Mess or Masterpiece? Portrait of Duchess Kate revealed - Page 3
Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 91

Thread: Mess or Masterpiece? Portrait of Duchess Kate revealed

  1. #61
    JeffX99's Avatar
    JeffX99 is offline Registered User Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    5,234
    Thanks
    3,512
    Thanked 4,896 Times in 2,544 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Fair enough. I find it odd to consider critique and analysis of artwork cowardly is all. Plus you kind of went on the attack for some reason, even challenging and calling me on my artistic integrity, which I actually hold extremely high. Just don't see any of that as called for. But whatever - I just think you projected a tremendous amount of baggage into the discussion.

    What would Caravaggio do?
    _________________________

    Portfolio
    Plein Air
    Digital
    Still Life
    Sight Measuring
    Fundamentals
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Vienna
    Posts
    2,110
    Thanks
    801
    Thanked 909 Times in 455 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bcarman View Post
    Those of us who enter the biggest contests in the world to have them critiqued by other artists are cowards?
    thats the 180° opposite of what im saying. putting your own effort out there is everything else than cowardly... i wonder how you read that into what i posted.

    Quote Originally Posted by bcarman View Post
    If my work is seen all over the world in a movie, video game or otherwise I would not find it cowardly if others critiqued it. Probably wouldn't pay attention. His work is being seen all over and that is part of payment for worldwide exposure. Kind of like those celebrities who work their whole life to be celebrities then say they don't want to shared. I am not a coward for critiquing a fellow artists work without his permission.
    yeah its part of the deal/gig and payment... if you produce anything thats published. but man thats the passive part. you just have to live with it or avoid any to be published (means not to be paid) work at all... both of us know that.
    yet actively putting someones elses work up for discussion is ... an entirely different subject matter. and right there i ask why its not his own work he seeks to get input on, but someone elses which is way less likely to yield a benefit.

    newest sketchbook
    oil paintings

    "Have only 4 values, but all the edges you want." Glen Orbik
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    1,238
    Thanks
    889
    Thanked 1,535 Times in 567 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Well I guess we are just worlds apart. I can't imagine never having a discussion where I say, "Man did you see Ishtar. Can't believe a movie with two such great actors sucked so badly." If I do high profile work I just expect someone to talk about it, hate it or love it or even be indifferent. It's a world where we can't put up each other's work for discussion that scares me. There is only so much one can learn by putting up his/her own work. We can learn other things by putting up other peoples work especially those that have been successful. Putting up Damien Hirst's latest work, whether for good or bad, can spark a very interesting discussion.

    And as far as your first quote above I was speaking to the word coward. Any of us who does this work at a high level expects our work to be scrutinized and even criticized whether we give it ourselves or have someone else post it.

    Opinions can't be shared unless they fit your idea of what can be shared? If it doesn't benefit mankind as a whole I can't share it?
    well could help myself not reading it like that .
    And this was formed in the form of a question in order to understand what you were saying. You paraphrased me incorrectly by putting quotes around it.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to bcarman For This Useful Post:


  5. #64
    JeffX99's Avatar
    JeffX99 is offline Registered User Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    5,234
    Thanks
    3,512
    Thanked 4,896 Times in 2,544 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sone_one View Post
    yet actively putting someones elses work up for discussion is ... an entirely different subject matter. and right there i ask why its not his own work he seeks to get input on, but someone elses which is way less likely to yield a benefit.
    Did you not read my reply on how we can benefit from critique? I highly suggest you take a course or two on art history. Read a few books on art as well, whatever aspect of it you find interesting or challenging. I mean I just can't wrap my head around the idea of not analyzing, discussing and critiquing art? The very nature of art requires consideration, response and analysis.

    What would Caravaggio do?
    _________________________

    Portfolio
    Plein Air
    Digital
    Still Life
    Sight Measuring
    Fundamentals
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  6. #65
    Wooly ESS's Avatar
    Wooly ESS is offline personal reinventor and observer of life Level 6 Gladiator: Provocator
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Southern Alberta
    Posts
    595
    Thanks
    113
    Thanked 405 Times in 163 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Here is a little more perspective on the artist:

    http://paulemsley.com/

    The truth will set you free,
    but first it's gonna piss you off!

