Taste
 

As a London painter I have to say that the standard of work is very high and the number of talented artists obviously greater than here. The portrayal of the subject is very different however. The repeated angelic children lit by heaven's glow has become a trend as have the happy portraits. As an outsider I feel it often denigrates the work shown here. Would you choose to portray deeper emotions in your portraits if it were not for the confines of pleasing the clients? Is this a recent trend?

The winners in your competitions contrastingly convey more substance, perhaps there is a niche for more of this work.

For me the most refreshing artists are the ones who are more individual, for example Jerry Weiss, whose work also posesses a "drawn" quality.


Aldo Balding

I often paint happy portraits because I like them, and for the same reason that I like the work of Franz Hals. His paintings of smiling and laughing subjects bring his century to life for me like no other artist's work does.

Dear Aldo,

I find your observations interesting, with which some I agree, and some I don't.

I also find it a strange dichotomy that the portrait societies' winners tend to be appreciatively different from the multitude of commissions that keep American portrait painters busy and booked up well - often years - in advance. Despite what the portrait societies' judges may like, and choose, the business and economics side of portraiture, certainly here in the US in fact is driven by demand, most of which commands higher prices than, at least from what I can ascertain, are paid in European countries. Of course, there are always exceptions.

I realize from your other posts that you appear to be in tremendous demand for commissions in your country, and I really do congratulate you on this. However, I would suggest, if only from my own experience, that the bulk of American clients are not artists, nor are they critics. They are people who find and hire portrait artists because of someone they know, love, and respect, and wish to see portrayed in that light.

I have also found that the portraits I have painted for my own portfolio fare better in national competitions than those I have painted as commissions. To this I would say I am appreciative, because the acknowledgement from other painters is really special. It, however, has absolutely nothing to do with my work as a commission painter. I have never met a single potential client who wants me to paint the kind of portrait I presume that you hold precious. And I would never give up the relationship I have with my clients and being able to please them for the approval of someone who would not hire me.

I choose to have a close relationship with my clients. If I didn't, I would direct my efforts toward inventory ( aka gallery -controlled work) Fortunately, any given painter can satisfy both masters, if he or she so chooses.

You may have noticed in the title line for this website, the word, "traditional" . The SOG members are essentially full time professional painters in the business of portrait painting. Most of the participants in the Forum likewise are interested in painting work that pleases clients, not in the business of deciding that our clients' taste is somehow lacking and should be changed.

Does this have anything to do with your thread? Sure. But do realize that there are many other internet forums that are dedicated to the "purity" of artistic taste. This site is about quality, but it is also very much about the business of portraiture. There's a place where they coalesce, and that is , at least to me, what we are about.

In the many hundreds of portraits represented in the Stroke of Genius site, and thousands painted elsewhere every year, there is simply too little evidence for a broad-brush indictment of them all

An argument for the angelic: when a child is gone, either grown or deceased, the petulant, angry, defiant, petty, cranky dissipates into the air. Only the sweetness remains. I think many people commission portraits based on knowing that they want to preserve these, rather than other moments. Thankfully, lots of people look at these as heirlooms, and take it with the same gravity (or more) as a professional photograph.

Other people want their child entered into a tradition of poses, and that includes the starched clothes and predictable poses.

Given the chance to own a hundred portraits, I think people might want to capture every waking moment and shade.

Best
Lisa

Chris, you raised some interesting points. The dichotomy between what we do for clients and what wins awards is an issue in many creative professions.

Years ago when I knew many people in the television advertising business I heard someone talk about this. They had just won a major award for an offbeat commercial that was ostensibly about shoes. Someone asked them if they thought that ad would really sell many shoes. The prize winner answered, "Of course not, this ad was meant to win us a prize. Then we'd get lots more clients who would hire us to make commercials that would really sell the shoes for them."

I think judges, most of whom are in the artistic professions themselves, look for creativity. Clients look for effectiveness at meeting a goal, and the two are not always the same thing.

Aldo, am I to assume that you define "deep" emotion as always negative and joyless if not downright mean spirited and grumpy?

Are our clients not being "authentic" if they "dress up" and try to look their very best for a portrait sitting?

I would like to think that some of us are able to see the dignity, worth and beauty of every human being. To portray any less than the very best aspects of the sitter is to do a great disservice to all involved.

Please don't be so quick to pass such a harsh judgement on those of us who are trying to make a decent living by giving our clients what they want. We don't deserve your criticism and scorn.

Pensive, thoughtful, kind, passive, shy, mischievous, compassionate are all great characteristics. Beauty, grace and elegance, also. I have never mentioned negative characteristics.

Being detached, I thought you may appreciate
comments reflecting a different culture. They are fair comments I think. Because if there is too much of one thing it becomes less exciting.

I suppose it is human nature to hear the negative comments and not the positive ones that I also made.

I think a little diversity would add to your excellent site, not detract from it.

