Oil portrait process

[Justin Snodgrass]

Mischa,

I must say that I am surprised by your response. It is clear to me that you have misunderstood the purpose of my post. Though I would like to move on, I find it difficult not to respond.

Originally Posted by Mischa Milosevic

David Hocney should take lessons from you as you project images on the canvas or paper.

This comment is simply not necessary and serves little purpose in this discussion.

Originally Posted by Mischa Milosevic

I am sorry but I have no words of praise for your procedure. I think that copying a photo image is one thing but it should lead towards honest study of drawing and painting.

To clarify, I was not seeking praise with my post. As my original post states, I consider myself a novice in this field and this is my first commissioned piece. I was simply seeking input and advice related to my process. I made the assumption that most would understand that constructive criticism is the most common and accepted way in which to respond. Perhaps encouragement to goal myself with working from life would have been a more constructive piece of advice. After learning from your website that you conduct workshops, I am surprised that your response was not more along these lines.

Originally Posted by Mischa Milosevic

Your method, as advertised on your web page, gives the idea that all artist do the same thing. To me it belittles the hard working, talented artists and the life time of sincere and solid education.

I would have to disagree with these statements. In no way does the description of my process imply anything about the methods of other artists.


I have only completed a handful of this type of painting. Again, I am a novice in this specific field. I did receive my BA in Fine Art in 2004, but have spent much of the time since exploring my interest in filmmaking. My point is that there is no need to allow my current procedure to belittle anything. In no way do I feel (nor have I ever stated), that the described procedure is the end all of oil portrait methods. I was careful in my original post to use the phrase "current method" and "novice" in hopes of making this point apparent.

Originally Posted by Mischa Milosevic

I do not think that there is one person on this forum, maybe one or two, that has not tried the projecting method but we have see the error of our way.

The fact that this method has been utilized by others seems to affirm the fact that there is a purpose and a place for such a method. It does seem out of place that you have chosen my post to conduct your rant on the matter.

Originally Posted by Mischa Milosevic

Are you saying that one should go back to something that has been proven to be a falsity?

Perhaps a careful reading of my original post would have prevented an erroneous leap such as this. I honestly cannot understand how you would have come to such a conclusion.

Originally Posted by Miscna Milosevic

You are honest about your method but then that suggests that all others are dishonest and this is the problem David Hocney has.

You are correct that I am honest about my current method. Again, my goal with the post was to receive feedback and advice related to the method. In no way does anything I have said suggest anything about the honestly of other artists. There is no logic in suggesting that one person's honesty equates to the dishonesty of others.


There are several examples on my site of works created from live models. Many of them are 40 minute charcoal studies. This process has been a huge tool for me as an artist. You will also find a number of studies completed from (brace yourself) magazine images. This has also served as a useful tool.


If art is based on process alone then one could argue that the ultimate work of art would not be done from a live model, but from our memory of a live model... while blindfolded and while holding the brush between two toes.


I do not consider the process in question "the way and the light" of portrait painting in any way. I look forward to growing as an artist and allowing myself to be molded by my experiences. As you can probably tell, your reply certainly qualifies as one of those experiences. I can assume that if your post would have been in a more fitting form it would have simply suggested that I should strive to paint from life. This is something that I agree with and that I will certainly apply.


The work on your site is amazing and I wish you all the best in the future.


Respectfully,

Justin Snodgrass

[Justin Snodgrass]

Originally Posted by Enzie Shahmiri

I love it as well. There is such substance to that little boy. Nicely done!

The way you have explained your work progress on your site is also very informative and should be easy for any client to follow.

Enzie,

Thank you for the reply. Iranian Man and A Lifetime on your site are amazing! Very powerful. looking back, I am honestly not 100% sure why I wrote the break down of the process. I am currently a stay-at-home dad with my two little ones (3 and 7). So, I can't realistically work as a commissioned artist (for a few more years anyway). I suppose writing it all out was a way of being able to step back and gain an objective perspective of the process. At any rate, thanks again.


David,

Thanks for the comments and advice. I was starting to question if this forum was a good fit for me. My guess is that Da Vinci would go with Cannon.


I can make armoured cars, safe and unassailable, which will enter the serried ranks of the enemy with their artillery, and there is no company of men at arms so great that they will break it. And behind these the infantry will be able to follow quite unharmed and without any opposition.

-Leonardo DaVinci

Sure seems like he was aiming to make things more efficient. In all seriousness though, I understand the appreciation behind grabbing a pencil over a camera and choosing a live model over an image. For the experience of the viewer, it seems that it is the end result of a work of art that bears more weight. In the case of the artist, maybe it is the process by which the art was created that is more important. Art is such an individual experience at every level, I suppose it is hard to say.

