Quote:
|
don't see a need for pictures to use for reference, unless you are painting to get a likeness for a client, of course.
|
Ah, but painting likenesses, regardless of how, is what we are about here on the Portrait Artist Forum.
The challenge, and at least to me, the reward, in portriat painting is working to try to capture all the many subleties that make a person an individual, not a generic illustration. I would never dream of painting a person from my imagination. Perhaps there are painters who can estimate a direction of light of the subject, but I haven't ever seen it done with any accuracy of likeness.
Certainly generic grapes and fruit can be painted just fine for decorative purposes, but you wouldn't see still life painters like Sherrie McGraw or David Leffel or anyone else of that calibre just inventing light and shadow. It's quite common to see portrait painters who focus on accuracy in the person, then just paint in some generic flowers or bushes, or whatever in the background; some work, some don't. I am a big proponent of backgrounds that support the focal point, but I think that the degree of finish and accuracy the painter uses for the person needs to be compatible with the finish used in the background and other supporting elements.