I've noticed that 2D artists/non-sculptors who engage in strange mediums or techniques generally only make realistic closeup portraits of people. I saw the headline, thought "neat, but I bet he just makes normal expressionless faces." Opened the page and it seems like that's the vast majority of his work. As an artist myself, I'm always like ehhhhh when I see this. Feels a bit like the kind of stuff you see for sale in tourist areas.

The technique is cool though.

▲

rhplus 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Perhaps they find more acceptance due to the effects of pareidolia, where the viewer is more inclined to say, “Oh yeah, I see it - that’s a face!”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia

▲

d--b 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

yeah it’s definitely a genre in itself.

It’s like there are 2 axes: - cool technique and - cool picture. The second is way more important than the first, which is way painters are still on top of the 2D art world.

Some people can do both though. And i’d say even in these cases the art world tend to dismiss the weird technique as gimmicky.

▲

BLKNSLVR an hour ago | parent [-]

And the reason 'cool picture' is way more important than 'cool technique' is because the technique is essentially no longer part of the art / picture at completion.

You've just got the sausage, and there's (not necessarily) any indication of how it was made inherent to the sausage - even if the way the sausage is made is cooler than the sausage itself.

(that analogy got tiresome quickly)

	▲	steezeburger 31 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I'm not sure it's so fitting. You can see hoe this technique was done and how it's different from painting. Or like, a portrait made of pennies, or string and nails, etc, etc.