    Website
    www.ceandersonart.com

    Facebook
    http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Ed-...47726545290769
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  7. #66
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Vienna
    Posts
    2,110
    Thanks
    801
    Thanked 909 Times in 455 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffX99 View Post
    Fair enough. I find it odd to consider critique and analysis of artwork cowardly is all. Plus you kind of went on the attack for some reason, even challenging and calling me on my artistic integrity, which I actually hold extremely high. Just don't see any of that as called for.
    your integrity as an artist is questioned by me asking, if the ones sparking and adding to that argument, has been in the situation the artist we talk about, has been in? you came up with the term. what i said didnt explicitly apply to you... only very little of it actually (been using the term you instead of anyone too much probably... give me the benefit of doubt not beeing a native speaker). but if we talk about critiquing portrait work, id like to see those that did, doing better. really! would brighten my day.

    just ment to be challenging... seeing something happen... good or uncomfortable... doesnt matter. better than 10/10 saying... not my thing, nose is wonky, its dead, its a copy, whatever.

    newest sketchbook
    oil paintings

    "Have only 4 values, but all the edges you want." Glen Orbik
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  8. #67
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Vienna
    Posts
    2,110
    Thanks
    801
    Thanked 909 Times in 455 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffX99 View Post
    Did you not read my reply on how we can benefit from critique? I highly suggest you take a course or two on art history. Read a few books on art as well, whatever aspect of it you find interesting or challenging. I mean I just can't wrap my head around the idea of not analyzing, discussing and critiquing art? The very nature of art requires consideration, response and analysis.
    by the standards of either masterpiece or mess? ARE YOU SERIOUS?

    now you are the one thats questioning my integrity...

    newest sketchbook
    oil paintings

    "Have only 4 values, but all the edges you want." Glen Orbik
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  9. #68
    JeffX99's Avatar
    JeffX99 is offline Registered User Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    5,234
    Thanks
    3,512
    Thanked 4,896 Times in 2,544 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Sorry Sone - having a hard time following some of that myself. Yes I mentioned integrity because imo that portrait lacks any. You saying "that's a big word" I read as an attack and challenge of my integrity...as if I don't have any and don't have the balls to back it up. That's all. Maybe I misread it, IDK.

    Anyway, I think you're missing the real heart of the problem, this stance that art, even extremely high profile, public art shouldn't be critiqued or discussed without permission and without coming from a place of superior ability. I've learned a helluva lot from art critics and art historians. They've opened my eyes to many possibilities and made me more aware as an artist. I certainly don't agree with much of what I read but that doesn't make me think they shouldn't be writing it.

    Edit: So he put on a silly, catchy title? And I think it certainly qualifies as a mess to me...especially when compared to what it should have been.

    What would Caravaggio do?
    _________________________

    Portfolio
    Plein Air
    Digital
    Still Life
    Sight Measuring
    Fundamentals
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  10. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    1,238
    Thanks
    889
    Thanked 1,535 Times in 567 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Here is a little more perspective on the artist:

    http://paulemsley.com/
    For the record I was never questioning the whole oeuvre of Emsley. He really has done some interesting work. I just feel that this painting is a shortcut. It seems to bypass some of the efforts of his other more successful paintings. This painting feels so attached to photo reference as to be unable to exist on its own as a painting. My real criticism is that even if the likeness were wonderful and the colors better it is lacking as simply a painting. Now again I have not seen the actual painting so I reserve some judgement. But with experience an awful lot can be seen through a reproduction.

