Pascal Adolpe Jean Dagnan-Bouveret

[Jesse C. Draper]

I had the opportunity the summer to visit the Met. The painting that touched me the most was "The Pardon in Brittany" by Dagnan-Bouveret. I have since discovered his other works. I have searched for information on this artist but have not found what I am looking for. The Art Renewal Center had some great photographs of him with some models that I found most helpful. Does anyone know how he worked. Any information on him would be much appreciated.

[Cynthia Daniel]

Here's the painting that you reference Jesse:

http://www.artrenewal.org/images/art...n_Brittany.jpg

and Art Renewal Center has information on him:

http://www.artrenewal.org/articles/2...t/dagnan2.html

[Timothy C. Tyler]

I like the piece you listed. I wonder if anyone else feels the kneeling figure is about 3-5% too small? The figures behind her (male and female) appear notably larger than she. Is it just me?

When I see this in multiple figure work I think many photos used from many angles. Sometimes some parts don't work.

[Lon Haverly]

Tim, she appears to be sitting, not kneeling, as is the man to her right. It looks right to me, and it is a great masterpiece. I wonder how it was innitially recorded? With sketches, or just a mental snapshot? Do you suppose this was like a courtroom artist working overtime?

Cynthia, you are such a resource whiz! Really amazing, and greatly appreciated. I shall dub you "The Link-meister."

[Steven Sweeney]

The referenced article indicates that the models for the Brittany piece were posed one at a time, in proper costume and in the relative positions they would take in the procession represented. I can't say that I sense any distortion in the relative sizes of the figures, though the article also theorizes that the artist used preliminary reference photographs, sometimes a composite of several, to facilitate accurate transfer of the subjects to the canvas.

This notion of the optical distortion that can occur when a variety of photographs, or just a variety of viewing points is employed is the subject of, among other books, David Hockney's "Secret Knowledge: Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters". The book has a good deal of intriguing theory about the use of photos, lenses, and other devices by many so-called old masters to effect the transfer of the initial contours of subjects onto canvas. (Unfortunately, the support for the theory is unconvincingly presented, at least in this publication. Much of the argument consists essentially of Hockney's statements that his theory must be correct, for he can think of no other explanation for the observed phenomena. Nonetheless, there is plenty of provocative musing for the careful reader.) By the way, Hockney's work isn't exactly on Art Renewal's Book-of-the-Month Club list, so you might want to read it under the covers with a flashlight. Merely owning it, much less citing it as any sort of authority, is considered heresy by some.

Daniel Greene has done a number of multiple-figure pieces, notably his series of "auction house" scenes, and he has remarked how very difficult it was to not only have to ensure that each figure was well and truly rendered in its own right, but also in correct proportion and perspective to all the other figures in the room.

Meanwhile, I'm still challenged by the task of getting the features of a single face to appear correct. Maybe if I traveled to Brittany to paint for a year or two . . .

Administrator's Note: See this topic for more information on the David Hockney theory. http://forum.portraitartist.com/show...=&threadid=259

[Timothy C. Tyler]

I disregard everything Hockney has to say. As to working with multiple photos; the first two are easy. It's the 3rd and so on that get very tough. I can tell a work that is "almost correct" and often why. Our methods should remain less obvious as Chase said,"a painting should look as if it were blown on in one puff."

[Steven Rosati]

Tim,

You said

I wonder if anyone else feels the kneeling figure is about 3-5% too small?

3-5%? It's a good thing you were not at the easel with Ingres when he painted his masterpiece "Odalisque" and insisting that he's painted 3 vertebrae too many!

I know what you mean but a great work of art is how it works as a whole and not how detailed and correct the pieces of it are.

Steven

[Timothy C. Tyler]

I agree. I like the man's work as a whole and love the whites and even love the composition. The figure resounds to me as too small. All else is great and therefore this one part bugs me. Compare the size of other figures on the same plain with this figure.

[Timothy C. Tyler]

Compare all the heads behind the kneeling figure especially the ones at the far right which must be 5 or 6 feet more distant from the viewer than the kneeling figure. I also think that this perception is doubled by the fact the she is pushing the bowl behind a figure much closer to us than she.

[Peggy Baumgaertner]

I just returned from New York and ran across "The Pardon in Brittany" by Dagnan-Bouveret at the Met. Based on the discussion here, I took a closer look at the painting. The "kneeling" woman, and the figure to her immediate right are in fact sitting on a step. Their legs are not visible in the painting. The figures processing in front of the begging figures are at a level of two steps below the sitters. This would also explain the perception that the middle processing figures are too short.

Peggy