Bare-chested boys? - Page 2

Cynthia Daniel · 07-13-2003, 04:09 PM

Quote:

I think it is a shame when healthy people have to live their lives and make their art according to the fears or fetishes of others.

Tim,

My point to Kim is that in six years of marketing portraits, I've never had a mother request a portrait of a boy bare-chested. Additionally, from my same years in marketing, every client with whom I worked commissioned their children in clothes. An exception to this is a beach portrait, which a client might commission if they have that as part of their lifestyle. But often even the beach portrait is done with clothes as in these two very beautiful examples by Tim Chambers: http://timothychambers.com/pages/carla-joshua2.htm
http://timothychambers.com/pages/bio2.htm (further down the page on the right).

There are two bare-chested boys on Kim's site. Considering that one only has a short period of time to capture the fancy of a potential client, my marketing advice was to use portraits that had a more proven track record of pulling commissions instead of those.

Kimberly Dow · 07-13-2003, 04:57 PM

Hey, I am really enjoying all this.

There is the part of me that says, "Well, I don't care if it is advantageous to my portfolio. After all, I was inspired!" Like I am going to stick to my vision no matter what, clients and critics be ****ed. Now, if that were truly how I felt that would be great, but we all need to make a living and I take less-than-perfect commissions here and there because the bills need to be paid. So much for my ideals.

I appreciate the fact that if I want to appeal to a wider range of clients I need to stick to classical poses/views, not to mention improve my skills. There is only one of this particular pose and I have no plans to replicate it. It was a fun thing to try basically. People have come into my studio and loved it, but here it is not a hit. I'm glad to know that.

The advice here is geared toward pleasing the client so we can make more money and achieve success - that is why I am here, so it's all good. By the way, my husband and mother hated it too - not the painting, but the harsh pose. I am glad I tried it, I still love it, but I believe this is something I will not do again. Thanks again for all the input.

Any suggestions on the expectant mother I mentioned above?

Peter Jochems · 07-13-2003, 05:03 PM

Quote:

The advice here is geared toward pleasing the client so we can make more money and achieve sucess

No, it is really about quality, and having a balanced view on composition, pose and the psychology of your paintings.

We're really trying to help you become a better painter, not to sell-out. You must never sell-out. But no-one said it was going to be easy.

Peter

Michele Rushworth · 07-13-2003, 07:22 PM

To succeed financially as a portrait painter the surest path for someone new to the field is probably to paint what you see a lot of on the successful artists' sites elsewhere on SOG.

Could you possibly become a new sensation with offbeat subjects (pregnant women, bare chested boys)? Sure, maybe, but I think the odds are strongly against it. If you want to know what most clients commission, look at what artists who've been doing this for twenty years are showing on their sites.

Kimberly Dow · 07-13-2003, 09:31 PM

Sounds like good sound advice to learn from the SOG painters. I am in no way interested in becoming some kind of sensation for offbeat subjects. It had also never occured to me that a expectant woman would be considered offbeat as well. I see them as beautiful and am interested in painting one.

I appreciate all the advice. For some strange reason though I feel the need to call my mother and have her tell me how smart & talented I am.

Michele Rushworth · 07-13-2003, 09:59 PM

Your work clearly shows talent and skill. (I particularly like the couple in the sunlight on your site.)

At this point, WHAT you choose to paint (especially what reference you choose to work from) will have the greatest effect on whether or not your samples bring you commissions. Study the work of artists on SOG whose work you really like and think carefully before you begin your next portrait.

Once you decide on a subject that you find compelling, plan out the composition, clothing, lighting and props. Then shoot your own photos (with NO flash). Reading the sections on good reference photos on the Forum will give you lots of excellent tips on shooting the right kind of photos to paint from.

Good luck and I look forward to seeing your next creation!

Tom Edgerton · 07-13-2003, 10:20 PM

Kim--

I wouldn't be too put off by the counsel to avoid "offbeat" subjects. In my opinion, you can portray doggone near anything, and it will either work artistically or it won't, regardless of the painting's actual content. I have seen numerous paintings of pregnant women, and they work, totally. It basically comes back to whether an artist has the skill and experience to pull it off. But that's a big if.

Specifically, in regard to your bare-chested boy, it's not a question of whether to portray a little boy without a shirt, it cuts to the quality and completeness of your vision and execution. The problem I have with that painting is the quality of your reference material. It's obviously painted from a photo that was shot with a flash, or at least in an extremely severe light, which completely undercuts your ability to see and render form properly. If you had conceived this image and painted it exquisitely from life, no one would be complaining or finding it "shocking." The harshness comes not from the image's content or even from its point of view--idiosyncratic though it is--but from its harshness and lack of sensitivity in rendering. In other words, the actual formal qualities of the painting. NO artist could have painted a terrific painting if working from this reference alone.

Michele is on the mark when she counsels that you put in your portfolio what you want to sell and pitch it to whom you think your clients will be. But I disagree that there are very many subjects that are off limits, if one has sufficient ability to bring them across the finish line. And making that decision for oneself takes a certain degree of true objectivity.

But as I tell my students, you'll learn more from a big failure than a small success. You just might not want to put it in your book.

Best--TE

Kimberly Dow · 07-13-2003, 10:21 PM

Thanks Mom. Oh! I mean Michele. Just an update for your amusement. Mom said, "If you do not want to know, do not ask. I hate that painting too. You can do much better Kimberly, now smarten up."

Kimberly Dow · 07-13-2003, 10:46 PM

Tom,

Thank you for your response. Your wording is diplomatic and best of all did not make me cry like the others. That is a joke everyone! This has been an extrememly informative day for me. Tom, I just saw your website and I am so very impressed.

Michele Rushworth · 07-13-2003, 11:29 PM

Tom, you wrote:

Quote:

In my opinion, you can portray doggone near anything, and it will either work artistically or it won't, regardless of the painting's actual content. I have seen numerous paintings of pregnant women, and they work, totally.

I agree that there are very few (if any) subjects that are too offbeat to be worthy as art. However I just wanted to let Kimberly know that commercial portraiture is a much narrower field of endeavor than simply creating a striking or even beautiful work of art for art's sake. I love many paintings of people that would not get anyone hired as a portrait artist.