    And sone one, I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the inflammatory title of this thread.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to bcarman For This Useful Post:


  12. #70
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Vienna
    Posts
    2,110
    Thanks
    801
    Thanked 909 Times in 455 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JeffX99 View Post
    Anyway, I think you're missing the real heart of the problem, this stance that art, even extremely high profile, public art shouldn't be critiqued or discussed without permission and without coming from a place of superior ability. I've learned a helluva lot from art critics and art historians. They've opened my eyes to many possibilities and made me more aware as an artist. I certainly don't agree with much of what I read but that doesn't make me think they shouldn't be writing it.
    sigh, not saying it couldnt be used beneficially up to some point... but why not exploit the more beneficial options by posting your own? or by posting something really controversial... this portrait is just plainly boring. c'mon.... its compromise through and through. and from my limited experience i can see where this could come from and how id be in total paralysis confronted with that task (not to draw kate middleton... its just a face.... but to draw it for a museum and kate and the royals liking it...).

    im not talking about pointing out (potentially beneficial) flaws, but about beeing judgmental. i dont know bout bill carman (love his pictures, not at all know anything about his ability to do pleasing representational portraiture), but im pretty sure everyone else who posted within this thread (ofc and especially myself included) would thoroughly wet himself beeing confronted with that task.

    so i ask for humbleness, if it comes to someone elses effort thats all.

    newest sketchbook
    oil paintings

    "Have only 4 values, but all the edges you want." Glen Orbik
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  13. #71
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    759
    Thanks
    656
    Thanked 367 Times in 244 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The work alone is an artists only defense. Being present or not during the discussion doesn't change the integral truths about the work. I was in a writing group awhile back and the other members would critique your work, but you were not allowed to say anything. That is the way it works in art too, sure alot of people try to defend their work verbally after the fact, but the work's only defense is itself. Art becomes seperate from the artist. It is like birth in that it takes on a life of it's own and in most cases out lives the artist. Dead artists can't defend their work are we not to discuss those? I agree though that such discussions about another's work should come from a point of respect for the effort and humility to put yourself in the artist's position.

    I still don't think that the painting is bad, I admit to being a little disappointed to see how heavily he relied on the reference (Kinda like how I felt when I found out that Norman Rockwell used a projector). I tend to feel the the best portraits involve the artist having access to the subject for at least a couple of field sketches.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  14. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    1,238
    Thanks
    889
    Thanked 1,535 Times in 567 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    But humility is no fun. Just want you to understand that for me it's not about pleasing portraiture it's about a good painting. Pleasing portraiture should be the minimum requirement but a good painting should always be the goal.

    Just read the Norman Rockwell projector post. Please don't equate what Norman Rockwell did with what this guy did with this portrait. Galaxies apart. Rockwell's stamp is always on his work reference or not. I guess the main complaint about this portrait is that his usual interesting stamp, which is on a lot of his other work, is not on this portrait.

    By the way sone one, I understand your concern with unthoughtful flip somewhat ignorant comments so I feel like I at least learned something about your argument and agree.

    Last edited by bcarman; January 12th, 2013 at 05:59 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bcarman For This Useful Post:


  16. #73
    JeffX99's Avatar
    JeffX99 is offline Registered User Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    5,234
    Thanks
    3,512
    Thanked 4,896 Times in 2,544 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    OK, cool - I'm getting a better idea of your point of view...I just don't necessarily share it, but that's fine...I never mind disagreeing when it comes to certain things, and this is one. I don't necessarily feel humbleness/humility have much place in critique or analysis, in this case. TBH I think many, many people would have handled that portrait better. Sure it would be exciting to be commissioned to do such a piece but not such an overwhelming thing.

    Actually I'm pretty underwhelmed by Mr. Emsley's work and think they got exactly what he does...shows that being royal, or advising them does not account for taste. Not to be judgmental but my impression of his stuff is schtick. He's got a schtick he does...and it just isn't terribly interesting to me.

    What would Caravaggio do?
    _________________________

    Portfolio
    Plein Air
    Digital
    Still Life
    Sight Measuring
    Fundamentals
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to JeffX99 For This Useful Post:


  18. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    1,238
    Thanks
    889
    Thanked 1,535 Times in 567 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Gotta love a bot.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  19. #75
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Cambridge UK
    Posts
    5,460
    Thanks
    6,454
    Thanked 4,517 Times in 2,458 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Call me all 90s but I thought this was how you make a portrait of a royal these days.
    and call me naff but i like Testino for a lot of the same reasons i like Sargent.








