Freakish realistic 3D...art?

[Tornado Joe]

My sister just emailed me the following info on this artist based in London (lemme know if any of you Brits are lucky enough to see in person). Don Mueck is a London-based photo-realist artist. Born in Melbourne,Australia, to parents who were toy makers, he labored on children's television shows for 15 years before working in special effects for such films as Labyrinth, a 1986 fantasy epic starring David Bowie. Eventually Mueck concluded that photography pretty much destroys the physical presence of the original object, and so he turned to fine art and sculpture. In the early 1990's, still in his advertising days, Mueck was commissioned to make something highly realistic, and was wondering what material would do the trick. Latex was the usual, but he wanted something harder, more precise. Luckily, he saw a little architectural decor on the wall of a boutique and inquired as to the nice, pink stuff's nature. Fiberglass resin was the answer, and Mueck has made it his bronze and marble ever since.

[Goldney]

Yeah, I've seen his work before in newspapers and the like. To be honest, I find it a little creepy how good the likenesses are to an actual human being. Although you have to admit he is very skilled at what he does. I'm not a fan.

[Alban]

My God that's horrific... but fantastic! Too bad I'm not living in the UK anymore. I'd be dragging everyone I know to that.

[Marvo]

The big statue of a boy, is actually in Denmark, in the art-museum "Aros" in Århus. It's called "Boy" and it's enourmous. Very very realistic indeed. I've been there a few times.

[jaasum]

It's a very effective use of scale to get the point across.

[Adam]

OMG that baby is freaky!! DO you know where his work is? I would love to take a trip into the city to see it

[Moonbeam]

Wow. I'd like to see that.

[27]

I've seen some of these before. Thanks for posting his name I want to check out more of his stuff.

[Oneironaut Zero]

Incredible. I'd love to see that stuff, in person.

[Oneironaught]

I stumbled across a site with a gallery of his work via a Google image search once. He made some sculptures of fetuses and some pretty weird "altered" bodies. One was a hand and on every fingertip is a doll head (not really doll heads but that's what they were supposed to be). The guy is very talented for sure. The picture of that infant looks like a photo of a real baby. Like goldney said, it is kind of creepy though. It's what computer graphics designers call "The Uncanny Valley". That's when Human characters look so life-like that they actually become creepy because then every subtle emotion and movement flaw shows up plainly. "You want to avoid going into the Uncanny Valley", they'd say.

[nina]

I think the work is amazing, but it's obvious he's going for the whole "wow that's really creepy" shock value. I mean, most of the stuff is somewhat disturbing...or not "pretty". Why doesn't he make some beautiful naked women or something like that?Why a fat guy and a creepy baby, you know? It just seems too obvious what he's trying to do. I think he should mix it up a bit...

[Alban]

I think the work is amazing, but it's obvious he's going for the whole "wow that's really creepy" shock value. I mean, most of the stuff is somewhat disturbing...or not "pretty". Why doesn't he make some beautiful naked women or something like that?Why a fat guy and a creepy baby, you know? It just seems too obvious what he's trying to do. I think he should mix it up a bit... I think his choice of subjects was probably made by a desire to show off his talents rather then purely for shock. In my experience, beautiful ladies are some of the easiest things to create artisticly. They're all smooth limbs, soft, fresh surfaces, glossy highlights and peachy colours. I'm far more impressed that he can represent wrinkles and puckered, saggy skin and all that stuff. I know I've always found it way more difficult.

[Xaqaria]

I think the work is amazing, but it's obvious he's going for the whole "wow that's really creepy" shock value. I mean, most of the stuff is somewhat disturbing...or not "pretty". Why doesn't he make some beautiful naked women or something like that?Why a fat guy and a creepy baby, you know? It just seems too obvious what he's trying to do. I think he should mix it up a bit... You must be one of those people that thinks only the standard stereotypical media beauty can be beautiful.

[Clairity]

You know that feeling where you don't want to look.. but you can't look away?? That's the kind of "uneasy" feeling I get when I look at his work. He is truly talented tho.

[Ravenfire]

I think it's wonderful. It seems that too many people only want "pretty" art but I think that great beauty can be found in flaws, especially when it comes to art involving people.

[Moonbeam]

I think the work is amazing, but it's obvious he's going for the whole "wow that's really creepy" shock value. I mean, most of the stuff is somewhat disturbing...or not "pretty". Why doesn't he make some beautiful naked women or something like that?Why a fat guy and a creepy baby, you know? It just seems too obvious what he's trying to do. I think he should mix it up a bit... Maybe he is trying to get across a different meaning than "look at this perfect beautiful body person". A message rather than a decoration.

[nina]

You all completely missed the point I was attempting to convey. Congratulations.

[wasup]

I don't know , they seem pretty spot on, if you ask me. While a beautiful naked lady would be nice and all, first of all, that is entirely trite in my opinion, and as the othe person said, its very easy to draw/create. I dont want to toot my own horn or anything, but I'm pretty good at graphite drawing. In all my pieces I choose to draw, not beautiful young people, but old people or someone making a very interesting face. While in real life, I would not call that beautiful. But in art, I think a piece of a beautiful girl is not more beautiful than a piece of work with an old man when someone very carefully represented the wrinkles and skin oddities. Of course, the girl is more beautiful. But the art itself... no, the subject does not have to be beautiful for the art to be beautiful. So sure, you're right nina, the subjects are not pretty... but the art itself is beautiful.

[Marvo]

Girls would make it slightly better though.

[Adrenaline Junkie]

Thats pretty cool, its amazing that people have been able to replicate things to such a fine detail, and it almost looks realistic also, i wouldn't mind visiting that gallery when i next go to London, whenever that is, its pretty impressive though!

[Alban]

Girls would make it slightly better though. I think the spooning couple are girls? Granted not very pretty ones.

[nina]

I think the spooning couple are girls? Granted not very pretty ones. Are you nuts? They are both GUYS. See the facial hair? Receding hairlines. Hairy legs. Yeah. GAY COUPLE. Hello...SHOCK VALUE. Psh... Edit: Actually the one on the left seems to have a feminine body...which is confusing, because it looks like they have a beard and receding hairline. I'm confused and disturbed about that one.

[Marvo]

Transgender sex rocks! :sick:

[wasup]

Girls would make it slightly better though. Well yeah, but here's the thing. Any artist can have a beautiful piece of art by replicating something already beautiful. But it takes a real artist to make something that is considered ugly beautiful. While I no doubt enjoy people capturing already beautiful things, I think making something ugly beautiful can be just as interesting.

[Marvo]

Indeed, but girls are still slightly better.