Old Irish saying:
 

"While the students are waiting, the teachers won't come out of the coffee shop!"

No one argues that attending a workshop of a master whose style one admires offers the best learning. But aren

Enzie,

A good question. I think that is a question we all have to think about. I really don't have a good answer.

Sincerely,

Cast your fate to the wind
 

Enzie, my point was not that members shouldn't post or ask for advice. I think that is fine and can be quite profitable for both the giver and receiver. I just think that some may think this is a reasonable substitute for an art education.

When I offer a critique it is for someone who can profit from the advice I give. There is no point on me offering subtle advice to someone who has no idea about drawing or form development. So in the spirit of helping the greatest number of people my advice was to study with someone who has great knowledge.

Many times when good advice is given people don't accept it because it isn't what they anticipated as an answer. You have a preconceived notion of how you want the forum to be run. I'm telling you, in my opinion your concept is an inefficient use of time and energy for those who are truly serious about learning the art of portraiture.

I agree it isn't always about money. It's about time and/or the other complications of life. There are always barriers to what we want in life. God's sense of humor, I think. Sharon and I have both shared the sacrifices we each had to make to get to where we are today (sitting at a computer picking away with 2 fingers?).

If you want something you have to give up something. No one can have it the way they want 100% of the time.

If you want to know how to start, buy a cast, set it up under a single light source, set a drawing board next to it, mark a spot on the floor where you make all your observations from and draw the cast in charcoal the same exact size it appears from your observation spot. Work on the drawing, as long as it takes, until it is as close as possible in both the shapes and the tonality as you can get it. When you are done start over again. Do this for two years every day for eight hours. This is how artists were trained in the past.

I am not trying to be funny. This will allow you to conquer drawing and value, the two biggest flaws in everyone's work. If you had a master to check on you every several days and point out the problems it would probably go faster. Watching a step by step demo on the forum will not help anyone develop the skills necessary to be a good portrait artist.

If you were to come to one of my workshops and watch me demonstrate and explain how I draw accurately and how I build form stroke by stroke then the cast drawing would go very much faster.

That's my answer!

Enzie, I think there must be quite a few folks spinning around in the wake of this thread and sharing your concerns and frustration, perhaps thinking,

I am not quite sure how my comments gave the impression that I am the one looking to the forum for tutorials to further my own work. If you have not noticed, I have not posted for critique since at least December, since I felt I need to address certain issues in my work, before taking up someone else

I meant to be agreeing with you, Enzie. My apologies if I didn't articulate that well.

(And I, too, am outta here.)

Nature vs. Nurture
 

It has been some time since I posted on anything that might get me in trouble so what the heck. I think I will throw my hat into the ring here.

I have always had a firm belief that the thing that truly separates the really good artist from those that are simply also-rans or life long students is god given talent.

Sure, skills can be honed and improved and how to handle your paint and brush can be taught. But real artistic talent you either have or don't have. There are many who would like to be an artist and just as many who think they have what it takes to be a singer (as anyone who watched any of the early American idol shows can attest to). Some simply don't have it.

Marvin, Sharon and Bill, although you all worked hard at your craft and to improve on the basic skill you were born with, I truly feel that you do have a skill that can not be taught. Marvin, the students you teach all have some level of natural ability.

I have seen artists that were completely self taught and they may not have the painting skills yet or honed their composition skills but their natural ability shows. And I have seen far too many art school graduates (including some that had received the same training as myself) that, like the American Idol hopefuls, just should just give up on any hopes of a career in art. Or at least not as a realist painter. There is no accounting for what can pass as art sometimes.

Now this next part may not go over well with some. I often refrain from posting critiques because often I feel if the poster can't see what is wrong with their painting nothing I could say will help them.

Just as Simon on American idol asks "Do you actual hear yourself and think you sound good?" Many times I feel like asking the artist (and I use the term loosely) "Did you actually look at your work and think it was good?" Now you can imagine that such a post would not go over very well nor would it be of much help to the posting artist. Also I do not post asking for critiques because all I need do is look at my work and I can tell if it works or not or if it measures up to what I am striving for.

Difference in styles aside, if you cannot compare your work with others' and see that you just do not measure up or that a particular piece of work is not up to snuff then how can anything I might tell you on a forum help?

A realistic painter must be able to see. For many I feel the problem is that seeing is beyond them, just as carrying a tune is beyond the tone deaf. The reason the structure and proportions are off is because they can't see. And I truly feel that many, no matter how much they study and practice, will ever get it. If you don't have it you just don't have it.

I know the debate of nature vs. nurture has been thrashed about plenty. But so far I have not been convinced that those truly great achievers were not the people who found their true calling in life. There is a huge difference between simply competent and those that standout. And I am not telling anyone they should give up painting no more than I would say you can't sing along with the radio for fun but just be realistic about the level of artistic skill you have.

Many who have this gift claim they are no different than anyone else. They just worked harder or had great instruction. To that I say oh poo! Stop being modest and think of those who studied along side of you who failed (or did not achieve the same level of skill) in spite of the same instruction and amount of effort.

You have it or you don't. So, is this a forum for those interested in painting for fun or pursuing a career as an artist? If it is the latter then those who post should expect to be judged by that standard and not expect to be condoled.

If you want someone to say "it's nice" ask your mother.

Clarification
 

Enzie- I was not speaking to you personally but to the plural you (as in all you out there). If I offended you I am sorry. I can appreciate the time it takes to put together a portrait chapter. I recently had the opportunity to participate in Atlanta and Connecticut. I have great admiration for both organizations and the selfless artists who run them.

There is that old axiom of teaching a man to farm vs giving him food. I believe that the type of feedback that the forum can provide is like the food whereas proper training will enable the artist be self sustaining.

I think the forum, a place to exchange ideas, is very efficient as it is. Where else could we be having such a spirited discussion as this?

Michael- I agree that God given talent is a huge factor. However some people need help to get in touch with it.

I had a student a number of years ago in my illustration class at SVA. My students bring in their work the second class so I can see where they're at and what they need to do to get better. One student refused to show me any work because he felt his work was embarrassingly bad. He was the hardest working student I've ever had. By the time he graduated he was doing extraordinarily beautiful work and was hired by Disney as a background painter and is now an animator for them. Before he graduated he showed me his original work he had refused to bring in. It was horrible, there was no evidence of any talent whatsoever. What had his teachers been doing during his first two years at school?

I actually see a greater correlation between those who work hard and success than those with talent alone.

Rudolf Nureyev didn't even see a ballet until he was 19.

God given talent can be hidden deeply and good teaching can bring it to light. Training and talent is the key.

Well gentlemen, the English language seems to have thrown me a curve ball. If I misunderstood the meaning behind your words, my apologies go out to you.