I don't personally know what makes what I make different from what anyone else makes in art. In most cases I don't see what makes what anyone else makes unique either. Anyone with enough skill at reproduction could copy anything I make just by looking at it, and my own level of skill isn't really as high as I used to think, and there's people years younger than me just as skilled. Does anyone know what makes someone's art unique among the millions of other artists making billions of other artworks, or is there even such a thing as unique anymore?

Art is not so much about technical skill, as it is creativity and thought. So, while you could reproduce Picasso, they will never hang it up, because he thought of it, not you.

By the same token, if you come up with something really unique and new, and someone reproduces it, even if it is technically (I use the word to describe skill with brush, pen, etc) better, yours is the real work of art.

Have you ever seen paintings in a museum and said, "I could have drawn that when I was six years old?" Abstraction discussion aside, the artist had an idea or someone buying the work thought they did, and liked it. Landscapes sell, but unique and new ideas make museums.

Well basically everything in art is unique, because no pictures will ever come out the same.

I'd have to agree with Dino. I think a lot of it is creativity. btw, how old are you?

I'm 22. I just feel like for as many years as I've been making art and taking classes, I should be better than I am. Of course I don't really make all that much art outside of class and I'm rarely interested in class projects, so it's not like I've been practicing with real dedication.

Also, the problem with the idea of creativity is that there's a big discussion going on for decades that "original" doesn't exist and creativeness is simply a process of reproducing, re-presenting, and alteration of past experience. I can make a drawing of a dragon but I certainly didn't think of that on my own, for example.

I think there must be something about me that makes me unique, I just can't point at a specific thing and say there it is.

Well I think both creativity and technical skill are equally important in art.It's also why in an art course you're grade is usually the combination of those two factors at 50-50.You aren't gonna get a better grade in art class in comparison to others just because you're stronger in one ability over the other.And really, you can't have one without the other if you think about it.If you were creative and you couldn't draw it out, does that help?Or vice versa, what if you could draw really well but everything you draw is so plain and bland?They're just as important as the other in those terms.

I think that creativity is how you look at things and the thoughts that appear in your mind when you think about it. Hehehehehee. Tied your mind!! But realy I do......

well I think your right, no on can make anything truly unique, anything anyone creates is going to reseble something. I dont understand what your asking really. and if you want to make money, all that matters is if other people like it enough to buy it, or pay you to use it. and then sometimes you can recignise artist because of the styles the consistantly use..is that unique? I dont know..but I would say its good when people know which painting you did out of 10 others on the wall...i dont get it..what are you trying to get at?

I may be just a kid, but what I think art is idea and creativity. It's self expression. If you try to copy someone else's art it won't be the same because you're trying to express the feelings of someone else. Everyone is different, and so the sadness they may feel is a different kind of sadness than someone else, or it's fueled by something else. You can get a fruit bowl and have 4 skilled artists, trained by the same person, and have them try to draw it. It might look the same, but then the teacher probably only taught them technique and nothing at ideas. It's like everyone is saying, you can't have art without technique and ideas. You can't have one without the other. Rikku-raiper is right, it's how you see things, you can look at a puppy and some my think it's ugly and fat and someone may think it may think it's cute. Art isn't about thinking you're better or worse than someone, about perspective. How you see or interpret things. Unique is different, and if something is different it's unique, but if there's something the same as something esle it's common, dull.

I just feel very lacking in that although I can do some things, there's nothing I can do that can't also be done by many other people, and many of them would do it better too. When I want my art to be unique I want to be able to do something that can't be easily done by countless others, but I don't know how to get to where that happens or if it can happen.

You're too negative. First off you have to think you can do great things, stop thnking you can't do it. Next, stop trying to do something you think everyone else thinks is amazing, create something you think is amazing. You're trying to express a feeling everyone else wants, but art is self expression. You're expressing your ideas, when you create something you like and you're 100% is something you would enjoy and if you enjoy it, then it's pretty sure other people will enjoy it.

aunvi I think you may be assuming too much about me. I know I can do great things. What I'm saying is that I'm not there yet and I don't know how to get there. I make art really only because I enjoy it anyways, but I've had enough experiences of other people acutely disliking my work that I also know I can't please everyone and I'm not going to, and me enjoying it doesn't necessarily mean others will to. I think you have some good ideas there, but I'm not fulling agreeing with all of it.