    Last edited by Velocity Kendall; January 13th, 2013 at 12:23 AM.
    sb most art copied to page 1
    Weapons of Mass Creation 2011 ::: Add your favourites!
    skype: velocitykendall
    facebook: Alface Killah
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  20. #76
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Cambridge UK
    Posts
    5,460
    Thanks
    6,454
    Thanked 4,517 Times in 2,458 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    oh and by the way



    thats all i have to say about this





    Last edited by Velocity Kendall; January 13th, 2013 at 12:40 AM.
    sb most art copied to page 1
    Weapons of Mass Creation 2011 ::: Add your favourites!
    skype: velocitykendall
    facebook: Alface Killah
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  21. #77
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Cambridge UK
    Posts
    5,460
    Thanks
    6,454
    Thanked 4,517 Times in 2,458 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    that millais is in cam town centre; the bit not covered by the frame its about the size of a postcard, ie about half the size on screen.. its fucking intense.

    sb most art copied to page 1
    Weapons of Mass Creation 2011 ::: Add your favourites!
    skype: velocitykendall
    facebook: Alface Killah
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  22. #78
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    21
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    To be honest, I don't like this painting. There's nothing interesting about it. However, I do think it looks her and as shown by his other paintings, the artist has talent. They should have chosen a better picture or he could have had the sense to suggest a better angle. He still could have saturated it a bit more anyway. The nostrils look weird. I don't think the problem is the underlying drawing structure. The tones and colors he chose are just very unflattering and don't create enough contrast. They just seem muddy. I have also seen another pictures of the painting and it seems nicer in those. Maybe, we aren't seeing it as it looks in real life? I bet it looks better. I don't see why she would be dissatisfied with it, though. She got what she asked for.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  23. #79
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    SPACE, MUTHAFLIPPER
    Posts
    1,484
    Thanks
    2,739
    Thanked 1,044 Times in 378 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    There's a nicer photo of the painting here in warmer light: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertain...icle-1.1238145

    Looks much better imho.

    Name:  middleton-portrait.jpg
Views: 279
Size:  27.4 KB

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to velderia For This Useful Post:


  25. #80
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Near Philly, US
    Posts
    338
    Thanks
    80
    Thanked 260 Times in 129 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    You keep bringing this up.

    Quote Originally Posted by sone_one View Post
    2) its easy to mock someones effort without the need to back it up, or expertise on situational factors or skill... without putting your money where your mouth is, so to say.
    Quote Originally Posted by sone_one View Post
    but if we talk about critiquing portrait work, id like to see those that did, doing better. really! would brighten my day.
    Quote Originally Posted by sone_one View Post
    telling yourself "oh i would have done that" is just masturbation and ego stroking without meeting the need to back it up.
    I don't think anyone is saying "oh i would have done that"--unless I missed something in the posts.

    So, if an artist can’t work at the skill level of another artist the artist has no right to critique the other (more skilled) artist’s work, even though the artist’s critical analysis jives with the consensus opinion of other artists due to the fact that the issues are GLARINGLY OBVIOUS?
    I can’t play a guitar like Buckethead, but I surely can tell when he botches a note. Why? BECAUSE IT’S GLARINGLY OBVIOUS!

    What makes you so abundantly certain that just because someone doesn’t have a comparable piece of art in their portfolio, that required months to complete, that they couldn’t pull off the same level of work had they spent the time to do so? I don’t have a single airbrushed work in my porfolio. I guess to you I wouldn’t know which end of an airbrush to point at a piece of illustration board (though I have 30 years of airbrushing experience).

