Go for excellence in portraiture

[Tito Champena]

Some portrait painters of renown have told me that after you have mastered the skill of painting from life, you may use photos because by that time, you will be able to edit the photo and not copy it. When you can paint from life, you will discover that a photography carries many errors that you have to discard and screen out, such as wrong values and distortions from the lens. Besides, a photo reproduces only one single and brief look of the sitter that may or may not be characteristic of his personality. Painters who are only interested in getting a likeness can certainly get it quickly from a photo, but a portrait is supposed to represent more than a likeness.
Frequently they ask you to reproduce your "photo reference" along with your painting before they can give you a critique. Jeff is right when he says that most of the critiques center on pointing out "errors" of drawing, by comparing your painting with the photo, as if the "likeness" is the only thing important in a portrait. I said before that some of the most famous portraits in the museums are considered masterpieces, even though there are no photographs of the sitters, available to compare. To me, a portrait has to be looked in its totality, no piecemeal. A portrait does not only represent the sitter but also the painter, a photo only represents the surface appearance of the sitter and leaves out the person and also the painter. Finally, I want to say that before painting, one has to master drawing, just like writers who have to know their grammar before attempting to write.

[Steven Sweeney]

The critique exercise is, I think, different from the creative process and the "internalization through practice" skills development, the loss of which is being lamented. In the studio/atelier setting, the model would be sitting there, and the instructor would indeed point out every single detail of difference between the model and the drawing or painting. Over time, there would be less and less difference in each new work. That doesn't mean that any art has been created. It means that you have developed the tools to create art.

But we're not in a studio setting here and so the best substitute for looking at a model is to look at whatever reference photo a member may have chosen to post. I look at those photos not as images in themselves, instrinsically worthy of slavish copying, but as if they were indeed the model. It's a lousy substitute, but it's all we have here. And if the photo image is aesthetically or artistically better than the drawing or painting, I point that out. I don't believe anyone has ever insisted that the photo image be copied in all its details, if those details are flawed. I know that I very often add a caveat that modifications are not suggested for the purpose of duplicating the photo, but because they will in fact enhance the drawing or painting, as by, for example, better representing form or a value design.

If a photo image in fact contains useful information that a student artist has failed to see -- which happens quite often, however poor the average reference photo -- then any critique worth the price of admission should point that out. Entirely different exercises are involved as between saying "This isn't artistically pleasing," and pointing out that "This isn't accurate."

If the student artist does not want comments on accuracy, but only on "artistry" or aesthetics, I'd prefer that the reference photo not even be posted, for it then becomes irrelevant. Copying the photo is never the point. It is a resource. It isn't art, any more than a live model is art, nor is a copy of it. The only chance for art is what we make of it.

Again, if accuracy isn't a concern, and if one is confident that a drawing or painting successfully includes all the "good" information in the reference photograph, I see no point in including the photo in the critique request.

I think the uses of photography are getting a bit muddled here, so that we're posting at cross purposes to some degree.

[Jeff Fuchs]

Sorry Steven.

I didn't mean to imply that everyone here is guilty of photophilia. And I agree that the reference photo should not always be used when asking for a critique, but sometimes the photo will be posted in the SOG photography forums, and people naturally refer back to it when they see the finished work in the critique forums.

I wonder, do you professionals allow your clients to see the reference photo again after you've painted the portrait? It seems the client is in the best position to judge the quality of the portrait without looking at a photo, and should probably not be given the opportunity to look for minor differences to nit pick over.

If anybody has suggestions for convincing people to pose for life sessions, please start a thread about it.

[Michael Fournier]

Well I am back and had to comment on this subject.

Can't get a model to paint?
Paint what ever you have paint a Apple until you could identify that one apple in a basket of apples.
Paint a vase of flowers not so it a generic vase of flowers but so it is that vase of flowers. If you can paint you can paint anything.

Sure the human face and skin is by far more interesting then painting a still life but a great still life requires all the skill as a painter that does a portrait in fact I might even add it is harder to breath life into a still life then to paint what already has life.
Now painting from a photo you are now trying to breath life into a dead image.

I almost lost my daughter to the same mental heath problem I also have and it brought things to a much different perspective to me. I find I now understand what life is and although I am now painting again I will not paint from a photo any more.

I spent 3 years not painting at all because of depression that caused me to doubt not just my art but my self being. I needed to paint and produce art to pay bills to support my family but every time I took a commission I would feel overwhelmed with producing art from reference that left me empty I would destroy paintings even though my ability to pay my bills depended on selling that painting. In the end I just had to stop painting and find other sources of income.

Now it was not just painting from photos that caused my fits I had a serious medical problem but I feel I started selling portrait paintings out of a need for income so I did what ever I could to make money in the end I failed because for that very reason I lost my perspective and my sanity over it. So I say yes it takes years of practice to become a great portrait painter (or any realistic painter) but once you become a professional artist and your income is tide to producing art it is easy to try and shortcut what it takes. DONT DO IT.

You may not have the same reaction I had due to my own mental state but unless you don't care about anything but money at the very least you will know inside that you are a fake. If you can't paint from life you can't paint life in your art. Many times I would doubt myself and the target of a lot of it was the methods I used to produce art became second to how much money can I make. I cheated myself and my clients I would paint only when I had a paid commission I lost all the joy I once got from my art.

Now my experience is unique but I have to agree completely with Bill that the ability to copy a photo is not going to make you an artist and I would add it won't give you the satisfaction of producing work from life.

Also do not try and become a professional until you are actually ready.The pressures of producing a great painting are one thing but adding to it the pressures of life and you could set yourself up for more then just a failed career.

[Steven Sweeney]

Welcome back, Michael. Glad you found your way. The "wind of the wings of madness" is chilling and brings a lot of torment.

Your posts from the past always came from the heart and the head, and it's no surprise that you have arrived at the convictions to which you're now committed.

Best wishes

[Cecelia Cox]

[QUOTE=


Now painting from a photo you are now trying to breath life into a dead image.

Also do not try and become a professional until you are actually ready.The pressures of producing a great painting are one thing but adding to it the pressures of life and you could set yourself up for more then just a failed career.[/QUOTE]


Michael,

I so agree with you. I have so much still to learn and think working from life is much more enjoyable and helpful in learning to paint.

Cecelia Cox