Margaret Preston (1875–1963) was one of Australia’s most influential modernist artists and a significant figure in the nation’s queer histories. Renowned for her bold post-impressionist woodcuts, still lifes, and incorporation of Indigenous Australian motifs, Preston spent her formative years with painter Bessie Davidson, with whom she travelled and studied across Europe from 1904 to 1911. She later formed a close relationship with Adelaide potter Gladys Reynell, and the pair lived and trained together in Europe until Margaret’s marriage to William Preston in 1919.

From the Art Gallery of New South Wales:

Margaret Preston painted this portrait in 1930 at the request of the Trustees of the Art Gallery of New South Wales. She confessed she was thrilled to receive the commission to paint what was, for her, an untested subject. As she later pointed out, “… my self-portrait is completed, but I am a flower painter—I am not a flower”. In a work as carefully designed and as uncompromising as the artist's still-lifes, Preston identifies and separates the essentials of her art: her brush and palette and a pot of wildflowers, a favourite subject, on the sill behind her.

(they can depict fictional creatures or characters, such as unicorns or demons. I mean that the style should be realistic, not abstract))

In 1802, London was home to a very special bull. It arrived in a specially designed carriage, after a tour of England and Scotland. At every stop, the ox drew crowds that came to stare at its massive size. Weighing nearly three thousand pounds, the existence of such a fat cow was a wonder.

The Durham ox was immortalized in a painting, and print reproductions sold by the thousands. But the ox was part of a much larger trend. Wealthy British landowners were breeding animals larger and fatter than ever before. Proud of their achievements and eager for recognition, they commissioned paintings of themselves and their livestock. And the public couldn’t get enough of them.

More here: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/britain-cows-pig-sheep-paintings-livestock

Like how pink were the roses when they were first made and was the background color of the irises also pink?
And were there other paintings that had the poor lightfastness of geranium Lake and other fugitive pigments?

New question: did the Starry Night painting had any fugitive pigments on it that, when it was first painted the night sky was more of a violet color than blue?

I'm researching the use of the pileus, or liberty cap, as a symbol in the French and American Revolutions, especially how it came to be red and how it came to be conflated with the Phrygian Cap. In some early American usage (Great Seal of New York and Liberty Displaying the Arts and Sciences Samuel Jennings ca. 1792) the caps are gold and white but all French usage is red. It would make sense that the red color is a French innovation to align with the earlier bonnets rouge movement.

However Linnaeus named the Pileated Woodpecker, a bird with a red Crest, in 1757. I'm trying to figure out if red would have been associated with the pileus at this time or if the name is merely for the shape of the Crest and the color is a coincidence. Phrygian Caps have been depicted as red (as well as other colors) since antiquity but the above painting is the earliest example I can find of the Goddess Libertas with a specifically red pileus.

It is Apotheosis of Venice Paolo Veronese ca. 1585. It should also be mentioned that the Doges of Venice wore a distinctive crown called the Corno Ducale which was often red and has been compared to the Phrygian Cap. I am wondering if anybody knows of other early European depictions of Libertas where the hat on her pole is red?

I've always found it interesting how differently people react to contemporary art. Some works can seem confusing or even meaningless at first, while others become much more compelling once you learn about the artist's intentions and the context behind them.

Do you think understanding the concept behind a work is essential to appreciating it, or should the artwork be able to speak for itself?

I'd love to hear your thoughts, especially if there's a contemporary artwork that changed your perspective after you learned more about it.

(Ivan Aivazovsky, Departing for a Foreign Shore, 1877)

Ivan is renowned to be a master of seascapes. He also had a unique method of painting. Unlike many landscape artists who painted outdoors (in front of the subject), he painted from memory. He argued live moments are too fleeting to capture and attempting to paint en plein air dents artistic imagination.

I regard him to be of the great artists in general, not only sea/landscape artists, as his paintings capture emotions. Longing, tranquility, fear, etc. the whole spectrum of it.

I was taken by this statue in Lisbon when we visited pre-Covid. She stands (or stood, as I've no idea if it was a permanent or temporary installation) near the Ponte 25 de Abril (Bridge of April 25th) across the Tagus River opposite the Santuário de Cristo Rei. Defiant, naked, colorful, and mimicking (mocking?) his stance, I see her as a symbol of unfettered freedom, and perhaps a challenge to the patriarchy of the church. What meaning do you see?

Who are the worst offenders who kept women artists in the shadows and robbed their voices? Please list which woman, which country, who kept her in obscurity and why. Let's create a worldwide database to identify, document, and rise up inspiring women that put a fire in your belly because of her unwritten excellence. Let's do shout outs and blow up this feed! And then let's honor them in our current work! We need to amplify our power!

The staute depicts that wisdom is flowing in the head while the student reads the book.

The sculpture was donated to the city of Leuven on the 550th anniversary of the Catholic University of Leuven.