Regards


Aldo Balding

Aldo, I appreciated hearing another viewpoint and it certainly made me review, in mind's eye, my own body of work. I agree with Michele that pictures in which people look happy are more appealing for me to paint, and often to look at; one reason I switched to photo references instead of working from life was to avoid the bland, homogenized expression that a model produces after hours of sitting. However, as Chris and several others pointed out we can be much freer in those paintings that we create for our own pleasure than in those that are commissioned. Similarly I've heard wildlife artists who are competing for prizes in that arena lament that detailed realism and not painterly expression is what attracts attention from those judges.

I suspect that what you are seeing - and what we are hearing from our clients - partially derives from the southern portrait tradition in our country, where little boys in suits and little girls in white dresses are much valued. The academic/corporate tradition is somewhat different but still tends to idealize. And as has been noted, the Strokes of Genius forum is very much about traditional portrait painting as interpreted largely by an American body of clients.

I took a look at Jerry Weiss's paintings and liked them very much; they have a spare yet painterly quality that is immensely appealing and evocative. Thanks for bringing him to my attention and for raising some interesting questions. I look forward to seeing more of your work and reading more of your ideas.

Competitions are a conversation among artists, without the sitters or clients involved. It's the environment in which we hold up superior work to each other for our mutual admiration and delight, and for what we can learn from it. The awards are bestowed on both commissioned and non-commissioned work, but these categories are rarely if ever delineated or discussed, nor in my opinion should they be. Good work is good work.

When I paint for myself, without compensation from the sitter, I can paint any human emotion I choose and explore any facet of human psychology I want to depict. These are works that I initiate, for my own aesthetic satisfaction.

When I enter into a commission, I enter into a collaboration with the client. I don't perceive my job in this context as imposing my own psychological overlay onto them, other than what occurs naturally. They want to be portrayed in a favorable light, or at least as reasonable people, and it's not my task to convince the world otherwise. Also, because of my own gregarious nature, I rarely meet a potential client that has no qualities that I can appreciate or respond favorably to. End of story.

A fortunate few of the portrait artists working today have achieved a career status and reputation that may cause a comissioning client "give over" to whatever vision that the artist wants to create. This is the exception, not the rule. I would love to be in this position, but I don't chafe under the limitations of a commissioned environment--it's my bread and butter, and I want to be busy. And to some extent, that is what determines what of my work I choose to include on my site.

The conceit that anything but a dark or serious portrayal of a subject is somehow less spiritually "truthful" or "deep" is nonsense. It is completely possible to show a sitter with a positive or pleasant demeanor and still produce a work with richness and complexity, that continues to inform and reward the viewer upon repeated visits.

A body of portrait work with a relentlessly serious or dark viewpoint doesn't tell me anything more about the subjects than uniformly "happy" work, but it speaks volumes about the artist. Or the critic.

Thanks for a pithy discussion.

With warm regards to a fellow artist--TE

I like to see the portraits of Vermeer and Rembrandt. I'm not sure whether Rembrandt or Vermeer showed deeper emotions but the girl with the pearl earring seems alive. Sometimes the sitter's casual appearance says enough I think.

When I see this portrait by Rembrandt I see an elderly man who has difficulty sitting on the chair properly. That's how people must have known him. When I see the portrait of Gerard de Lairesse I see a young man whose face was deformed by syphilis so badly other people looked away from him, but Rembrandt knew how to portray him with a certain dignity and sympathy.

The painting was unfinished... unsatisfied client?

Hot topic!
 

This is a good fresh discussion...indeed the whole thing is about taste; ours and the clients'. I think formal need not preclude deep-it's just that lesseor formal portraits often do, so we associate these traits. The converse is certinly not true either-casual doesn't mean a deeper portrait.

It is a goal of some portrait painters to only accept the commissions which allow them to paint as they (the artist) would elect to paint. A few have actually arrived at that place. I personally think these give us the best work. Work that will mean something to someone 50 years from now, even if we don't personally know the sitter. Sadly, too few portraits today (or ever) have passed this test.

JSS below

Tim, even as I defend the potential for achievement within "work for hire," I've got to agree with the above.

If you all will indulge me, THIS from Sargent, later in his career. A Rockefeller, no less. Not a painting done by a commission-hungry artist, nor likely to be done by a younger artist, in my opinion. It breaks my heart every time.

Thanks for posting that, Tom.

What a rare luxury it would be as an artist to be allowed to paint the man inside the role, like that frail old gentleman wrapped in the Rockefeller name. So many official portraits, in particular, paint only the job and the symbols, and leave out the humanity.

Not only are there few artists who would be given the leeway to paint this sort of a portrait of an important figure, there are few important figures who have the security of self to allow themselves to be portrayed in such a vulnerable manner.

