Boy is Richard Schmid a purist!

[andymania]

I was rereading Alla Prima today. Awesome book and an awesome painter and intelligently written. I got to the section where he talks about using photos and tracing (a section I didn't read fully at first) Man does he bash on tracing!! Frankly, I was a little suprised by how unintelligent some of his remarks were. To paraphrase a little:

"Commercial art is about the profit so it doesnt matter what method you use. It is not about the Art."

Lastly this really stunned me: "Tracing will make you less of an artist and less expressive"

I wasn't expecting that one. With a man of his intelligence, I was expecting something a little more open minded. Oh well.

(Yeah, I used to be purist as well, hence some of my old posts as you all know, but my mind has changed and I really thought about it with some rational)

-Andy

[Craig D]

"Commercial art is about the profit so it doesnt matter what method you use. It is not about the Art."

nothing dumb about that statement.
It may or may not matter to the person making it but they are getting paid
to produce a product. Commerce being the operative word in commercial.

[FlipMcgee]

"Commercial art is about the profit so it doesnt matter what method you use. It is not about the Art." -- Richard Schmid


"I think the art world... is a very small pond, and it's a very inbred pond. They rely on information from an elect elite sect of galleries, primarily in New York." -- Thomas Kinkade



FIGHT! :teeth:


.

[DavePalumbo]

nothing dumb about that statement.
It may or may not matter to the person making it but they are getting paid
to produce a product. Commerce being the operative word in commercial.

Though as I understand it, Richard Schmidt also buys his food and pays his mortgage with money generated through painting. But how can this be??? O_O

that said, it's still a phenomenal book on painting. respect.

[Craig D]

Good point Dave, I wasn't actually thinking along those lines.

[andymania]

CraigD,

There are many commercial artists who do care about the art aspect of their work instead of just the profit. With such a generalized statement, it might lead to deducing that legends like Fuchs, Rockwell, Stuzan, etc. only cared about the profit. I just think that statmenent is WAY too generalized. I'm sure there are tons of commercial artists out there (including one of my former instructors) who just care about the profit only and not so much about the art as well.

[kev ferrara]

Those are perfectly sensible statements by Schmid.

He wasn't looking down his nose at how others make their money, he was talking about how a commercial work can be made in any old way because it only has to reproduce correctly. Whereas a gallery work must exist with integrity because it is being offered as an object of art. At no point did he say a commercial work cannot aspire to "fine art" status, merely that such ambitions are not necessary for the satisfaction of the commercial transaction.

His argument against tracing is also understandable. If you don't observe and remember, how is your imagination and drawing skills cultivated? Artist's like Berni Fuchs and Robert McGinnis only traced after they learned how to draw. It is good advice to a learning artist to say "there is no easy way out of learning to draw."

What's the bruhaha?

[Elwell]

There are many commercial artists who do care about the art aspect of their work instead of just the profit. With such a generalized statement, it might lead to deducing that legends like Fuchs, Rockwell, Stuzan, etc. only cared about the profit. I just think that statmenent is WAY too generalized. I'm sure there are tons of commercial artists out there (including one of my former instructors) who just care about the profit only and not so much about the art as well.
There are also plenty of gallery artists who's subject matter and technique are largely market driven.

[andymania]

Don't know Kev,

The way he phrased everything in that paragraph, it didn't seem to sound what you mentioned. I didn't see anything written about reproduction quality.
The whole tone of that paragraph sounds a little to stuck up to me. I don't know. I'll read it again.

[Boolean]

"Commercial art is about the profit so it doesnt matter what method you use. It is not about the Art."

Sounds perfectly valid to me. If you are trying to make commercial art, who gives a toss how you made it as long as it sells. Likewise, commercial music is about profit so it doesn’t matter what method you use. It is not about the music it’s about selling a cd. That’s not to say all people who make money off music are selling out, but people who create music with the sole intention of making it commercial music, well they would be an idiot to choose their personal preference over something that makes a profit. Does a movie studio cares how a movie is created as long as it turns a profit?


Lastly this really stunned me: "Tracing will make you less of an artist and less expressive"

I agree. If someone traces their whole life, I can’t see how they are learning anything. I can see some people taking offense to the wording “Less of an artist” which I feel is a bit strong, but if you are just tracing other peoples work, how is that expressive at all?

[andymania]

who says it cant be both about the profit and the art? What I got from that statement is that commercial artists only care about profit and making deadlines and not worried about if their work looks like shit. As long as they get paid. Which I know is not the deal with many commercial artists. I don't know, but it feels like that sentence should have been phrased differently since it can give you the wrong impression at first. It just has a slight elitist tone to it. What I really don't get is that last part: "it's not about the art"

[Boolean]

What I got from that statement is that commercial artists only care about profit and making deadlines and not worried about if their work looks like shit.

He said commercial ART, not artists. Whether or not an artist puts all their soul into a piece of work or not, it’s beside the point - As a commercial piece most people wont care, it's only the final result that will matter. When he says "it's not about the art", he's saying it's not about how the piece makes you feel, what it means to you, it's not about the art of it, it's about the final product as a marketable commercial piece.

[andymania]

Oh ok. I understand now.