    I guess maybe in your world those who point out issues in a more skilled artist’s work are just blithering idiot-nut-bags…



    On a side note (as someone who criticized the portrait), I’d be more than happy to take your money and put it where my brush is and take you up on the walk-the-walk if you talk-the-talk challenge.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  26. #81
    Elwell's Avatar
    Elwell is offline Sticks Like Grim Death Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Hudson River valley, NY
    Posts
    16,212
    Thanks
    4,879
    Thanked 16,666 Times in 5,020 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Velocity Kendall View Post
    Call me all 90s but I thought this was how you make a portrait of a royal these days.
    Nah, more like this:

    Name:  Shanks-Diana.jpg
Views: 245
Size:  110.1 KB

    (To those going all gooey over Nelson Shanks, as you can see, he doesn't exactly do his best work under these circumstances, either.)


    Tristan Elwell
    **Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial

    Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!

    "Work is more fun than fun."
    -John Cale

    "Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."
    -Marc Maron
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  27. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Elwell For This Useful Post:


  28. #82
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Vienna
    Posts
    2,110
    Thanks
    801
    Thanked 909 Times in 455 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bill618 View Post
    I don't think anyone is saying "oh i would have done that"--unless I missed something in the posts.

    So, if an artist can’t work at the skill level of another artist the artist has no right to critique the other (more skilled) artist’s work, even though the artist’s critical analysis jives with the consensus opinion of other artists due to the fact that the issues are GLARINGLY OBVIOUS?
    I can’t play a guitar like Buckethead, but I surely can tell when he botches a note. Why? BECAUSE IT’S GLARINGLY OBVIOUS!

    What makes you so abundantly certain that just because someone doesn’t have a comparable piece of art in their portfolio, that required months to complete, that they couldn’t pull off the same level of work had they spent the time to do so? I don’t have a single airbrushed work in my porfolio. I guess to you I wouldn’t know which end of an airbrush to point at a piece of illustration board (though I have 30 years of airbrushing experience).

    I guess maybe in your world those who point out issues in a more skilled artist’s work are just blithering idiot-nut-bags…
    oh dear... i said what i had to say... and if youre really interested where im coming from, i invite you to re-read my postings.


    Quote Originally Posted by bill618 View Post
    On a side note (as someone who criticized the portrait), I’d be more than happy to take your money and put it where my brush is and take you up on the walk-the-walk if you talk-the-talk challenge.
    yeah why not.

    newest sketchbook
    oil paintings

    "Have only 4 values, but all the edges you want." Glen Orbik
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  29. #83
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Near Philly, US
    Posts
    338
    Thanks
    80
    Thanked 260 Times in 129 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sone_one View Post
    oh dear... i said what i had to say... and if youre really interested where im coming from, i invite you to re-read my postings.
    No need to reread. I’ve quoted what you also said.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  30. #84
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Near Philly, US
    Posts
    338
    Thanks
    80
    Thanked 260 Times in 129 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Elwell View Post
    Nah, more like this:

    [minus image]

    (To those going all gooey over Nelson Shanks, as you can see, he doesn't exactly do his best work under these circumstances, either.)
    [cough] Yeah. [cough]

    I’d still like to see Shank’s rendition of Kate, though out of pure curiosity--not gooeyness.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  31. #85
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SEA, WA
    Posts
    867
    Thanks
    260
    Thanked 175 Times in 152 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I'm the original poster of this thread, and I haven't contributed much to the discussion because A) I don't really have the knowledge or the experience to back up any of my critiques and B) I felt that there were pros here who could shed some light on the topic at hand....which is the reason I posted it here to begin with.

    Also, the inflammatory title is the title that was given in the original article; I didn't work that up on my own. Perhaps I should have put some quotation marks around it or something...sorry for that.

    I get where sone_one is coming from with the core part of his/her argument, but I don't know if it really applies in this case. If I had written/posted my own original argument against a non-public piece of art, and then proceeded to trash it then I think you'd be 100% valid in your criticisms.

    Oh well, good discussion everyone.

    BTW: I really like the eyes in this portrait. It's what my eyes were initially drawn to. I did get a sense of a "lack of life" from the painting as a whole, but it's WAY better than anything I could ever do!

