Work from life or from photos?

[Richard Barnett]

Moderator's Note: I split this topic from the Untitled topic by Holly Snyder in Oil Unveilings here.



It looks like this post was some time ago.

But I just wanted to tell you how much I like this painting. Really great job.

Rick

[Ilaria Rosselli Del Turco]

Hello Holly,

what a nice portrait, it is technically good, but also it has that quality of intimate relation that makes it more interesting.

I wanted to say something about being painterly: for me to be more painterly the best way is painting LIVE. When you paint edges from life what you should or should not blur just comes to your eyes as soon as you look for it. The way colours are interwoven, how one colour is found on both sides of an edge, these are things that will not appear in a photograph, you'll have to make them up.

I think that you do learn a lot by painting from photos, and I did almost nothing else up to now. But when you arrive at a stage when you know what to look for when you are painting (again edges, temperature, direction of brushstrokes etc) you might find that it's easier to paint from life then from a photo.

I recently read an essay by Antonia Byatt about portraits. She was saying that a photo (and a portrait from a photo ?!), because it is a record of a moment lost in time, that will never return, is ultimately about death. A portrait, painted in a certain period of time, not to mark the instant but to look for someone's personality and special features, it's about life.
I think it is a very interesting approach. I just started my first portrait of a young girl from life and I immediately felt it was worth the effort: it is coming out painterly without me thinking about being so.

I posted the canvas after the first (short) sitting.
To go back to your beautiful work, I agree with Chris about the blue of the irises being maybe too blue, but overall i think it is great, also the accent on her left eye really works
Ciao

Ilaria

[Linda Brandon]

Originally Posted by Ilaria Rosselli Del Turco

I recently read an essay by Antonia Byatt about portraits. She was saying that a photo (and a portrait from a photo ?!), because it is a record of a moment lost in time, that will never return, is ultimately about death. A portrait, painted in a certain period of time, not to mark the instant but to look for someone's personality and special features, it's about life.

Nice painting, Ilaria!

Interesting that you post this, Ilaria. Recently I've been painting from life in multiple sittings and what is happening is that I am finding that people move very slightly and if I like something better than what I've painted earlier, I change it. This is another reason to keep things loose and painterly early on.

This is also making me think that I am a terribly subjective painter - I'm looking for what I like best about a subject, and I'm emphasizing it, or else I'm tweaking the painting to make somehing even more beautiful in my own judgment. When you work from a photograph you have only the judgment of the photograph. Of course you can tweak this too, it's just that it's one step removed from the actual physical experience of being around your model.

I'm also convinced that human eyes see things differently in terms of perspective than does a camera but I am still trying to figure this one out.

Marvin said something recently to the effect that an artist really only paints him/herself in every portrait... Marvin come in and correct me here if I'm quoting you incorrectly?

Ilaria, I would really like to read that essay.

And Holly... once again, a lovely painting, full of life.

[Ilaria Rosselli Del Turco]

Linda, I think we should start a new thread, as this one is becoming about us rather than Holly's painting!
Byatt has wrote a lot on portraits. I will try to scan both from the pages I am referring to, which are the introduction to a catalogue of the BP Portrait Award, and from her book on portraits in art, but I need a little time
ilaria

[Mike McCarty]

I think it would be an interesting conversation.

What I find aggravating is that the argument always compares the best of the life painting experience with the very worst photo reference. Some of the worst paintings I have ever seen were painted from life.

A camera never makes a judgment. When a subject is before the camera they are also on the move. The artist is making the same subjective judgments, only before the fact. The best photo reference is also the best judgment of the artist. Having witnessed the many movements, angles and subtleties that were presented to, and cajoled from, the sitter.

It is also a moment of inspiration producing all the ingredients of a great portrait, such as a perfectly lit face, great composition, lost and found edges along with wonderful color harmony. All these things captured forever for the artist to ponder, manipulate, condense, expand and interpret.

[Marvin Mattelson]

Linda, that's essentially what I said. To clarify further, what I was eluding to was my feeling that in a successful portrait the artist must connect with the universal essence that is common to us all. So in essence we are always painting ourselves since we are all connected. Unfortunately not being keenly aware of this can leave the finished portrait as a merely superficial record. This is a sensibility that must be cultivated.

Mike, having painted both from life and photo reference I find that life sitting offers a greater opportunity to experience what I eluded to above connecting with the sitters soul.

[Mike McCarty]

Marvin,

I cannot deny the experience that you have connecting with your sitter. For me, at it's best, I think I too make a connection with my sitter. It just so happens that my connection takes place the day before I start painting.

I would not presume to denigrate painting from life. I just think each should be celebrated for the good they offer. I do get slightly agitated when only the worst of photography is held up as the only comparative. And, I'm not suggesting that the ladies above were doing that. For something that offers so much there are precious few who will defend it.

[Cynthia Daniel]

Lovely, Holly.

[Linda Brandon]

Originally Posted by Mike McCarty

Some of the worst paintings I have ever seen were painted from life.

And a lot of them are in my studio!

Mike, I don't think anybody is arguing that you get a necessarily better result with painting from life than you do with using good photos. I know many successful portrait painters that work only from photos and my work is not as accomplished as theirs. I work from life or from photos, and all I can say is that each process feels different to me. Each one is a struggle but they are different struggles.

A client doesn't really care either way, so long as you get a likeness and they look good.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the best way to paint is to put as much of yourself into the process as you can, and I can see how taking your own terrific photos of your subject can get you to that place.

[Mike McCarty]

Each one is a struggle but they are different struggles.

I think you are exactly right.

And at the end of the day we get no points for process. Either we met our objective or we didn't.

Sorry Holly.