I have at times found it difficult to validate some abstract and minimalist works unless the artist has, at some point, shown the ability to accurately recreate a given subject. I have said before that realism is a means toward abstraction. I see that this is, in many ways, an opinion that is similar to Mischa's. Art is such a complicated matter in practice and in theory... and that is one of the reasons why I love it.

[Mischa Milosevic]

Justin, thank you for your response and for sharing your thoughts. Please do not allow your emotions to think for you. Allow me to explain.

As one absorbs the information on this forum, one finds much discussion on the topic "working from life". One cannot avoid this topic it is practically present in every post. At the same time there is much advice in the proper use of reference material whether sketches or photographs. Again one cannot miss the fact that Many of the artists on this forum have spent much time and cash to learn this trade. These same artists respectfully have gladly volunteered all even their time, free of charge, in order to assist individuals as they strive to reach their artistic goals.

Please do not think my words to be a rant rather a big bell to let you know that we are all friends here.

Justin, if you posted in the unveiling's most all would have given you praise. Most likely no one wold have commented on you method being that your method is your prerogative. At the same time, the members of this forum are a bunch of nice respectful people and at times they are just to nice.

There is SO much input here that anyone wishing to learn can do just that.

Think about it and remember, we are here to help each other. If I have stepped out of line it is not because I do not care. I spoke up because I do care.

Also, if anyone even thinks that this place is to pick on someone or even belittle someones method then they are wrong. I would be wrong if I was to think along those lines. I hope you understand and if I have hurt you in any way I am sorry. It is up to you now.

I truly wish you to acheave confidence as you develop your artistic abilities.

[Justin Snodgrass]

Mischa,

No harm done. It is probably best if we end it at that.


Thanks,

Justin

[Justin Snodgrass]

Allan,

Thank you for the comments.

Originally Posted by Allan Rahbek

My goal is to express something painterly coherent, which means that the marks of the brush is the words that tell the story, I don't paint everything in front of me but choose some of the parts from my motif.

I may begin a painting by squaring up and transferring a motif taken from a photo, to get a certain composition. But once I start painting I will simplify, or summarize the elements in an attempt to make the painting live through the brushstrokes....the brush strokes tell the story. Does that make sense ?

I sacrifice the original picture and make my own story.

I think I see where you are coming from with this description. This is something that I admire about art and its creator. Perhaps it can be compared to being able to see the world through the "mind's eye" of the artist. Would you say that you take those things from an image (or set of images) that "dazzle" your mind and then, through painting, try and make them "dazzle" for others as well? This is a very interesting concept to me.

Originally Posted by Allan Rahbek

A smile is the shortest distance between people.

Very true, and a challenge to accomplish through wires and waves!

Originally Posted by Richard Bingham

Justin, the detail and presentation of your methods on your website belie this. Having painted a recognizable, workmanlike image, you are justifiably happy with the result. Good for you.

To instruct and/or delineate methods of working presupposes mastery. As you are a recent graduate with a baccalaureate, this is at best, premature, especially when you enter a forum where not only have a fair number of the participants been seriously dedicated to the practice and study painting for long years, but many are recognized, respected masters of national and international reputation.

I spent a good portion of the last year building a depth-of-field lens adapter for my digital video camera. The majority of that time was spent on-line, studying text and images posted by others that have built the same. Once I had completed the lens adapter, I posted images and a detailed write-up of the process. This was not done as a statement of my mastery of the process. It was a way of sharing what I had learned and served as a means to receive feedback. Am I proud of something that I create? Absolutely! Does being proud or sharing the way in which I have created something make me a self proclaimed master? No.


Now, if the description of my process would have been titled, "How to Paint Oil Portraits", then yes, that would have been premature. But saying, "here is how I currently paint portraits" and asking for advise and input seems appropriate and timely (especially in the presence of masters). The forum's description states: " A Forum for Professional Portrait Painters and Serious Students". I can see that there is a wealth of knowledge here, so I truly hope that this statement is the case.

Originally Posted by Richard Bingham

Speaking of great masters, it's incredible how often a death-bed regret that life should end just when "understanding" of painting was within grasp is recounted. The biographies of Titian, Michelangelo, Tiepolo. Renoir and others include such, although all lived to ripe old ages. There's a moral for all of us in that.

Very interesting. It seems to often be the case with "understanding" the purpose of life as well. Strange how these two (art and life) have such similarities. They can both be acknowledged, but not clearly defined. It also seems that both can never fully be mastered, in that each seems to be effected by the cycle of change promoting change.


