Why copy a master? Here's why.

Michael Georges · 05-17-2002, 09:29 AM

I was reading on another forum in a topic where someone was searching for techniques of "The Old Masters".

The thing that struck me was that many people are told to "Study the Masters". But I wonder if they really understand what that means...it's not just book learning, but you need to understand them through your own paintings.

I was also advised to "Study the Masters". The difference being that the instructor in question advised studying the masters via the paint - replicating their paintings. The theory being that, and I quote (Frank Covino): "Before you can create significant art, you must first visit significant art. By 'visit' I mean that you must create from a master work, your own understanding of what they did and how they did it. This is the way to true understanding."

I believe that many aspiring artists have misunderstood this axiom and simply want to research their materials and possibly dig up techniques. Clearly, these things are useful, but they of themselves won't help you "understand" "how" and "what" they did beyond a surface understanding of the materials involved.

I have done three old master reproductions. What you learn from doing them is astonishing! First, you learn about how they composed the piece - light, shadow, angles, form, negative space. Second, you learn a bit about how they might have prepared for their painting by preparing yours - sketching, value studies, surface preparation, and underpainting. Finally, you learn a huge amount about how they finished their paintings as you strive to duplicate the effects they achieved. While you are copying the painting read everything you can about the artist you are copying - get into their "head" as it were - it is a great experience to reflect upon their lives as you create your own version of their work.

I learned more from reproducing a Hans Holbein than simply looking at it could ever teach me. It is amazing when you then go back to the museum and look at their paintings. You can actually say "I've done that." and understand much more about "what" they did and "how" they did it.

The masters are not unatainable. If a human being was capable of that level of perfection 600 years ago, then there is hope for all of us now.

The difference it will make on your own works will be dramatic.

Here is my Holbein - Sir Thomas More. Holbein's version hangs in the Frick Museum in New York.

http://www.fineportraitsinoil.com/ThomasMore-Done1.jpg

Tammy Nielsen · 05-17-2002, 09:50 AM

Thanks Michael,
I think that the understanding is so important. With have so much that we can study and talk about but to put it into practice there comes the understanding. I try to teach people about their horses one hour of study to 100 hours of practice equals understanding.

Karin Wells · 05-18-2002, 11:46 PM

I agree with all that Michael has said, and the Old Masters have been (and still are) my very best teachers.

My best advice to anyone who wishes to improve their work: Copy an Old Master painting.

Leopoldo Benavidez · 05-18-2002, 11:54 PM

It all depends if you want to paint like a OLD MASTER! There are alot of contemporaries that ruffle my feathers......L

Karin Wells · 05-19-2002, 12:54 AM

I think that one can learn many lessons from copying an Old Master's painting without adopting that particular style of work. For example, building solid compositional skills transcend style and technique.

Quote:

There are alot of contemporaries that ruffle my feathers...

I don't understand what you mean by this. Explain?

Michael Georges · 05-19-2002, 10:19 AM

I agree with Karin.

There are great masters in almost every genre of painting from portraiture, to environments, to wildlife, to still life, to landscapes. Further, by Old Master, I don't mean only those realist painters from 1400 to 1900. There have been masters throughout history painting humanism, realism, impressionism, and all the other isms. Pick your poison and learn from them. It does not mean you have to adopt their style, but for the beginning artist, you sure can learn a lot.

Karin Wells · 05-19-2002, 11:08 AM

And if the worst thing that can happen to you by copying the Old Masters, is that you develop your ability to paint like an Old Master...

W

W!

Michael Georges · 05-19-2002, 11:55 AM

Quote:

And if the worst thing that can happen to you by copying the Old Masters, is that you develop your ability to paint like an Old Master... W

W

LOL! Oh Darn! I can't get this Old Master out of my head!

Leopoldo: Please forgive us for having some fun at your expense. It is just that the masters did it so well. Much of the "ability" has gone out of painting IMO. There are so many artists out there who are just painting on a wing and a prayer without any real skill or understanding of their processes or techniques - not to mention composition and design.

What's worse is that opportunistic galleries and museums and collectors have endorsed this "fly-be-free" method of painting for their own purposes - money. The public at large has lost faith in artists because so much of what they see is not that much better than what they themselves could do - leading to a "but is it art?" mentality.

Don't even get me started on the Thomas Kincade "fine art prints" scandal - the fall out from that will rock the art world for a hundred years at least.

I for one and glad to see this slight swing back to realism and the fostering of people who actually know how to paint.