Who started the next Art phase after Stick Figures?

I was with a friend tonight, talking over dinner. And, my gosh! We got on the topic of ghosts, alien activity, ancient cultures, and a lot of other things. Wish I’d had a tape recorder handy.

Anyways, this friend said that he had read the following. I did a quick Google search on the topic, and came up with nothing. I’d love to hear what others on ATS have to say:

Up to a certain point, all civilizations on earth write their history in stick figure pictures. Most of us have all seen these pictures online, on TV, in books, and in person.

At a certain point, a certain culture (my friend could not recall the country), began producing what he called “3d” art. Pictures with dept, perspective, shadows, etc.

Can anyone tell me when this kind of artwork first started? Who started it? And does anyone believe we were “helped” along, to produce this “3d” art?

Art has been such a rich and often used way of communication in our world’s cultures, I’m really curious to know some of this history. All comments, ideas and theories appreciated.

-VW

Perspective in art is an invention of the Renaissance.

I don't think that that was what your friend was talking about.

Actually, I don't know what he is talking about, because its not strictly true. There's certainly nothing to suggest that one cultured made the leap from really primitive art to not so primitive, and some of the very old stuff that is had in terms of art are carvings. I'd think that some of the rock paintings in the sahara and australian outback can be considered 'stick figures', but the cathedral cave culture in europe doesn't allways use that. But, again, I don't see any reason to say it spread from one culture to another.

Nygdan, is half right...

It was Brunelleschi who initially brought "perspective" to life in painted/drawn 2D art around 1410-1440's (during the renaissance). Actually perspective was attempted proir to 1400's by many artisans but you will find the perspective to be "inaccurate" in most cases. Sort of a half attempt at it.

As to "why" perspective happened? You must realize, artisans at that time were NOT only painters, they were usually sculptors and architects first and foremost. This being the case, they were very familiar with "working in 3D". It was a natural progression of art at the time, to adapt a 3d perspective to 2D art. Hence the "renaissance"... the explosion of art & knowledge.

Hope that helps.

Peace


[edit on 15-3-2005 by Serum39]

There were many stages between stick figures on caves and perspective. Certainly Egyptian art is well above stick figures, but still not very realistic.

Originally posted by VisionWithin
I was with a friend tonight, talking over dinner. [...]And does anyone believe we were “helped” along, to produce this “3d” art?
-VW

This might be going a bit too far back into prehistory to answer your question in perhaps the way that you intended, but it may be illustrative nevertheless ...

I'd say the biggest single "help" would have been the move to an agrarian culture (even in part).
This would have "helped" the emergence of a more sophisticated expression of art and culture, simply because having a [relatively] settled and predictable source of food would have meant that people would had [relatively] more time to devote to 'stuff', other than that [solely] connected with their basic survival. Some of that other 'stuff' became art, or self-expression, some inevitably would have become improved farming tech, (which would have fed back into the time efficiencies quite neatly too).

I'd also cite climate, geography and the movement of people - a more gentle climate would support an easier lifestyle by an improved availability of foodstuffs, which in turn would cut down the time required for hunting and gathering, which would allow more time to do other stuff etc : and a movement of people would open up new ideas and influences.

If my memory serves me correctly these are generally regarded as the factors in the emergence of the leptolithic cave art the late Pleistocene through the Franco-cantabrian region (and more widely into Eurasia).


Perspective is present in the work in lascaux too.
This page talks about this in respect of the "Bison Diptych".

Edit for context.

[edit on 15-3-2005 by 0951]

I was reading the whole thread, wondering when someone was going to mention Lasceaux, hehe.... As some of the oldest art known, and it is not of stick figures, there seems to be no basis for a "progression" for anything...

The move to an agrarian society is likely a key to this, as mentioned. Once art became a profession in and of itself, then we see more innovations in the ability to depict things. Take it from someone who's had a LOT of art history drilled into him, hehe...

Or the LS Lowry who famously painted "matchsick men and matchstick cats and dogs" (it was a big chart hit in the 70s here in the UK):

www.neurodiversity.com...

www.btinternet.com...

I appreciate everyone’s response to this thread. I do not know a thing about art, and I learned a few things from this thread. I do have a couple of other questions though, and here goes.

At what point in our history did we see painted art that was not flat looking. Was it before the 14th century in Italy, and if so, who and where?

And, are there cultures outside of Italy that showed this talent either during, or before, the 14th century?

-VW

Question. Do you yourself even understand perspective? Have you ever studied it, do you know about vanishing points and how lines must go to the vanishing points to have successful perspective?

Many here have stated already, it was not an overnight change into a more three dimensional art. Many artists, mainly in Europe made attempts at perspective, but their vanishing points were all over the place. It was a gradual change, very gradual.

Well, there were earlier attempts at perspective...if that's what you mean, but most were flawed...

