Marvin, I often receive similar letters, typically from China. I erased one just this morning or I'd go back and refresh my memory regarding exactly what they thought they were offering me. Normally I just read far enough to see what I've gotten and then hit the "bounce" or "delete" button. I imagine that any artist with a website gets these things, and occasionally someone must respond, one supposes, or else why would they send them out at all?

Having an apprentice in your workshop who helped with the cleaning of brushes and the preparation of canvases and eventually, most wonderful of days, the painting of the occasional backdrops during the period when this was common is very different from allowing some foreign entity to paint most of your picture for you off-site. Apprenticeships were once the only way a young and aspiring painter (like Van Dyke!) could learn the craft, so there was some justification for the practice. However, I wonder whether some (but obviously not all) of the great masters would be amused at our discussion, because they tended to view their work as a product which would put food on their table and silks on their backs, rather than as high expressions of art which merited their best efforts and reflected on their integrity. How much do we know of the psychology of those times?

I like the inclusion of that sentence in your contract and will probably add it to my own.

Leslie

Unfortunately I have heard of a gallery in NC that utilizes the China sweatshops for portraits. The difference is that the gallery is up front about it. The price is very low compared to our market.

I have only seen reproductions of their work and have no idea if the customers are satisfied. Its been almost 2 years since I learned of this and can not say if it is still a going commodity.

I theorize that at least it is promoting portraiture, just not fine art. And the market they are reaching is different than ours.

The idea of providing a portrait under the false pretenses is most disturbing and may be considered fraud depending on how the portrait is sold.

Any artist going down this path will lose in the long run. Contracting with a portrait artist, or any artist is a matter of trust.

Hi Marvin,

Great post. Scary that an artist with a reputation to uphold would even consider this sort of deceit. What is there to stop them from black mailing the artist in the future.

It's kind of like when an artist accepts accolades for the drawing in a portrait that has been projected from a photo and traced. Once again, accepting the benefits (monetary or awards) from work not performed.

I have received some pretty dicey emails of this sort in the past too. I just shrugged it off and deleted but maybe I should have thought of posting too. Thank you for sharing this with us and taking a stand that this sort of practice is unacceptable.

Always pleased to read through your posts.

Clayton

[QUOTE=John Reidy]Unfortunately I have heard of a gallery in NC that utilizes the China sweatshops for portraits. The difference is that the gallery is up front about it. The price is very low compared to our market. . . . I theorize that at least it is promoting portraiture, just not fine art./QUOTE]

Frankly I'm horrified to hear that any art gallery, whether or not it is up-front about it, is doing this kind of thing. When I was in my early 20s, portraiture was still considered commercial art. After putting 30+ years into trying to change that perception, it offends me to think that a gallery that sells fine art would want to downgrade it when there are so many artists who can paint a person and, in the process, create a work of art. So what if it costs more money? It's worth it. What if this gallery offered copies of the art they sold for much less money? Even if no one bought it, it would be an insult to the artists they represent.

Clayton I think this is a whole other issue which maybe deserves it's own thread. So basically you are saying that Vermeer and Ingres are frauds?

Alex,

I agree, it is quite disturbing. I only meant to point out that the gallery owner is not committing fraud. He is, though perpetuating poor substitutes for art.

It is our responsibility to educate the public on what makes for a truly good portrait and a piece of fine art.

I wish that every portrait exhibition could include the reasons why the paintings accepted or won. It just doesn't seem to be enough just to award prizes based on some secret that the public is unaware of (and sometimes me too).

I can see where a modern artist could make great use of these kinds of services. He could hire one offshore artist to come up with concepts, and a painting mill to paint the final works, then have the final paintings shipped directly to the gallery and put in a show

The theme of the exhibit would be that he had created a body of work that he himself has never seen, nor has any knowledge of its content. Very cutting edge.

He could make millions!

Note: This is my original idea, and I reserve the right to profit from it in the biggest possible way. If you steal my plan, you owe me money!

Jeff,
are you sure? I believe Jeff Coons already does it?

Jeff Coons comes up with his own ideas and compositions and his staff of artists manifest them. Mark Kostabi (http://www.kostabi.com/ ), on the other hand, hires people to do every aspect of the work from concept to signing the painting and is proud of the fact he has nothing at all to do with its production.

I saw a documentary where two people, who had just bought a painting of Kostabi's for 10s of thousands of dollars, thanked him , at his opening, professing gratitude for the work he created. He in turn told them that he had nothing at all to do with the painting and actually showed them great distain.