|
I just found this in Daniel Burleigh Parkhurst's Book (page 22, 23)as stated earlier. Could this be the difference between a photograph and a painting?
Could we maybe do a mass public relations gig to open up the hearts and wallets of more public, concerning Mike's statement?
Quote:
There is the difference between the artist and the photograph, which sees only facts as facts; which while often distorting them does so mindlessly, and at best, when accurate, gives the bad with the good in unconscious impartiality. But back of the painter's eye which sees and distinguishes is the painter's brain which selects and arranges, using facts as material for the expression of beauties more important than the facts.
A picture is a visible idea expressed in terms of color, form, and line. It is the product of perception plus feeling, plus intent, plus knowledge plus temperament, plus pigment. And as all these are differently proportioned in all persons, it is only a matter of being natural on the part of the painter that his picture should be original.
|