Also, the problem with the idea of creativity is that there's a big discussion going on for decades that "original" doesn't exist and creativeness is simply a process of reproducing, re-presenting, and alteration of past experience.

What a pointless discussion. If you came to the conclusion that it is impossible to make something out of nothing (hello physics), would you stop making art?

When I want my art to be unique I want to be able to do something that can't be easily done by countless others

Dedicate three decades of your life to mastering some random gimmicky technique, like, painting blindfolded with a broken brush made of croutons. You'll mesmerize the public.

Let's just make fresh images, okay.

DireOnion- I disagree about that discussion being pointless. The reason is that whether or not that point of view is right it addresses the very nature of what art is. Part of being human is the attempt to understand who and what we are, and part of being an artist is asking what art is and why it's made. Also, I am well aware of the laws of thermodynamics.

I've tried a lot of things in art already, though certainly not near as many as I can, and I've found a dislike for gimmicks. I suppose I have a few minor ones such as rarely cleaning my brushes and letting paint dry in them, but that's only because I like the feel of them when the bristles are stiff and the paint is thick.

It's funny you'd say that DireOnion, seeing all the other non-art-related topics here in the forums, I can't help but laugh at that....sorry.

As for what I think you're trying to get at here, I think creativity is like personality development.It's a mixture of your own thoughts into your influences in life.Cause if you've ever taken speech and psychology, they'll mention how a lot of how you think is influenced by your surroundings including culture, the way you were brought up, etc etc.Creativeness is kinda the same way.You look at ideas and incorporate them and add a lil flavor of you into it to develop something new.Not for the public's sake all the time, but for your comfort.You don't wanna be going around stuff you don't enjoy drawing.Unless all you care about is pleasing your audience to make some cash.So yes, creativity in a way is reproducing, but to a certain degree.If it were a 100% reproduction, then you just pretty much replicated someone else's efforts in expressing their uniqueness.So it's a combination, I think.

A blank peace of paper can hold anything you can imagine. It can hold your thoughts your dreams. It can hold whole worlds. It can hold emotion. It can hold things know one could ever dream of. It can hold everything that ever was and everything that will be.

You can take a blank peace of paper and draw things that have never been drawn before and may never be drawn again.

A blank peace of paper is everything to me. There is an infinite amount of unique things that can fit on a blank peace of paper.

For the love of english, it's spelled "piece."

Sorry
Me can't spell too good.

Creativity has nothing to do with reproducing, and I don't care what you say about that! Life experiences ARE unique. DerrickEwing may be grammatically retarted, but he certainly has the right idea about art.

I'd like to thank everyone for contributing to this discussion so far. Even if I disagree sometimes I want to remind everyone that I do appreciate your thoughts and opinions.

random thought- I sometimes feel trapped between an academic environment that wants to analyze art and communicate with it and all that, and a casual environment that just wants to take art at face value. I'm not sure where I fall in that just like I'm not sure if I'm more an illustrator or more a fine artist. Some people seem to think there's a clear difference, but myself I don't see one besides who the audience is for each and how it's being used.

Well if creativity isn't reproducing to any degree, are you saying that if we were to suck all the experiences and things you've seen out of your life right now, then you'd still be coming up with the same ideas on what to draw with these experiences?That's "very" hard to believe for me.

-Here's a thought.What if you were blind all your life, and suddenly you were given vision at around the age of 50 and you haven't gone out to explore the world?Then you were to sit down to draw anything.Although they haven't seen much other than their current environment so far, I think they won't have as much influence on what to work off of as much as we would.So the fact we've seen things should definitely be affecting "what" we draw and how we draw it.I don't mean reproduction as copying stuff from other works technically.It's being under the influence.