If you mean 3 dimensional in general, then yes, of course. In Ahkenaton's reign in Egypt (Tut's dad), he not only switched to the worship of one god, but also changed the art style away from the norm that we associate with Egypt, to a more realistic and 3-d style. After he was assassinated by the clergy, they of course reverted to the traditional, and even attempted to erase him from history.

Of course, there was sculpture throughout the ages, but if you are speaking of 3d on a flat surface, then you'll see the use of shading, etc. in many of the works before and during the dark ages. with the exception of the Byzantine era, which was fairly flat.

Originally posted by steggyD
Question. Do you yourself even understand perspective? Have you ever studied it, do you know about vanishing points and how lines must go to the vanishing points to have successful perspective?

I'm aware of the concept, but do not have an understand of it. Had I been aware of the words you used in your post, I'd have used them in my orginal post.

Many here have stated already, it was not an overnight change into a more three dimensional art. Many artists, mainly in Europe made attempts at perspective, but their vanishing points were all over the place. It was a gradual change, very gradual.

Thanks for the above Steggy. I posted these questions because I had an honest wish to understand something I had never thought of before.

I'm interested in all kinds of things about how we learned to do this, that, and the other, because the more we know about that, the more we can understand our own history.

As I have said, I appreciate the responses, in this thread, and am pleased those who posted did not find it too OOT. Thanks!

-VW

There are cave paintings in france that have incredible perspective, and are drawn not only in 3D, but are planned with the Natural rock formations being parts of the animals.
FOr example the protrusion of a rock would be the shoulder of the Bull. Natural cracks running in the walls of the cave would be the creases of skin, etc. The animals depicted actually appear to be running, jumpring, due to the artistry that these cave painters possessed.

These are spectacular paintings, far and away a sophisticated artform, beyond anything we would expect. These paintings are dated at 30,000-40,000 years old.

There are cave paintings in france that have incredible perspective, and are drawn not only in 3D, but are planned with the Natural rock formations being parts of the animals.
FOr example the protrusion of a rock would be the shoulder of the Bull. Natural cracks running in the walls of the cave would be the creases of skin, etc. The animals depicted actually appear to be running, jumpring, due to the artistry that these cave painters possessed.

These are spectacular paintings, far and away a sophisticated artform, beyond anything we would expect. These paintings are dated at 30,000-40,000 years old.

Originally posted by toolmaker
There are cave paintings in france that have incredible perspective, and are drawn not only in 3D, but are planned with the Natural rock formations being parts of the animals.
FOr example the protrusion of a rock would be the shoulder of the Bull. Natural cracks running in the walls of the cave would be the creases of skin, etc. The animals depicted actually appear to be running, jumpring, due to the artistry that these cave painters possessed.

These are spectacular paintings, far and away a sophisticated artform, beyond anything we would expect. These paintings are dated at 30,000-40,000 years old.

I assume you are referring to The Caves at Lascaux in France. No?
The caves at Lascaux

I hardly call these "3D". Perspective is NOT a factor in these paintings. Just because the "inks" have deteriorated over time, causing a gradiated appearance does not indicate 3D/perspective intent.

While you point out the texture & surface of the rock helps create a 3D appearance, (which i dont see as a dominating factor) I assure you it was NOT the painters intent, (please dont ask how I know it wasnt his intent. If you know anything about psychology, ancient societies, art history, and COMMON sense, you will come to the same conclusion as art historians already have) -- its no more than the surface that was used to "tell their story".

Anyhoo, all that being said, the cave art is still a must see for any "art enthusiast"

Be well & Peace


[edit on 18-3-2005 by Serum39]

While you point out the texture & surface of the rock helps create a 3D appearance, (which i dont see as a dominating factor) I assure you it was NOT the painters intent, (please dont ask how I know it wasnt his intent. If you know anything about psychology, ancient societies, art history, and COMMON sense, you will come to the same conclusion as art historians already have) -- its no more than the surface that was used to "tell their story". """"



I was pointing out that early humans, (c. 30,000 BC), did not draw in stick figures. They drew magnificent animals, and used shading and perspective as well, beyond what most people are willing to accept, yourself included.


your comment about "no more than the surface used to tell their story", well, exactly what do you think perspective and shading is?
It is using the surface of whatever media to tell a story. ( is there Art that does Not use a surface to tell a story?)



I would be highly interested in the art historians conclusions. Especially the ones that used common sense, ancient history, phsychology, and art history to determine the state of mind of an Artist living 30,000 years ago.


The proof exists in the painting Itself, nobody can take away what those people left, not even high brow art historians.

Typically, I try to approach life with a "zen" attitude, and try NOT to be confrontational- (each to their own.) I will NOT speak/comment on subjects that I am unfamiliar with. However, being an artist and designer , I feel qualified enough to comment on this subject one more time....

