Renwick Gallery, Washington D.C.

[Allan Rahbek]

I like,

The fine balance of cold and warm colors.

The way the red shirt is painted with the strong shadow color and the highlight.

The balance between the light figure and the darker background without any of them being too dominant.

The flow of the brushwork.

Allan

[Kimberly Dow]

Allan, Im going to disagree with you.

There is obviously other light sources beyond the window we see - it is reflecting and bouncing off many surfaces. Just looking at the bit of room we see has me invisioning other windows, but not so close.

I always read that ear as correct, but you do have me looking at it now. I dont mind the shutters at all..they recede far enough back for me.

I do maybe agree with the sleeve, now that you mention it.

He sure does have a thin head, but I read that myself as being correct.

Just thougt I'd join in.

[Mike McCarty]

Allan,

I think this may be a good example of a painting that breaks technical rules for the sake of a pleasing overall visual impact.

Your first three criticisms are somewhat presumptuous I think. First, this gentleman may have been one of those narrow headed fellows. A condition commonly attributed to men who invite cats to visit their laps. Also, we don't know for sure that the existing light could not create the circumstances necessary to create the effects you object to. Your analysis may well be correct, but, it's possible that it may not.

I maintain that there should be a presumption of innocence. In my own work I often operate on the principle of plausibility. A passage may not coincide with the precise facts on the ground, but if it is plausible, if it gives a pleasing visual effect, I say do it. Of course this principle can easily be abused and the line crossed very quickly.

I think the majority of folk, including those like you and I who may tend to be more critical, will first make their impression on the entirety of painting. I think a painting should first be evaluated in it's entirety. Based on that first analysis certain minor technical faults may be excused.

I believe that Ms. Beaux woud have possessed the technical ability to create a precise rendition of the facts. I further believe that if she chose to stray from them, as she may have done here, that she should be given the license to do that.

I'm not offended by the position of the cat.

I think that if I had been given the opportunity to critique the anatomy of Ingrid Bergman (back then not now) I would have soon become seduced by the enormity of her many intangible charms, and any minor physical defects would have soon been forgiven.

[Allan Rahbek]

Originally Posted by Kimberly Dow

Allan, I'm going to disagree with you.

There is obviously other light sources beyond the window we see - it is reflecting and bouncing off many surfaces. Just looking at the bit of room we see has me envisioning other windows, but not so close.

I always read that ear as correct, but you do have me looking at it now. I don't mind the shutters at all..they recede far enough back for me.

I do maybe agree with the sleeve, now that you mention it.

He sure does have a thin head, but I read that myself as being correct.

Just thought I'd join in.

Kim,
this is fun, please don

[Allan Rahbek]

Originally Posted by Mike McCarty

Allan,

First, this gentleman may have been one of those narrow headed fellows. A condition commonly attributed to men who invite cats to visit their laps.

I think that if I had been given the opportunity to critique the anatomy of Ingrid Bergman (back then not now) I would have soon become seduced by the enormity of her many intangible charms, and any minor physical defects would have soon been forgiven.

Mike,
this g-man must have had a lot of cats on his lap then.

I would also have accepted all of IB

[Sharon Knettell]

This is also one if my favorite paintings. The incredible luminosity, the exquisite brushwork and those luscious whites. The lighting and compositon are incredibly complex and intelligent.

I find that modern portrait painters are too used to the photographic image and cling much to tightly it. We are starting to read that any divergence from a photographic point of view is somehow incorrect. When you are painting from a live and non static model you can interpret more, elongate here, move a hand there; you are never faced with a finished statement as you are using a photograph as reference. There is always a surprise element and I think this very expressive portrait is a brilliant and perfect example of this.