Aldo,

Could you do us a favor and post a link to a British website that features many commission portrait artists? Surely there's a UK version of SOG over there. I'd like to see examples of what they're doing that is so different from US artists.

I'm reluctant to say this on SOG, but I think that, as a whole, commission portrait clients are among the least sophisticated art buyers out there. They lean toward overly sentimental portrayals, and all too often want paintings made from old snapshots. This is regrettable, considering that much of history's great art is commissioned portraits. But taste over here is poor to begin with. If you're aware of the tremendous success of Thomas Kinkade, you have an idea what American artists are up against.

I recently posted a question in this forum, asking whom the SOG artists might choose to paint their own portraits. My choice was Odd Nerdrum, because of his skill, and dark, meaningful works. Many respondents chose similarly, avoiding sentimental artists.

I was encouraged yesterday, when I attended the Heart of Spain exhibit in Alexandria, LA (a small city, and unlikely venue for a major exhibit). The crowds were staggering, and we had to wait in line an hour to get in. For many, this may have been the first true fine art they have seen. If the American public could see more great art, their tastes would follow.

www.heartofspain.com

Nah, Jeff...don't venerate Europe just 'cause it's old. The U.K. gave us Benny Hill, after all.

I've never felt constricted by my geographical circumstances. I've often, however, felt constricted by my own lack of imagination.

(I'm sorry, I couldn't resist. This is the last on this from me, I promise.)

Tom
 

Tom, good one. I think that was Sargent's last right? That's a good story. It also begs the point...was Sargent American, Italian, British or French? It was said he would use French when he did not know the right English word. He spent 6 months in America- 40 years in England...yet France and Italy were major influences upon his art education. I think about all we can claim is his legal nationality.

Ok let

Tom,

Nothing in my post venerated Europeans. I just lamented tastes here at home. For all I know, European artists are saying he same thing about their national taste.

Face it, if someone had told you ten years ago, that people would someday rearrange their schedules to watch big hit TV shows that featured people eating insects... well, I think I've made my point.

Disgussion
 

As a portrait painters we have to work within certain limitations. If you can rise above these inherent restrictions, then you may find on your easel a portrait like Sargent's Lady Agnew or Rembrandt's Herman Doomer.

If you choose to be restricted, then you create portraits steeped in mediocrity. That's what separates the geniuses from the wannabes.

In terms of what wins awards, you have to factor in the hidden agendas of the judges. Half are trying to justify either what they themselves do or their ideal of what ART should look like, while the other half want to keep out anything that competes with their standing in the portraiture pantheon and protect their butts.

If any of them judged with the intention of rewarding excellent examples of portraiture then you'd see beautiful examples of commercial portraits and no dichotomy between fine arty and commercial portraiture.

Lastly, everyone has their own opinion about the wrong and right way to do everything. If you take offense with those who don't share your opinions you're gonna walk around with a big chip on your shoulder trying to justify your position.

Aldo is entitled to think whatever he likes about my paintings. He's not going to be commissioning me (or anyone else) to paint a portrait, so he can think whatever he wants.

I have been fortunate enough to find a number of people who actually like what I do and therefore they put their money where their mouths are. These are the opinions that I regard with the utmost respect.

Aldo,

I've never been to your country, so I do not know much about the culture. But, I have heard stereotypes.

I have this picture of the country as a whole being less obsessed with appearances than we are here. I could cite examples, but I do not know if any are true, so I won't.

Perhaps if it is true, this affects what is acceptable in a portrait over there?

Tim's, Tom's and Michele's follow ons reflect many of my own thoughts. I'd better leave my posthumous portrait of Benny Hill alone then!

It seems one's own portfolio will determine the style of commissions received so that would be difficult to change if one wanted to.

There is The Royal Society of Portrait Painters
www.therp.co.uk I believe Sargeant exhibited there, if you wanted to see what's going on across the pond. Although there are no forums like here. www.commissionaportrait.com is another .

The major plus here is you all help each other.

Regards,

Aldo

Benny
 

I want to go on the record as liking Benny Hill and Monty Python.

It

Scott,

A lot of London galleries like realism.I think your work will be well received,selling paintings is difficult at the moment however.

If you want any advice or a beer, contact me offline.

Aldo

Wow. Aldo, your portraits are powerful.

The commission a portrait site is exciting as well. There is quite a range of styles shown. Thanks for the links, I'm really inspired.

Regards,
Stanka

I've enjoyed cruising those sites as well. It seems as though, on the Royal Portrait Painters site anyway, that there is a lot more emphasis on the backgrounds.

Aldo,

I have reviewed the websites you have mentioned, and I must say that you have made your point. For the most part, I saw portraits of real people being themselves... even the children.

I liked your comment about one's portfolio dictating the type of commissions one receives. It's a point worth noting.

Dear Aldo:

After seeing some original paintings by SOG artists, I admire those museum quality works.

I also noticed the difference of two sites. Let everyone does in his/her own way.