portrait art
phill...@bvu.edu
I once posted a question to this newsgroup concerning portrait
paintings and their value in the world of art. It was my concern,
being that I enjoy painting people, that I was really just using my
brush as a camera, without adding much to the image. I feared that I
was just showing what was already there, without much expression in a
work.
Therefore, I posed the question, "Am I an artist then, or a
photographer?"
Your responses were great, and I wish I would have answered them
sooner than now. I especially wish to thank Peter@aol. Your help has
been greatly appreciated.
Peter stated that photos don't show color as completely for the
eye as painting. Shadows often go black or get washed out. "Also,
subtle blue and violet tones get distorted and blue eyes often
photograph green. Therefore, when you work from photos you have to be
aware of the limitations and check on the living subject
wheneverpossible." He also stated that a painter edits the subject
matter in a photo to emphasize his reaction to the subject and to make
a well composed interesting picture. "Only then it can become art."
From responses I recieved many artist names that one should consider
in portraiture. It would be a great tool to copy the works of J.S.
Sargent, Sorolla, Anders Zorn, Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres, and
Pietro Annigoni. Peter is right, these artist contributed greatly to
portraiture ant are excellent study material in one's own pursuit to
become a portrait painter.
Of course portraits don't stop in painting, the likes of Michealangelo
and Rodin should also be studied, because of their grasp of human
form.
The nineteenth century produced some of the best portraits, and the
only way to improve yourself is to study others. I was provided with a
few websites you may want to look at to learn more.
http://wwar.com/
also the lib. of congress
http://www.thinker.org/imagebase/index.html
Check these out to learn more, and I wish to thank you once again for
your responses.
Nathan Phillips
Communications and Graphic Design major @ Buena University
Storm Lake Iowa
Larry Seiler
phill...@bvu.edu wrote:
>
> I once posted a question to this newsgroup concerning portrait
> paintings and their value in the world of art. It was my concern,
> being that I enjoy painting people, that I was really just using my
> brush as a camera, without adding much to the image. I feared that I
> was just showing what was already there, without much expression in a
> work.
>
> Therefore, I posed the question, "Am I an artist then, or a
> photographer?"
>
Phillip....there is more purpose to painting and more derived than
judgements by others or marketing. It contributes to your own
development as an artist and appreciation as well.
You develop a critical eye with each work you do. Over the years, I
have focused more on colors reflected by the moisture of the skin,
particularly around the lower jaw and shirt is concerned. Focused more
on the refraction of highlights and sources of light not only on the eye
but passing through the eye and its effect to the iris opposite, making
the difference between if an eye will appear life like and jewel-like.
As a result, you stand in a line at a fast food restaurant and look at
people differently. Your eyes are opened and see into a world closed to
others. This will reflect in your other works as well, and make you a
greater celebrant of life.
Cameras are good resources only, but they cannot tell you what the eye
alone can see, nor measure the level of maturity the artist has.
I used to see edges as linear..more defined. The years and observation
taught me to scumble or blur curved edges to create a more convincing
realism and imitation of life. For example rounded cheeks going back on
the face. These disciplines cannot be regretted, and is there ever a
time we can ever fully call ourselves "artists" without that ever
present awareness that we are simply students of the arts that have
lived and pursued a little longer than others- reflecting a maturity
others have yet to achieve? Every exercise...every work whether later
to be regarded as wondrous to the art world, contributes to your growth.
I was told once, and believe it to be true.....paint 120 paintings with
every intention that each be your best effort yet. However, get those
first 120 paintings out of the way, and then you will know how to paint.
In retrospect, they will be recordings of your effort..and perhaps even
an embarassment....whatever the case, Phillip, "paint on!"
Larry
William Barkin
Larry Seiler wrote:
> [snip] and is there ever a
> time we can ever fully call ourselves "artists" without that ever
> present awareness that we are simply students of the arts that have
> lived and pursued a little longer than others- reflecting a maturity
> others have yet to achieve? Every exercise...every work whether later
> to be regarded as wondrous to the art world, contributes to your growth.
Aptly put Larry...If I may quote Edgar Allan Poe:
"Were I called on to define, very briefly, the term Art, I should call
it 'the reproduction of what the Senses percieve in Nature through the
veil of the soul.' The mere imitation, however accurate, of what is in
Nature, entitles no man to the sacred name of 'Artist'."
-Bill
Larry Seiler
To quote no one, "that is way too cool!" thanks, :-) Larry
Dorothy M. Danforth
Give me a break!
I think that is taking it all a bit too far...
Note, "Artist" is not another word for God as Poe's silly statement
would allude.
Then again, under the influence of halucinogens I may conclude that "the
mere imitation, how ever accurate of what is the human brain, entitles
no man to the sacred name of 'Programmer'."
It seems that Poe thought about his definition the same amount of time
he supposed himself to be called apon to spew it forth..."very briefly"
:)
--
Dorothy M. Danforth
The Artesian Well
"discovering the future of art"
http://208.204.14.91/
a...@netlinkers.com
Larry Seiler
a small microcosm/reflection of an image possessed by the Creator, a
trait to be creative because He is the Master Artist. What William
shared with me still stands, I thought it was cool...so no "break!"
Larry
Craig Luce
Well quoted, Bill. Can you supply the reference of Poe's: where did it
appear? I've always thought that a Painter calling himself an Artist is
like a Priest claiming himself a Saint..... IOW, its not to be
pronounced by ones'self.
...If I may quote Edgar Allan Poe:
> >
> > "Were I called on to define, very briefly, the term Art, I should call
> > it 'the reproduction of what the Senses percieve in Nature through the
> > veil of the soul.' The mere imitation, however accurate, of what is in
> > Nature, entitles no man to the sacred name of 'Artist'."
--
Craig A. Luce, MS, CMI, <Crai...@Virginia.edu>
Medical Illustration and Animation since '77
UVa. Sch. of Med, ITC-Academic Computing Health Sciences
Luce Studios, Inc., Charlottesville 804.823.2745
W. Kaminski
I've been experimenting with wax crayons since a while, and came to love
it. It's quite challenging to handle, and I found it very rewarding to
"invent" scratching (sort of scraffito), brushing and wash techniques.
(Any other wax crayon-lover out there?).
Unfortunately, the colors are assumingly not very lightstable (non-toxic
dyes, no pigments). Does anyone know how long-(or short-)living those
colors actually are? And, most importantly, are there any ways to conserve
wax crayon colors?
thanks and regards,
Wika
Otter
Yea!!
I *love* working/playing with wax crayons!
It's a great way to get really loose (mentally) and work out
ideas, and because it's perceived by most as primarily a
'kiddie' medium, no one takes it so seriously that it makes
them freeze up when working with it!
Crayons are very versatile, and can be handled in a variety
of styles and techniques, and I *always* take a 24-pack of
Crayolas (highest color saturation for my money) with me when
we go to restaurants that cover the table-tops with that great
butcher-shop white paper (great tooth!), and by the time the
entrees are brought to the table, the server and busser are
arguing over who gets to take home my crayon doodle.
As for preservation, I guess (!) it's mostly a matter of what
kind of surface you're applying your colors to, because there
are paintings of wax encaustics that are centuries old and yet
extant (I think that's the word), but don't ask for my proof
or documentation on this, since I'm not a conservator and
don't file that kind of stuff in my head or library.
Does anybody know how lightfast the pigments are in crayons?
Well, I'm just gonna hafta see if Crayola has a website, now --
Thanks for the topic, Wika!!
Cheryl Mandus
http://www.angel-mask.com
c...@angel-mask.com