Composition - examples of note

[Ant Carlos]

Unfortunately the modernists were cruel enough to cause that kind of tragedy. Even today they still seem to have bad feelings about painters who know how to paint realistically. Not rarely I find myself arguing with the so-called contemporary artists who label my Art as "classical" in a pejorative meaning. But now, for me at least, they are the old-fashioned ones. If you try to define contemporary art, perhaps you'll be in trouble, giving so many matches in that field. I don't like, nor dislike what the modernists do. It just happens that because their style can accept anything, a lot of non-talented ones keep on going. A realist painter is easier to judge, even by the artist himself.

But back in 1920, poor Godward, lived in a tough time.

Ant

[Mike McCarty]

I was struck by the story of W. A. Walker, American, living in that time when all the so called "real" art was being created in Europe. This story of an American making do with the gifts that he had seems to be in contrast to the well studied artists of Paris. Sometimes it's just about the story. The fact that he was a Southern Irishman "posing" might have something to do with my affection for his tale.

Shown below are:

Goin' Home I 12x6
Goin' Home II 19x13

William Aiken Walker
1838-1921


William Aiken Walker was born in Charleston, South Carolina in 1839 to an Irish Protestant father and a mother of South Carolina background. Walker would grow up southerner through and through. He completed his first painting at age twelve and continued painting until his death in 1921 at age eighty-three.

When his father died in 1842, Walker's mother took her family to Baltimore, where they remained until returning to Charleston in 1848. During this period, he began painting rural farm and plantation scenes of poor southern blacks and it was these works that he built his reputation. Something of a prodigy as an artist, Walker exhibited his first painting in 1850, and received his first one-man show at the South Carolina Institute Fair in 1850 and Courtenay

[Mike McCarty]

Here's a nice composition, I think. It offers a good bit of peripheral interest which is emphasized, or not, with just the right amount of light; a hierarchy or interest, if you will.

Alcide Theophile Roubadi 1850-1928, "Zizi et su Poupee," 35x26.

[Ant Carlos]

It's a very good work, although it gives me the imprerssion of being from a photo-reference, a B&W, of course, making it difficult for the artist to deal with some color temperatures.

Ant

[Mike McCarty]

Ant,

You have a much keener eye than I. I would say that the color, apart from the composition, is well within the window of believability.

There is a window, is there not? After all, reality changed for him every second, just as it does for us. Can anyone hope to achieve a perfect moment when that moment will not stand still? Even when It stands still in a photo, as artists we must be given some latitude of believability.

[Steven Sweeney]

Through the grace of a serendipitous recommendation while I was on another mission, I had the opportunity to visit the Museum of Russian Art today, in Minneapolis, during an exhibition of realistic works. In turn, I very highly recommend a visit by anyone within three hours' drive of the Cities, or by anyone who will be in the vicinity in the next two months.

The image attached is a sad reproduction of a postcard, but I still think it's worth seeing here. I found the composition exquisite. This is "In the Palace of Culture Ballet Class," by Nadezhda K. Kornienko. 1956, 61-1/4 by 71-3/8 in.

In another composition, I might have thought that the young ballerina's gaze was focused into too small a part of the frame. But it is very easy to imagine an unseen "audience" here, much in the way that a perfect short story suggests events that occurred prior to its opening line and extending beyond its conclusion.

By exquisite I mean that I understand that everything in the painting is important, but I only care for and react to the subject ballerina. For the artist to shepherd that focus is, in my estimation, masterful.

[Mike McCarty]

That's a dandy, Steven.

More than a few years ago I had the opportunity to visit the Hermitage museum in what was then called Leningrad, USSR. Hard to imagine that I could forget something like this, but it was long ago and I've lost billions of much needed brain cells since then.

Catherine II
by Virgilius Eriksen after 1762

[Ant Carlos]

Originally Posted by Mike McCarty

Ant,

You have a much keener eye than I. I would say that the color, apart from the composition, is well within the window of believability.

There is a window, is there not? After all, reality changed for him every second, just as it does for us. Can anyone hope to achieve a perfect moment when that moment will not stand still? Even when It stands still in a photo, as artists we must be given some latitude of believability.

Mike,
in my opinion the work is still a nice painting, but some parts resemble to a work from photo and since it was B&W at that time it seems to me he had to make up some colors. Maybe he had the real objects close, but the photo-reference dependence is clearly showing in the light-blue fabric of the little girl's dress. I also find the shadow of the face a bit too warm. Perhaps this digital reproduction is not making justice (?).

Ant

[Mike McCarty]

Mike,
in my opinion the work is still a nice painting, but some parts resemble to a work from photo and since it was B&W at that time it seems to me he had to make up some colors. Maybe he had the real objects close, but the photo-reference dependence is clearly showing in the light-blue fabric of the little girl's dress. I also find the shadow of the face a bit too warm. Perhaps this digital reproduction is not making justice (?).

Ant

Ant, et al,

First of all I don't have much faith in this reproduction. Sometimes you can get good ones and sometimes not. This one seems dark and I don't have my good edit program available to make it better. I could lighten it up some, but as far as making color adjustments that would seem to be totally arbitrary.

But apart from that -- Let's say that you are right on the money with your analysis. It seems like a very long way to stretch your rubber band, but let's say that your assertions could be proved 100% right. My questions are these:

First of all, who should care? Apart from a couple of portrait forum jockeys like you and I who deal in this sort of minutia, who should care?

Which leads me to this question: Given your proven facts, do you think less of this painting, or more? Or, given that what is seen is within an acceptable range of plausibility, would these facts have no bearing on the quality at all?

[Ant Carlos]

First of all, who should care? Apart from a couple of portrait forum jockeys like you and I who deal in this sort of minutia, who should care?
Which leads me to this question: Given your proven facts, do you think less of this painting, or more? Or, given that what is seen is within an acceptable range of plausibility, would these facts have no bearing on the quality at all?

Mike,
I hardly find a flawless painting, and never am quite satisfied with any of my own. Roubadi's work is a very good one. The small problem with the light-blue fabric that lies above her knees looks like a photo-reference issue the painter had. And it would only get worse if you lighten this reproduction, so I really believe it's there.
But yes, it is within a very acceptable range of plausibility, and what I think (even if shared with others) would in no way have any bearing on the quality, given that the observers can always have their own interpretation and in most cases they just go Wow! when they see a craftsmen work well done.
And by the way, I think I would never mention this to Roubadi if I lived at his time and could have had any contact with him. Simply because I think I could not have done any better.

Ant