Talk:Hyperrealism (visual arts)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hyperrealism (visual arts) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Copying

Large portions of this page are copied straight from other sources: the last paragraph, for example, is lifted straight from Denis Peterson's page on Hyperrealism. As a secondary result, much of the language is not neutral. Suggest the page be rewritten to eliminate the copy-and-pastes and the bias inherent in the writing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.11.98.194 (talk • contribs)

I removed that paragraph, but I haven't gone through the rest to see if anything else is copied. I agree this needs to be cleaned up. --Delirium 15:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"that bears witness to what immediately becomes historical evidence of the grotesque mistreatment of human beings in a perpetual hypersphere or hyperreality." The author hijacks words from mathematics for uses incomprehensible to anyone else. The connotations of the term "hyper" are "complex", "conceptual", and "futuristic". But in reality, "hypersphere" has a specific definition, completely unrelated to perpetual torture. Unless you are refering to the author's art-school "get me" attitude, which is torturing me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.121.18.98 (talk • contribs)

I agree; I read this article and still don't really know what hyperrealism is. I think it's trying to explain why hyperrealism is better than just taking photographs (the obvious criticism of photorealistic painting), but it certainly doesn't succeed in doing so in a readable way. It could also use more factual history of the movement, and of course sources. --Delirium 15:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Superflous paragraph

Isn't having list of hyperealist AND artists a bit pointless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LaughingMan (talk • contribs) 17:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photorealism Split

As I've read and become aware of "Hyperrealism" it seems to me that it is not a complete split from Photorealism. Many of the Photorealists are now using digital means to paint their paintings. Also, in many of the sources listed the Photorealists all talk about how there IS meaning in their paintings. This article claims that there is hardly any meaning in the original Photorealism movement, which is wrong. Hyperrealism is an advancement due to digital capabilities in Photorealism. Not a complete split. Zachiroth (talk) 16:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Citation 10 has a dead link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.26.233.70 (talk) 04:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC) I've never seen much distinction between photorealism and hyperrealism, except that the range of subject matter has expanded with hyperrealism. The techniques don't matter and using a projector is so old fashioned (and lends itself to a slight inaccuracy) why shouldn't we use computers and digital images? Sorry I've just got to say my piece because I am a practicing artist and find the intellectual approach in Wikipedia somewhat off putting.Markalanrussell (talk) 12:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)markalanrussell[reply]

Please add example Images

Since this is an article on painting style, don't you think adding some example images will be helpful? --Hirak 99 (talk) 09:59, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, I will publish soon some images, I'm waiting permission from the artist.Denistonello (talk) 08:26, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quality

Quality and technics are important element for judge hyperrelistic paint. I notice many name's of artist doesn't with a very poor quality for hyperrealism i.e. Latif Maulan , Boris Dragojevic. And many other, I think this section need some integration and revision.Denistonello (talk) 09:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Baudrillard's quotation

"”the simulation of something which never really existed.” This quote is attributed to Baudrillard's. However, it DOES NOT appears neither in the book Simulacra and Simulation nor in the article "The Precession of Simulacra". If source cannot be find, this quote should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parneix (talk • contribs) 17:51, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More Copying.

Huge chunks of this article come straight from http://www.jordangalleryone.com/resources_about_hyperrealism.htm Belore (talk) 07:50, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fruitbowlwithmelons.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Fruitbowlwithmelons.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests May 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:08, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hatnote isn't really a hatnote

Why is there a pretend hatnote at the top of this article? If disambiguation is needed, then a proper hatnote template should be used, and links to articles such as Hyperreality and Hyperrealism (music) should be included. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 05:23, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mediums?

Hyperrealism can referrer to more than just painting and sculpture, correct? Pencil, pen, charcoal, 3D, etc? The article seems to exclude these other mediums. --Dan Leveille^TALK 23:46, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Links

The link to Omar Ortiz links to an article about Omar Ortiz the football player. --Webbie1234 (talk) 03:37, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Hyperrealism (visual arts). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:45, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Better picture and documentation needed

As it stands now, the allegedly hyperrealist picture "File:La hora del te.jpg" appears indistinguishable from a simple Photoshopped photograph of a physical tea set, and could possibly be a hoax. A more contextual photo is needed, showing the painting in a frame, on a wall, or in an exhibition. A ruler or a simple object, or a person or a hand are need to establish physical size. Other standard information, such as medium, date of creation, date of photo, location, etc. are all missing. Please improve the documentation of this photo. In the meantime, I am temporarily removing it from the article. Reify-tech (talk) 18:05, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence: see artist, see work. Saludos. Açipni-Lovrij (talk) 01:06, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hyperrealism (visual arts). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070504201929/http://www.artinfo.com/News/Article.aspx?a=16964&c=175 to http://www.artinfo.com/News/Article.aspx?a=16964&c=175

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Themes section

Does anyone else think that the themes section is essentially gibberish? "Helnwein developed unconventionally narrative work that centered on past, present and future deviations of the Holocaust. Provocative subjects include enigmatic imagery of genocides, their tragic aftermath and the ideological consequences." What exactly is meant by "unconventionally narrative"? One could understand this in reference to novels, perhaps (though it would still lack specificity), but in relation to realist paintings, what could it mean? What is a "deviation" of the Holocaust (as opposed to a Holocaust)? How can an image of genocide, especially a realistic image, be "enigmatic"? And what might "ideological consequences" encompass? In short, this doesn't give the reader meaning so much as it uses words as mere signposts to point at a meaning which is elsewhere, and which, in the end, the reader has to take on faith as being actually present in the paintings. The discussion either needs to be more comprehensive and specific, or it needs reproductions of actual paintings to give it some point. Otherwise, it's just airy generalizations, at attempt at suggesting deep thought and social engagement without actually giving us any of the content of those deep thoughts. In short, gibberish. Theonemacduff (talk) 17:57, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Survival of Serena.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mischaracterized

This article begins wrong. Sorry I'm not skilled at editing, but look at this reference: https://mymodernmet.com/hyperrealism-history/

Major museums are a good source of defining art movements and styles, due to the large number of misconceptions online.

Hyperrealism is not an attempt to resemble a high resolution photograph. "Hyperrealists used advancements in high-definition photography as a jumping-off point into expressions of false realities" So, although inspired by photography, the paintings are meant to go beyond what photography can express. For example, they often will not copy the flaws or limitations (no out of focus areas, no optical defects, distortions). It is not "photographic in essence". The article is a mix of fact and misconception, and thus self-contradictory... Then there is the "Themes" section which seems to be a collection of irrelevant tangents.24.236.70.18 (talk) 13:42, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Noob to wikipedia here. I arrived at the page wanting to see what it said. And I wholeheartedly agree with the above. I am an unheralded photorealist painter and when the hyperrealist term first came across my radar twenty years ago the artists who used this newer term to differentiate themselves used this very argument. They tried to explain that the use of computers could lead to them ignoring the limitations of the camera. Also they talked about how they were creating more socially aware art rather than the plain old visual tricks that you see with photorealism. BertErnieArtist (talk) 05:13, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]