Thanks again for the input!

Virgil, I find your indictment a little harsh and elitist though. A "plagiarist" tries to present his work as uniquely original. I do not. I mean, after all, the photographer didn't "invent" John Lennon or the light that day in New York, did he? He saw. I see. We take away a vision from the event that is personal. I also give indelible credit to the original photographer on the back of the canvas.

This painting was only done for myself as a fan of the man & his music. I now learn from you good folks how a real marketable portfolio should be built.

You live, you learn. (Although I'm keeping my camera!)
;)

Copying Celebrity Photos
 

David,

There is a widely-held perception that attaches the stigma of amateurism to painted copies of celebrity photos. That perception did not originate with me; I was simply the one who was good enough to tell you about it. It is generally regarded with less respect in professional artist circles than dog portraits. You may do what you like, but I thought you ought to at least know how those things are viewed by those whom you would have as peers, and by prospective clients as well.

If one practices drawing from life a great deal, it is possible to become very fast at it, and that enables the artist to make the most of short sittings without having to use a camera or, worse yet, someone else's photos. The drawings can then serve as reference material for paintings. I suggest trying grey paper, with charcoal for the darks, the paper for the middletone, and white chalk for the lights, as a very fast way of getting an image noted down. I can get a head and shoulders portrait study done in one hour, perhaps an hour and a half at most, following this method. In another 45 minute sitting I can execute a small color sketch in oils to give me accurate color of the subject's complexion and hair (no details in the color sketch; only color). I can do a grey underpainting without the sitter being there, by following the charcoal study. I like to finish the grisaille with another short sitting from life if possible, but it is not absolutely necessary if the charcoal study is accurate. I can follow the color sketch when putting color over the grisaille, and can finish the picture with one or two more sittings with the subject, if he or she is available, or just by following the study and the sketch, if not. The Old Masters had to work this way when commissioned to paint popes, kings, generals and other important people who had little time to pose for them before photography was invented. The clothing was usually posed on a mannequin, or sometimes sketched quickly while another person of the same build as the subject posed, if the subject were unavailable. I suggest you work that way, regardless how awkward it may feel at first. One improves in speed and accuracy with much practice. I find my sitters are intrigued by the process, and appreciate the results more when they have participated more in the making of the portrait. It also gives the artist a better read on the personality of the sitter, and THAT is really the subject of a portrait.

We all have difficulties of one kind or another to overcome. If quality results are important to you, work with the best equipment you have: the artist's eye. A camera's eye is inferior as a viewing instrument to the two human eyes and brain of an artist. See my article, "The Photographic Image Versus Visual Reality" in the current issue of The Portrait Signature for more specifics on that.

Virgil Elliott

Valid to copy?
 

I paint all of my portraits from photographs I have taken...I even started that way.

However, I would not use anyone else's photo to paint from unless I have their written permission to use it. Copyright laws are no joke....respect them.

You really have enough talent to be a pro. It would seem to me that it is a waste of your time and effort to paint from someone else's work. It is much better to learn to use a camera effectively (and make sure that you have a single source of lighting on your subject).

Arnold Newman - portrait photographer
 

One of the world's greatest portrait photographers is Arnold Newman. He is a portrait artist. He uses a camera instead of brushes and paint. Among his best known works are Igor Stravinsky at the piano, Nazi industrialist Alfred Krupp looking demonic in his factory, and a mask-like, three-dimensional portrait of pop artist Andy Warhol.

Arnold Newman was a Life magazine photographer. His photographs are powerful and unforgetable, and I hope no painter ever tries to copy them.

Please take the time to read this article:
http://www.masters-of-photography.co...articles2.html

Two Thoughts
 

I have two different thoughts to add on to the previous posts.
First thought- is regarding copyright infringement when working from photos of celebs. Consider that in addition to the problem of the photographers copyright, there is also some law that has to do with not being able to use a famous person's face without their permission. So even if I happen to be some place and I am able to take my own photo, I still don't have the right to use the image of the celebrity for the purpose of commercial gain without their permission. I forget what the law is actually called, but I think it should be looked into before using celebrities as samples.

Second thought- Since my paintings are done from a combination of source photo, notes, and a client sitting to finish the painting up, the finished painting is not going to look like a duplicate of the source photo (and it shouldn't). If a perspective client sees a source photo, they may start looking for "mistakes" and expect to see a "duplicate", and what they think is a "mistake" might be me rendering something as it really is and not being a slave to the source photo. An excellent way to show a perspective client that you are capable of creating a likeness, is to have the subject pose next to the finished painting, and take a photo of the subject and painting together. I've done this a few times, and it works great!

Mary Reilly

Celebrity Portraits
 

I started out doing mall shows and art fairs to promote myself and get commissions, but I always knew that I wanted to be like John Howard Sanden, a professional portrait artist. I made a rule for myself to distinguish me from the quick sketch artists who were painting next to me.

I would only paint celebrities if I was commissioned to paint them. What this meant was this:

1) I had to have met the celebrity.
2) I took the photographs, or references had to have been provided to me by the celebrity or their representative.
3) I had to have been commissioned (money changing hands).