Among the biographies that you have listed, do you know if there is one that most touches on the point that you have made. I just might have to make a trip to Barnes and Noble tomorrow with the kids.

Originally Posted by Richard Bingham

Read, listen, converse, study hard and work harder, and you'll do great things if painting is your muse.

Advice that I will heed.

Originally Posted by Richard Bingham

... but please, leave your ego at the door.

I just hope I didn't trip over any on my way in.



This has become an excellent discussion of the process in question, and I am very grateful for that.

-Justin

[Marvin Mattelson]

When I was in art school learning to be an illustrator we were taught to use a projector. When I traced the photos, It was my natural inclination to trace the shapes. Years later when I began working from life, I naturally went about it the same way, looking for shapes. When I discovered the Bargue plates (long before the book came out) I was amazed to see that mine was the same basic method as the academic approach used in the 19th Century.

Once I get my shapes down I find the next step for me is to garner an understanding from a structural point of view. Just getting the right part in the right place isn't really enough to convey understanding, which is the commonality I see in the work of all great masters.

I think there are many ways to skin a cat. Some people who eschew working from photos copy drawings. To me, both can effectively serve to train the eye. I think what you are doing is a valid start but we all have have a long path to traverse if painting mastery is our goal.

[Julie Gerleman]

Originally Posted by Marvin Mattelson

I think there are many ways to skin a cat. Some people who eschew working from photos copy drawings. To me, both can effectively serve to train the eye. I think what you are doing is a valid start but we all have have a long path to traverse if painting mastery is our goal.

This is a good observation, Marvin. I've been thinking about this thread ever since it was posted, trying to figure out how I feel about the issue of using a projector since I'm so enjoying working from life (yup, you guessed it; lots of time on my hands!) In school we too used a projector for one of our earlier drawing projects and although I don't feel compelled to use that technique at this point, in retrospect that was an immensely valuable experience in learning to see. Mostly because it forces your brain from thinking about WHAT something is ("this is an eye") to observing HOW something is put together ("this is a shape, that fits into this shape, that relates to that shape").

[Allan Rahbek]

Justin,
you certainly hit a sore dilemma of ours: to what extend shall we benefit from technical means?

I say that we shall use whatever means helps us to obtain our goals.

So what is our goals then?

I can only speak for my self of cause.

My goal is to express something painterly coherent, which means that the marks of the brush is the words that tell the story, I don't paint everything in front of me but choose some of the parts from my motif.

I may begin a painting by squaring up and transferring a motif taken from a photo, to get a certain composition. But once I start painting I will simplify, or summarize the elements in an attempt to make the painting live through the brushstrokes....the brush strokes tell the story. Does that make sense ?

I sacrifice the original picture and make my own story.

My story is not depending on the edges, values or colors of my motif, but is, of cause, inspired from it. That is how I paint even if I am painting from a photo or from life.

I admire the way that you answer to the critic of ( one of ) your methods, I think that it is important to focus on the matter and not take everything too personally.

A smile is the shortest distance between people.

[Richard Bingham]

Originally Posted by Justin Snodgrass

. . . I was not seeking praise with my post. . . . there is a purpose and a place for such a method. [projection] . . .

Justin, the detail and presentation of your methods on your website belie this. Having painted a recognizable, workmanlike image, you are justifiably happy with the result. Good for you.

To instruct and/or delineate methods of working presupposes mastery. As you are a recent graduate with a baccalaureate, this is at best, premature, especially when you enter a forum where not only have a fair number of the participants been seriously dedicated to the practice and study painting for long years, but many are recognized, respected masters of national and international reputation.

Does painting from projections have a purpose and a place? Certainly. Graduates of trade schools where the skills apropos to the sign and display industry are taught become eminently capable at it within six months to a year, generally on a scale ten times or more of your 4'x4' painting. Most do not labor under the illusion that they are creating timeless art.

It's unfortunate you point to Leonardo's non-accomplishment of bloviating over a war machine that was never built. His dilettantism and puffery were his undoing on several occasions, when he had to flee the wrath of an unforgiving warlord for his non-performance.

Speaking of great masters, it's incredible how often a death-bed regret that life should end just when "understanding" of painting was within grasp is recounted. The biographies of Titian, Michelangelo, Tiepolo. Renoir and others include such, although all lived to ripe old ages. There's a moral for all of us in that.

Read, listen, converse, study hard and work harder, and you'll do great things if painting is your muse. God bless your youth and enthusiasm, but please, leave your ego at the door.