You said-- "I was pointing out that early humans, (c. 30,000 BC), did not draw in stick figures. They drew magnificent animals, and used shading and perspective as well, beyond what most people are willing to accept, yourself included."-

-- Agreed they DID draw magnificent animals no doubt there, but your statement--- "incredible perspective, and are drawn not only in 3D, but are planned with the Natural rock formations being parts of the animals" (as supposed to what deciding to use paper!?) lol

Incredible perspective? No, not really. How is that art any different than oh say.. the Egyptians other than being NOT as detailed..... the cave paintings are not in 3D perspective. Not even close. Did you even look at the link?

Ya know, I got up and hour ago and just sat back down (had a design/creative meeting)... and I was going to continue with trying to convince you otherwise regarding your statements- but ya know what? It's all good. It reminds me of trying to convince my teenage daughter- a pointless attempt. At no point will you concede and defer to someone who actually "might" know more based on experience... not opinion.

But thats fine. Be well.

Peace

Serum, this is for you. The caves at Lascaux are ok, but the Grotte Chauvet Art is a Grander accomplishment. Altemira Spain is beautifull ork as well.

In most Paleolithic caves animal figures (mainly horses, bison, cattle, and hinds) predominate, suggesting that the art may have had ritual significance related to hunting; there are few group or hunting scenes, however, and human figures are extremely rare. Drawn with vitality and the elegance of great simplicity, the animals are the masterworks of prehistoric art and are of an accuracy that provides invaluable evidence to paleozoologists. The Lascaux cave was closed when the paintings began to deteriorate. Some of Lascaux's painted rooms show no signs of human habitation and may have been used for ritual. Engravings on soft stone, bone, and ivory, as well as low reliefs and a few freestanding sculptures, have been found in or near many of these caves.

In 1994 and 1999 richly decorated limestone caves were discovered at Grotte Chauvet in SE France—again by accident. The stone engravings and more than 400 paintings are the most ancient on record, c.32,000 years old, and depict lions, rhinoceroses, bears, horses, and other creatures with bold realism. In addition, during the late 1990s and early 2000s more than 20 ivory figurines depicting animals and birds and dating from approximately the same period as the Grotte Chauvet paintings, were discovered at various sites in Swabia, SW Germany.

Another style predominates in E Spain and bears a strong resemblance to the rock carvings and paintings of N and S Africa. The pictures, drawn chiefly in silhouette, are found on the walls of shallow rock shelters and are usually small; they depict human as well as animal figures in scenes of hunting, fighting, ceremonial, ritual, and domestic activities. This art seems to have reached its peak in the Mesolithic period. A third style, largely of Aurignacian origin, ranges from France to W Siberia and consists almost entirely of small sculptured figures of animals and human beings. The latter are chiefly female, often abnormally voluptuous, and are generally regarded as fertility goddesses; one of the most famous is the Venus of Willendorf, Austria.

The damp climate of the British Isles is believed to have caused the destruction of most of the islands' Paleolithic art, but some examples have survived. In the first years of the 21st cent. archaeologists discovered the earliest extant works of prehistoric art in Great Britain, engravings of two birds (possibly a crane or swan and a bird of prey) and an ibex, in a cave at Creswell Crags, Derbyshire. They were carved some 12,000 years ago, and are done in a style similar to that of contemporary works on the continent. The engravings are neither as old nor as accomplished as continental examples.



I am not your teenage daughter, Post facts instead of fluff.

The Grotte Chauvet Art is truely a grand accomplishment. It's nice to see people interested in art other than what's "mainstream".

Ok, you win.

I am humbled by your copy and paste abilities and dumb founded how wrong I was.

Peace

[edit on 18-3-2005 by Serum39]

Nobody wins...its getting people to see our ancestors for what they were.

Media has portrayed pre historic humans as inept and ignorant rock throwing troglydites.

They were no such thing. They built massive construction works, carved 30 foot statues, sailed the oceans and traded with cultures the world over. They fabricated intricate bone beads, carved the stars and planets cycles into rocks, they cared for the people in their tribe and created the myths that we call religion.

Our ancestors were Brilliant, resourceful people. They struggled in a dangerous world, and left their calling cards on the walls of caves the world over.

Nice discussing this with you Serum. Your appreciation of their Art is a comfort.

My passion is "rock art"; petroglyphs and pictographs of the ancients... and I'm particularly interested in the American Indian material of the Pecos region in Texas
www.rockart.org...

Art style is often a cultural preference and is dictated by the materials and tools available. You don't do a lot of sophisticated detail when your only tool is a fingertip. For the American Indians, the cultural stylistic preferences were very strong, and they didn't start drawing in "western European style" until after the missions came in and the priests drafted the acolytes (Indians) to paint the murals for the church.