How this worked:

My husband was able to wrangle us backstage passes to the Beach Boys. (This was 20 years ago....) We met Carl Wilson, who graciously consented to having his portrait painted. We met the next day, I took photographs, I did the painting, delivered it a few months later at a concert, he paid a (nominal) amount for the portrait. Mike Love (another member of the Beach Boys) saw the painting and wanted one of his own, I took photographs, did the portrait, and was paid a not quite so nominal fee, etc.

I now had two celebrity portraits for my portfolio, recognizable names I could put on my resume, and they were legitimate commissions. I also met some terrific guys and got to hang out on stage with them during concerts. In my future as the portrait artist of celebrities, I found myself sitting under a white grand piano at the Governor's mansion, listening to tapes in a van with Danny Hutton of Three Dog Night, and having Graham Nash write a song about a project I was doing.

I don't actively chase celebrity portraits anymore, but I recommend to my students that it is a great way to add some penuche to your credibility, and also show that you can get a likeness without going through those uncomfortable "...let me look at the photograph..." appraisals.

But do think about following the rules I've mentioned above. It starts your career off with integrity and professionalism. Most importantly, it will also get you out into the marketing world where you need to instigate meetings, make calls and follow up, and deliver the portrait. I will still cold call an institution and suggest a meeting to discuss a commission. There is a lot more to this business than getting an agent and waiting for the commissions to roll in. You need to be proactive and bring the work back to your studio, at least initially. The skills you learn initiating a celebrity commission will pay off long after you have removed their portrait from your portfolio.

Peggy

I agree with many people who have previously posted. If you have to work from photos (which I do), take your own photos of the subject. After doing a lot of research, I decided to invest in a Minolta SLR. It is well worth the money. The photos are excellent, I can choose the position, lighting, background, ect. With several roles of resource photos, I can make a flattering composite painting.

If an artist is "copying" for practice, Karin's suggestion of copying the Old Masters is a more constructive approach.

Renee Price

I studied illustration in art school (in Los Angeles), and all of us were required to have a celebrity portrait in our portfolio. Fortunately, I loved movies, had already drawn (and sold) a lot of celebrity portraits, so producing celebrity portraits was no hardship for me.

I guess because of my background, I shrug my shoulders at the celebrity portraits. I see no big stigma there, but I can see why others do. "Fine Art" portraiture is different than illustration, after all.

I've also been commissioned to do portraits for celebrities. (Hey! I'm from L.A.!) Jaclyn Smith's secretary hired me to do a pencil portrait. I was giving a promotional still to use as reference. Jaclyn liked it very much, and gave me an autographed photo (which I have misplaced, of course).

A friend of actor Robert Ito (from "Quincy") hired me to do a portrait of Ito and co-star Jack Klugman. The friend said that Ito never had a picture of himself with Klugman, and she wanted to give him one. I presume he liked it. I was also given promotional stills as reference.

And then there was the one of David Hasselhoff. I was hired by an acquaintance of David's then-wife to do a portrait of them together. I used a combination of promotional stills, and watched videos of them (the wife was a soap opera actress) to get the likenesses right. It would be fair to say that no one photo was "reference". Hasselhoff and his wife liked the portrait - I was given a picture of them posing with it. But of course, once again, I have misplaced the photo!

I think that with a more traditional portrait artist, it would be important to have portraits of "ordinary" people. I don't feel any shame in my celebrity portraits. It is part of my background, and also part of going to art school in L.A.!

I do agree, painting and drawing from life is something that should be done as much as possible. Obviously it cannot be done all the time. But it's a wonderful experience to be able to observe your model from life, and at least get some sketches, or something! And, using your own photos is always better than using someone else's. Of course, when you are doing a portrait of someone who has passed away, you haven't got many choices.

Valuable PR materials
 

Jacqueline,

I'm concerned about your mention of misplacing important photos. Photos such as those you mentioned which were misplaced are a valuable record of an artist's career and potentially great PR material in the future. When I managed a portrait artist, I took all past PR materials (from before my tenure), put them in chronological order, with the most recent first and created a PR book which was a leatherette, 3-ring binder with plastic page protectors.

Once created, I kept this PR book up to date on a regular basis. Whenever we had an exhibition, the PR book was always on a table close by for attendees to peruse. Seeing the artist's history in this book brought a lot of credibility and provided easy conversation starters.

I would also often copy recent sections of the PR book and send out with press releases to provide additional material that might catch the recipient's attention.

The PR book (which actually grew to 4 books) contained such things as:

1. Newspaper articles where he was either the main feature or where he was mentioned.

2. PR photos taken at an event.

Even if your participation in an event is never published, you can still create a story for a PR book.

For example, we attended a fund raiser for the Young Musician's Foundation in LA. We were invited by Shelley Conti, the wife of Bill Conti who won an Oscar fo the soundtrack of the movie Rocky. It just so happened that at that time, George Peppard was Bill's best friend (George is now deceased). I managed to get snapshots of the artist with Bill Conti and with George Peppard. Though our attendance at the event was never published anywhere, I created a story with these photos. At the event, I shot the artist next to the event's main large banner, giving a title to the event story and then assembled the photos with captions.