I honestly dont think you should worrie about being unique. The best advice I ever got was from my dad and he says to just draw what you like, even if other people dont, but your art will come out a lot better, because YOU like it. That souned realy corney or whatever, but Its true. and I know how you feel so please just trust me. I just dont feel like art, or creativity is something someone shoudl realy think about..I dont know...*sigh*..practice preactice practice...another thing my dad told me is if you want to be truely great at something you have to stick to that one thing your whole life..and stop switching around..MAster that one thing...like..paint..or..pencil..or computer..or..drawing people..painting people..painting landscapes...paint dishes, do babies...I dotn know pick something...lol *sigh*

To expound on the idea of creativity:

It is utterly impossible for humans to create something out of nothing, strictly speaking, because we follow laws of cause and effect. We need something to create from. To quote Descartes:

Nevertheless, it must be admitted at least that the objects which appear to us in sleep are, as it were, painted representations which could not have been formed unless in the likeness of realities; and, therefore, that those general objects, at all events,-- namely, eyes, a head, hands, and an entire body -- are not simply imaginary, but really existent. For, in truth, painters themselves, even they study to represent sirens and satyrs by forms the most fantastic and extraordinary, cannot bestow upon them natures absolutely new, but can only make a certain medley of the memebers of different animals; or if they chance to imagine so novel that nothing at all similar has ever been seen before, and such as is, therefore, purely ficticious and absolutely false, it is at least certain that the colours of which this is composed are real.

Admittedly, Descartes is using this argument in regards to philosophy on knowledge and reality, but I believe it has applications in understanding the idea of creativity.

At risk of oversimplification, what we call creativity is a novel way of presenting stuff we've already seen. This can be said even of the most abstract art, which boils art down to its most basic principles -- principles taken from previous art (which showed them to lesser degree).

In other words, manipulating existing symbols and images is creativity. The more manipulation involved, or less obvious the manipulations, the more creative it is.

To respond to redpanda's question:

For whatever reason, each person is unique. Some are, admittedly, more unusual than others. But being different for the sake of being different is vain and artificial; if you draw what you want to draw, your unique perspective will show through. Sure, there are millions of other artists out there. Some might like some of the same stuff you do. Some might like a lot of the same stuff. But nobody's going to be exactly the same.

Of course you can't point at one thing and say it's what makes you (or your work) unique. What makes it unique is the big picture, the way everything works together. If you focus on having unique individual things, you end up with gimmicky stuff like DireOnion suggested.

edit: You might find this to be a relevant forum thread.
edit: Relevant, not identical. This discussion has its own merits.

Was this discussed before? I think so. Bugger. :}>

Unfortunately sincity not all of us have been here as long or seen as many discussions. I have no doubt that many topics I start will have already been done, but I also see no harm in revisiting certain ones once every few months.

-also, I actually saw that thread zack linked a few weeks ago while browsing. I just felt this was different enough and that was old enough for this to be something separate.

It's funny you'd say that DireOnion, seeing all the other non-art-related topics here in the forums, I can't help but laugh at that....sorry.

I was referring to the "big discussion about creativity", not this particular topic.

So, becasue I've seen an animal and now I draw it walking around with a hat on I'm like everyone else? Nobody could take issue with the fact that most drawings have a basis in reality; I am asserting that that doesn't really stifle your ability to be unique in any way. I, like Derrick, love paper! Blank paper. More than anything with things already on it, because when I make that first mark, now I see a ghost that likes opera, or a fish playing bocce. It's a process, but I don't reproduce anything.

Well, yeah, I'd say that's reproduction because you are reproducing what's already there.But by doing things like drawing a horse with a metallic whip tail, or a rabbit boxing, or just drawing hybrids of animals, creativity starts to kick in.But even then, you are using what is already there and adding a twist of your own to it.So that's why I say you are technically reproducing to a degree.And I'm not gonna assume this, but I'm guessing that you're thinking that I'm saying reproduction is a bad thing.I'm not.I'm saying it's kinda unavoidable since you are influenced by your surroundings and that's how things work.But for the most part, this whole disagreement is based on how far we take the definition of reproduction.