WetCanvas
Home Member Services Content Areas Tools Info Center WC Partners Shop Help
Channels:
Search for:
in:

Welcome to the WetCanvas forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit our help center.

Go Back   WetCanvas > Explore Media > Oil Painting
User Name
Password
Register Mark Forums Read

Salute to our Partners
WC! Sponsors

Our Sponsors
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #181   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-13-2018, 12:45 PM
Raffless's Avatar
Raffless Raffless is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 765
 
Re: In defense of painting from photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by sidbledsoe
I am digital too now, but still shoot some film for fun and have even more fun developing. I was see-sawing (developing film without a tank, by hand) 620 film when I was just a wee lad in me short trousers, and now I just made some homemade Rodinal with Tylenol, and next up is to make some coffee/vitamin C developer and test it out. Film is too darn much fun to ever quit using it.

Thats the spirit Sid. Rodinals one of my favourite devs. Glorious darks. 620 camera i had one too. Colour developing isnt as hard as folk made out. Just got to maintain those temps. I will never quit film.
Reply With Quote
  #182   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-13-2018, 12:46 PM
Dcam's Avatar
Dcam Dcam is offline
A WC! Legend
NorthWest NJ.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 20,011
 
Hails from United States
Re: In defense of painting from photos

Hmmmmm. If Richard Avedon or Ansel Adams tried their hand at painting and worked from their own photos, worked directly on them, whatever..... in any way, would we fault them?
Reply With Quote
  #183   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-13-2018, 02:36 PM
Pinguino's Avatar
Pinguino Pinguino is offline
Enthusiast
Monterey Bay area, California
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,020
 
Re: In defense of painting from photos

There is something that has, so far, been omitted from the discussion: value.

Sadly, art is sometimes marketed with the insinuation that it will gain value with time. This is rarely the case. It is even less likely if the art was produced by a method whereby the artist could make as many copies as the market could absorb.

If all good-looking (or bad-looking) art was valuable, then it wouldn't be so hard to sell.

From the viewpoint of merely mounting the art on your wall, and looking at it, the method of production (and duplication) does not really matter. But if you are under the illusion that it will be an investment, then it does really matter.

Often, when visiting a major museum where one can find many modern works by famous artists (not just paintings), I always think to myself that the donor is cleaning out the garage, and taking a tremendous tax deduction based on the purportedly high value of the donated work. Nothing else.

As for DCam's question about whether we would care, if famous photographers painted over their own works: Generally, we wouldn't care, because we know they are altered photographs, presumably with numerous copies that are not of investment value.

I recall reading an article somewhere (not at WC) a few years ago, wherein someone had a soup can autographed by Andy Warhol. Seems that the can was beginning to bulge (was past expiration date), and the owner wanted to know if it was valuable. No, it wasn't of any significant value (replied an expert), because Warhol autographed a lot of soup cans. Rather like catching a home run ball at a baseball game: A valuable memory, but not through generations.
Reply With Quote
  #184   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-13-2018, 04:13 PM
Dcam's Avatar
Dcam Dcam is offline
A WC! Legend
NorthWest NJ.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 20,011
 
Hails from United States
Re: In defense of painting from photos

How could these photographers hand paint enough copies to be "numerous"?
Reply With Quote
  #185   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-13-2018, 09:40 PM
Pinguino's Avatar
Pinguino Pinguino is offline
Enthusiast
Monterey Bay area, California
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,020
 
Re: In defense of painting from photos

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dcam
How could these photographers hand paint enough copies to be "numerous"?

"Numerous" is a relative concept, depending on size of market. I imagine that a sufficiently simple composition could be painted over in a couple of days. Say, output two per week at a leisurely pace, 100 in a year. If the size of the market is 80, then that's "numerous."

The only ones I've personally seen were abstracts (prints of original abstract art) that did not involve much by way of fine detail. Should not have taken very long to paint over.

I read somewhere that certain famous European art works (such as Albrecht Durer's Young Hare) may be exhibited as copies. That is, the museum visitor goes there to see the original, but instead sees a high-quality copy (as opposed to an ordinary print). This is because the original cannot withstand continuous exposure. Although that's not the same issue as the original question, we can ask ourselves: If we went to the Louvre to see Mona Lisa, but a carefully painted copy were on display, would we know the difference? Would we care?

I can see a quality image of Mona Lisa at any time, and inspect it in greater detail than I would be allowed to inspect the original painting at the Louvre. But if I were in Paris, and took a day to go there (paying the entrance fee), I would be quite disappointed if a duplicate were on display, even if the duplicate looked better than the original.

On the other hand, I really don't care whether some ordinary scene was painted from (or atop) a photograph. Nor do I care whether it was painted by my cousin's grandchild, or someone else.

I personally would not hesitate to paint from, or atop, photographs. The catch is that I lack sufficient brushwork skill to capture important real-world details, so that wouldn't work for me.
Reply With Quote
  #186   Report Bad Post  
Old 06-14-2018, 01:42 AM
Armadillobelly's Avatar
Armadillobelly Armadillobelly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 54
 
Re: In defense of painting from photos


Last edited by Armadillobelly : 06-14-2018 at 01:54 AM.
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:24 PM.


© 2014 F+W All rights reserved.