Author Topic: Art Test  (Read 79256 times)

artmeliana

  • Guest
quiz
« Reply #15 on: January 15, 2006, 08:46:30 AM »
I made 67%.  You could say shame on me because I have an art history degree, but contemporary art was not our focus, we merely touched on it at the end.  In our course we mostly disdained it for more classical stuff.

Still, I could identify by name Kandinsky, Rothko, Mondrian and I even remember our lecture on the Black Circle (who wouldn't, it's so odd!).  The rest were educated guesses.

Thanks to my studies, I have a least a better appreciation of abstract art even though I still don't like them - BUT I do like Kandinsky, for some reason.

Anonymous

  • Guest
Art Test
« Reply #16 on: February 28, 2006, 02:18:50 AM »
Interesting, having done the test and then read the ecclesiastes 9:11 article I discovered that the two that I mis-identified were the two weighted closest to 100g.  Imost certainly would not count myself amongst the knowledgeable about art - music yes, art no.  I recognised the Mondrian as my daughters have both seen his work and had to produce similar as homework, but I am not sure that I had even heard of any of the other artists, much less could correctly identify their work.
Perhaps there is a 'quality' measure somewhere and the results seem to indicate that your fakes didn't all have the same amount of that 'quality'.  Perhaps some people are more atuned than others to distinguishing the quality.
Would be interesting to correlate the results along that axis - i.e. was it the case that those who scored well had trouble with the 'near-100g' works, while getting the 'far from 100g' works more correct, whereas those who do not have the 'gift' you might expect to randomly get the wrong answer.
As I say... interesting.

Someone Else

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Art Test
« Reply #17 on: May 24, 2006, 09:55:49 PM »
I missed the first one (the Klee), the rest were fairly straightforward even though I have no formal art education. I just don't 'get' whatever the Klee is trying to say, but then I have never found Klee's art compelling at all. However many do, and I think it's because the subject matter at the root of his work is something that I don't find at all interesting.
he position of the artist is humble. He is essentially a channel. Piet Mondrian

Pascal

  • Guest
Art Test
« Reply #18 on: June 03, 2006, 05:30:34 PM »
I am right there with you Someone Else. I am no art major or professional, but I do enjoy going to museums to appreciate beautiful and profound works. I scored a 92 on the test, but this can be attributed to my knowledge of playing around with paint programs on the computer, not my knowledge of modern abstract art. The two-color squiggled lines is something that I have done myself, messing around with MS Paint, and have seen various friends do. Also, the overtly pixel-like work was obvious.

Anonymous

  • Guest
Art Test
« Reply #19 on: June 06, 2006, 12:45:36 PM »
I liked number 6.
(which was a fake)

The rest looked; kinda; whatever.

So, I would guess that makes me a chimp.

enamel

  • Guest
art quiz
« Reply #20 on: February 06, 2007, 04:23:07 PM »
i do like art but i have only visited a the art museum in chicago once maybe 5 years ago and i hade a class in highschool but other then that dont know anything about art and i got  a 100% guess i could tell the ones made with MS paintbrush

Alla

  • Guest
Got 100% on the true art quiz
« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2007, 04:20:02 PM »
Recognized all of the classics except for the last one right away.
For the last one, I could tell that it was an artist's serious endeavor, and not random tests like the other fakes.
The only one I had to think about for a moment was the dragon-looking one with teeth. However, it was definitely manufactured on the fly.

WEC

  • Guest
the art quiz
« Reply #22 on: February 23, 2007, 01:51:27 PM »
How do you know that with this quiz you are not simply testing whether or not a person recognizes the particular piece displayed?  If anyone recognizes a piece, then all the psychological baggage of whatever they 'know' about that artist comes into play.  For this quiz to provide meaningful results, every single piece displayed would have to be unknown works.  Which is no problem for the 'fake' ones, but a big problem for 'real' ones.  As it is you are  measuring socialization.

Mikhail Simkin

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Re: the art quiz
« Reply #23 on: February 23, 2007, 07:34:31 PM »
Quote from: "WEC"
How do you know that with this quiz you are not simply testing whether or not a person recognizes the particular piece displayed? ... For this quiz to provide meaningful results, every single piece displayed would have to be unknown works.

Actually, I estimated the fraction of the masterpieces previously seen by an average quiz-taker. Results of the quiz are quite meaningful and very scandalous.

Anonymous

  • Guest
Art Test
« Reply #24 on: March 09, 2007, 02:01:22 PM »
Tell you what, when you actually get some paint and canvas and run this test with actual paintings instead of tiny reproductions, let me know.  Scale, surface texture, subtlety of brush marks all are lost when paintings are viewed on the computer, particularly when the images are small and cannot be zoomed in on.  You can keep claiming your results are significant all you want, but that does not make it so.  Of course you have a vested interest in believing they are meaningful, don't you?  Maybe mama didn't love you enough.

Mikhail Simkin

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Art Test
« Reply #25 on: March 09, 2007, 11:41:56 PM »
Quote from: "Anonymous"
Of course you have a vested interest in believing they are meaningful, don't you?  Maybe mama didn't love you enough.

And you think them to be art? Did your mama drop you on the floor head down?

Akapodon Xela

  • Guest
Pollock or birds?
« Reply #26 on: April 06, 2007, 03:16:29 PM »
They were all feathery jobs a la Pollock  :lol:

Mikhail Simkin

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 142
    • View Profile
Re: Pollock or birds?
« Reply #27 on: April 07, 2007, 02:25:13 PM »
Quote from: "Akapodon Xela"
They were all feathery jobs a la Pollock  :lol:

Note for casual reader: This comment is apparently related to Pollock, or birds? quiz.

lin

  • Guest
Art Test
« Reply #28 on: May 21, 2007, 09:12:17 PM »
I get 12/12 correct.
I confess that I've seen some of the real artisitic works, yet the fakes, except the black and red, crocodile-like one, are easy to recognize. Maybe the color and the line of the fakes can be more delicate.
well, maybe I'm too serious....never mind.

NicceL

  • Guest
Art Test
« Reply #29 on: May 22, 2007, 05:20:17 AM »
Ok, so I - with a mild interest in art (atleast abstract), and what I thought inability to understand abstract art scored 100%. It should be said thue that I was quite unsure and thought for a while and was severly helped by the notion about the half-fake, half-true relationship - that is a severe flaw I must say. Comments per pic:

1. My spontaneous reaction was to call it fake but upon a more thourough look it looks like coming from a creative process. There are certain details that convinced me.

2. Not have I only, and possibly all test-takers, seen this pattern on numerous places but it sure just looks good to the eye.

3. Partly representative.

4. Again, looks good to the eye differenting from number 10 who had severe colour clashes.

5. What is there to say more than that this couldn't have been made free-hand.

6. Tendency to symmetry and partly representative, draws focus away from colour-form relationship which is the abstract foundation.

7.  :roll:

8. Clearly art. Not only crafted with advance techniques but also investigating colour relationships.

9. Rothko. As for number 2, possibly all test-takers recognize this.

10. see no 4

11. As for number 6

12. Again, form-colour relationship make it look appealing.