Ask MetaFilter questions tagged with rothko

Help me find the original Rothko.

Knowyournuts — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 10:22:28 -0800

Why are there so many versions of Rothko's "Violet, Green, and Red" and which is correct? I am looking at prints to buy from online stores, but the colors are so different, and some of them are even upside down (complete with his name at the bottom, so it's clearly an error in printing, not just how it was posted).

Or is there a difference between "No. 6 (Violet, Green, and Red)" vs. just "Violet, Green, and Red"?

Does anyone have a picture of the original? Thanks!

How to choose a frame for a Rothko print?

pines — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:55:04 -0800

What kind of frame should I use for a print of this Mark Rothko? So I just got a high quality print of Mark Rothko, "Untitled (no. 16) 1950" from the Tate Modern, measuring about 5 x 2.5 feet (or 150 x 75 cm if you prefer). It's to go into a pretty bland office space, mainly to add some colour.

I'm hoping to go to a framer and give him some ideas as to how I'd like it framed. But - here's the rub - I don't know how it should be framed and I'd like (for once) not to say "Do what you think is best." So: colours, materials, width of frame ... what should I aim for?

He makes it look so easy.

LoriFLA — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:10:15 -0800

I could paint that. Couldn't I? You know those "simple" abstract paintings that leave you thinking: I could do that!

How difficult is it to loosely copy art? Very talented artists have the gift of choosing color and composition. Couldn't the somewhat artistic, lay person create the same look without it looking crude and amateurish?

Examples:

Untitled (Orange and Yellow) by Mark Rothko

Untitled (Green, Red, on Orange) by Mark Rothko

I am aware that Rothko is very accomplished and talented. Famous! I realize what seems effortless is probably very difficult. But, how difficult would it be to borrow a few color combinations from these beautiful works and paint something that is similar? Most of us are nowhere near Rothko's talent, but how hard is it really? I ask this without any sarcasm.

I think Rothko painted with oil, but would watercolors be a better bet for an amateur? I'm wondering how he achieved that translucent, feathery quality that is at the edges of the rectangles, and the layering of colors with colors bleeding through.

Tell me I'm dreaming. Or, tell me a somewhat artistic person could paint a few rectangles and create something in the spirit of Rothko without looking like a five-year old did it. I have some talent in drawing but I've never done much painting. I would consider myself somewhat creative and artistic.

That was a lot. I guess I'm looking for painting tips and techniques, book suggestions, and general advice.

What makes extreme abstract art significant?

wackybrit — Tue, 28 Jun 2005 07:11:26 -0800

I don't understand the painter Mark Rothko's abstract works. What is it that makes the art have any significance? I was reading the National Gallery of Art's Rothko section and I just didn't "get it". The "Myths & Symbols" section contains some good art, but the other sections just feature paintings that are basically messy colored squares. I'm into a little abstract art and generally don't have the problem of not "getting" art, but this stuff makes no sense to me at all. Is Rothko's abstract work considered to be significant because he spent so much time on it? Is it considered significant because he was a good artist in earlier life? What makes a few painted squares significant? Is it solely because of the verbal explanation the artist gives? I've seen children paint similar works.. yet their art is not considered significant. Enlighten me.