I absolutely love sad art and seeing the many unique approaches to sadness. I really want to see what you think best expresses sadness. I especially would love to see sadness not necessarily through death and tears but through longing stares and sillouhetes.

¿Un ángel con alas de mariposa? ¿Hombres-pez? ¿Un monstruo con un reloj de sol en la espalda? 🌌👹

A primera vista, esta obra maestra de Pieter Bruegel el Viejo (1562) parece un caos absoluto de monstruos. Pero detrás de cada criatura perturbadora se esconde un secreto oculto que casi nadie nota.

Bruegel no solo pintó una guerra celestial en La caída de los ángeles rebeldes; metió en el lienzo animales reales recién descubiertos en América, instrumentos científicos avanzados y una fuerte crítica política disfrazada de religión.

¿Querés descubrir qué significan estos delirios visuales y por qué desafiaron a su época? 🤔

🎬 ¡Acabo de subir un análisis completo a YouTube! Desarmamos el cuadro pieza por pieza para revelarte todos sus misterios.

I just recently discovered the magazine today and what it is about, and the attacks that happened to them. I don't understand their shtick at all. Is it just being racist and offensive under the guise of "art"? That's what it seems like to me. To be clear I don't support the attacks that happened, but you can't say they were not to be expected consequently

I have seen people say that it's about sending a message about artistic freedom, but I don't see how them drawing extremely offensive and stereotyping images of religious figures for example, is different from some racist from the 1800's drawing offensive images of black people, with exaggerated and stereotyped features etc, like they did at that time. Is that also not "artistic freedom"? Would people support charlie hedbo if they made racist images of black people like that? I imagine not, and I imagine that everyone would expect some people to be offended to a point that they attack them. I wouldn't support killing them instead of taking them through a legal system, but I wouldn't be surprised that someone did either, nor would I sympathize too much with them

My point being that artistic freedom doesn't mean that all moral principles are excused just because something is "art". But I genuinely want to know if I am misunderstanding something, or if people even support it, and why they do so if they do

I have always deeply enjoyed paintings that do with daily life and wanted to hear your thoughts on what makes them so compelling. My best guess is that it is not only relatable but allows us to slow down and notice the beauty in how we go through the motions. Often, I feel as though people think that going on autopilot is boring and an unfortunate part of our busy lives and, though it is true to an extent, i like the idea that it is beautiful and kind of cute. It is like watching ants carry food back to their homes or admiring how mechanical a barista can be while making coffee.

Hey, all.

Frans Masereel (1889-1972) was a Belgian artist renowned for his expressive woodcuts and wordless visual narratives, being a solid inspiration for Lynd Ward, Eric Drooker, and Clifford Harper.

I spent a few years gathering about 70 books with woodcut illustrations by him, and I was aiming for books that were in the public domain or soon entering it. Then I scanned, cleaned, rebalanced, and uploaded them to archive.org. Many of the pages were yellowed, so, I had to do some gimp work and colorizing to make them nearly pure black and white.

Being in the public domain, you can use these for whatever you want! Reprint and re-stencil them anywhere, or integrate them into your own artwork, even commercial use, anything.

Some of the scans are massive (20k by 28k pixels), and at 1,800 woodcuts, that would be a bit to download all at once. I recommend the PDF of all the artwork (just under a gig), which shows smaller versions of the images. I use that as a catalogue, and then I grab the original when I want a high-res version for whatever I'm working on. I hope this will be a useful resource for others, as well!

Youtube Video Format: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReZYh5PQfQ8

Archive.org PDF (789mb): https://archive.org/details/frans-masereel-career-1918-1930_pdf

Archive.org Web: https://archive.org/details/frans-masereel-career-1918-1930_art

Archive.org File/Folder Browser (easier for browsing individual images): https://archive.org/download/frans-masereel-career-1918-1930_art

Please enjoy!

Howdy! One thing that always captivates me at art museums is when there are paintings with tons of little details that all mean something. For example, a cat playing with a mouse in the corner representing infidelity, or cards on a table in the background that somehow show some prediction, or even in some cases, hidden faces, like the theory that Van Gogh hid his face in his last piece, Tree Roots.

What are some of the best pieces with symbolic details?

For those with PhDs, what did your comprehensive exams look like? How did you choose and organize your reading list? How many titles were on it? Ngl, I'm going to be taking comps next year and I'm pre-emptively freaking myself out.

Straw art...seems as if poetry written on the surface of straws... This art is widely practiced in the place called Jirala near Dhenkanal. The dark coloured straws are segregated from the golden coloured straws and those are then cut precisely in different shapes and pasted usually on black smooth surfaces . The topic is taken usually from our mythology. Here given certain photos for better understanding.

https://lunarsecstacy.com/2025/12/18/a-variety-of-paddy-crafts-unique-intricate-folk-art-forms-of-odisha/

Most of the famous artists I have studied deeply in my classes are European but I would really like to hear about small, global artists.