Another example of creating a story was when the artist painted a portrait of George Washington offering a quill to the viewer, inviting them to sign the constitution as part of the Bicentennial Celebration. When this painting was exhibited at Disneyworld, again I took photos of the event and make a story in the PR book. I included our name tags which had Mickey Mouse on them and the printed program where he and the painting were mentioned.

Even if you don't manage to get photos of an event, you can still include the printed program, highlighting any mention in the program of the artist.

3. Anything related to the artist that had been in print.

When one of his portraits was used for the cover of a Chick Corea album, I color copied and reduced the album cover and included it in the book with a caption.

4. Special projects.

When the artist was commissioned to do a painting for the annual Donaulinselfest (Danube Island Festival) in Austria, I created a story behind the painting by photographing him photographing Vienna's mayor and a famouse Austrian rock star, both of whom were to be in the painting. One of the photos ended up in the Vienna newspaper, which I clipped, of course, and included in the PR book also.

PR and an historical record of an artist's career is an often overlooked aspect of an artist's career and wanted to mention it here for you and for anyone who is serious about their career.

Copyright red flags
 

I realise this thread is not the most active one on the forum, but I hope what I am providing is valuable.

Someone (I think it was Mary Reilly) brought up the issue of what is properly known as "personality rights". That is the right that people have to control the reproduction of their own likeness. It is just like copyright--where the creator has the right to control reproduction of his/her work of art--except it is for one's visage.

One key point should be understood about copyright (and hence, personality rights): they apply to everyone, not just to celebrities, and you don't have to do anything to get these rights. The very act of creation makes copyright apply to the thing created, through the operation of the law. Personality rights also exist by operation of law alone. You don't have to do anything other than be.

With some exceptions, you can buy and sell these rights at will, as if they were property (which they are). For example, if you paint a snow scene, you could then sell the right to use the image on holiday greeting cards but retain the right for any other reproductions, such as posters. Or, you can sell all of the copyrights and you no longer control the reproduction. Or, you can sell the physical painting itself, but keep the copyrights in the image. This latter one is the most common situation for a fine art painter.

Globally, copyright law is pretty uniform today on account of various international conventions and treaties. That doesn't mean that some countries aren't fairly lax in enforcing them, though. States such as Vietnam and Taiwan are notorious for their copyright infringements (pirating) yet they are subject to most of the laws as they are found in the US, Canada, UK, France, etc..

Before I get to the important issues for portrait painters; a further word on personality rights--they do not just adhere to celebrities. We all get the same rights, it's just that we are all not famous and recognizable. If you see your mug in an advertisement's photo of a crowd in front of some store, you could exercise your personality right and ask them not to print the picture. They may pay you, they may simply use a different shot, or they may digitally get rid of you. They could also just go ahead and you could sue them. But, it wouldn't be worth it because, other than on account of their being jerks, you wouldn't get much for your efforts because you aren't a famous celebrity. If you were, you could make a good case that the firm using your image was riding on the coattails of your success for their own gain, and without paying any compensation.

For portrait painters to paint celebrity paintings from photographs they must infringe on two copyrights: the photographer's and the sitter's personality rights. Or, they must get permission from both. This sort of thing goes on all the time without much reprisal because, usually, neither the photographer nor the sitter are any the wiser. However, it is still copyright infringement.

A unique aspect of the copyright law applies to portraits here in Canada. I would very much like to know if it is the same in the US, the UK, and elsewhere. If the painting, or the photograph, is a portrait, then the copyright automatically belongs to the sitter, not to the artist/photographer!! Think about that for a moment. This means that, by law, you cannot use that image even as advertising for yourself. You have to get permission . . . in writing. There is no implied right to use such images in self-promotion; it must be expressed in writing.

Of course, most of us don't do that because most of us, and the sitters, are unaware of the existence of this twist of the law. Nevertheless, if you normally use some form of written agreement when entering into a portrait contract, you might think about inserting a line in there that states the sitter gives you the right to use their image in self-promotion and for entering competitions, etc.. Maybe you already do this.

This specific issue applies only to portraits as opposed to other figurative art that may involve likenesses of models. Such instances probably fall under the work-for-hire doctrine (where you pay people to pose for you) or, otherwise are governed by normal copyright laws where you own the copyright, period.

Anyway, this law may not apply outside of Canada, but I would be surprised if that were the case. As I said, the copyright laws are pretty uniform all around the world. Also, it might be worth it to at least check more deeply into your copyright laws because this little tidbit took me a long time to notice--and I practiced intellectual property law for a number of years!

Finally, even if the law is not stated as clearly where you live as it is in Canada, the fact of the sitter's personality right would act as a de facto barrier to your use of his/her likeness, anyway. So, for that reason, it would again be wise to get their permission to use the image of your painting for self-promotion purposes, etc..

Thanks to those who took the time to read this. I hope some of this is useful. Please get back to me if their is anything I wasn't clear about. A lot of this is complicated and usually not something we need to get worked-up about, but it's out there. I haven't even touched on the "moral rights", but that's another ball of wax. I can already sense your eyes glazing-over.

Speaking of glazing . . . I've got to get back to work.

All the best.

Juan