    -I often post from my phone; so please excuse the typos
    Sketchbook
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  32. #86
    Arshes Nei's Avatar
    Arshes Nei is offline Registered User Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    6,802
    Thanks
    2,278
    Thanked 4,259 Times in 2,074 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  33. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Arshes Nei For This Useful Post:


  34. #87
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Haifa, Israel
    Posts
    3,839
    Thanks
    2,291
    Thanked 2,227 Times in 1,348 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Oh for pete's sake, please knock it off. It's gotten ridiculous long ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by sone_one View Post
    1) i dont like the thought of my artwork beeing posted anywhere for crit without me knowing, without chance to react, explain, whatever. fortunately noone cares enough .
    Then don't accept any jobs that involve publishing your work in any form. Problem solved. In fact, to be safe, don't show your work to anyone to avoid people having opinions about it.

    You are projecting your own insecurities on whoever painted this portrait. That's silly. They accepted the job, knowing that it will put their work on display in wide circulation, and all that that entails. Including public discussion.

    2) its easy to mock someones effort without the need to back it up, or expertise on situational factors or skill... without putting your money where your mouth is, so to say.
    There are plenty of competent people on these forums who have the requisite expertise, professionals and some amateurs too. In addition, people here are not judging an abstract "effort", they are evaluating the result. How much effort the artist invested into a picture is absolutely irrelevant to the result. (You could technically see lack of effort, if any, relative to other works by the same artist, but in a single picture you simply cannot detect the amount of effort spent.)

    3) i think its cowardly to pull someones else artwork out for discussion, rather than your own.
    The work is published. That makes it automatically open to public opinion and public discussion. No amount of you attempting to shut everyone's mouth up is going to change that simple convention. Sorry.

    Now, please, let the case rest.

    P.S. It comes to my mind that such things could take more public scrutiny, not less. If enough competent people openly criticize the quality of an official celebrity portrait like this one, it might make people (both the commissioners and the public) more aware of what competent work is and what level of quality should be expected from it.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  35. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to arenhaus For This Useful Post:


  36. #88
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Munich, Germany
    Posts
    1,214
    Thanks
    195
    Thanked 370 Times in 193 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    @sone_one;
    To be honest, I find this quite amusing. To me, you've got it backwards- the right attitude but in the wrong situation.
    I think qualities like humility, a friendly and not dismissive tone of voice and a general rule of not being harsh when it does not accomplish anything are very important- but only if the artist is part of the discussion. Because if they are, they have entered into a kind of relationship that merits respect. If you show some of your work and invite people to critize it, you have a damn right to be treated well. Fellow artists know that critiques can easily be discouraging, especially for the younger ones or people who're just starting out. It goes without saying that you don't tell someone who has exposed their work to you point blank that they suck.
    Now, with a public piece like this portrait and the artist absent from the discussion, I don't think those rules apply anymore. The artist could care less what we write about their work, there's a pretty slim chance they'll ever be aware of it, so no restrictions of politeness etc. need to be observed because no one can get hurt.

    Hope that makes sense.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  37. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Benedikt For This Useful Post:


  38. #89
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Vienna
    Posts
    2,110
    Thanks
    801
    Thanked 909 Times in 455 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    @arenhaus...

    so basically you come here, at a point, where the argument has already cooled of, rehashing points that have already been brought up, putting words and intentions in my mouth i already explicitly said are not true earlier, just to tell me to let it rest?


    @benedikt...

    makes perfect sense. thank you.


    what i said, been said going by a (as it turned out) wrong impression of intentions, in a mood where i shouldnt have posted anything to begin with, and in a way which may come off as dismissive and offensive. i apologize to those who were hurt by it.

    do i regret it? hell no! i actually enjoyed the argument that followed (special thanks to jeff and bcarman for playing), and learned a few things i wouldnt have otherwise. the bruises will heal in no time .


    ps: @bill618 if you want to have that challenge, please send me your proposal.

    newest sketchbook
    oil paintings

    "Have only 4 values, but all the edges you want." Glen Orbik
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  39. #90
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    1,238
    Thanks
    889
    Thanked 1,535 Times in 567 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    By the way sone one, I lived in Salzburg for 8 months but missed out on Vienna. Heard that I missed out on the best?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 1

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •