers and Newton-Francis ArticlesLiving with Pets →

Related essays

Current status

0%

Satisfied customers

0

Active Writers

0

Operators Online

0

Preparing Orders

Close
 
 
Order now
X