3 ms·

This is manifestly true. Artists worried that they would be rendered obselete by photography, and to a degree they were correct. Those that survide had to compl

by Daub 4y ago

This is manifestly true. Artists worried that they would be rendered obselete by photography, and to a degree they were correct. Those that survide had to completely redifine their role and how they served that role.

frumper 4y ago
I am not a portrait artist despite having a camera. Instead of hiring a portrait painter, I hire a photographer. It’s much cheaper now, so I can afford to hire many portraits throughout my life. It still takes an artist to get a good portrait.
- Daub 4y ago
  Portraiture is a good example of what I mentioned. I am a painter, but I would say that a camera is far more capable of capturing the subtleties of the human face your than a painter. Don't believe me? Search for paintings made before 1800 that feature a smiling face. They exist, but even the lamest insta does a better job of showing us those fleeting facial moments. Landscapes are another matter. Try finding any photo of a landscape that is half as sublime as the landscape paintings made by the Hudson river school. An effective painter can improve upon optical reality in a way that beggers belief. They do this with a clever mix of increasing contrast and affinity in a way that would be almost impossible for a photographer.
  - bitwize 4y ago
    The Mona Lisa kind of proves your point: the smile is very slight. Were it broad, there would have to be exacting detail given to the configuration of the facial muscles in order to convey the emotion of the smile.
  - underwater 4y ago
    People didn't smile in painted portraits because of cultural norms. A smile was perceived as looking foolish (or drunk). Early photography followed this lead. A quote attributed to Mark Twain says “A photograph is a most important document, and there is nothing more damning to go down to posterity than a silly, foolish smile caught and fixed forever.“
    - Daub 4y ago
      > People didn't smile in painted portraits because of cultural norms. A smile was perceived as looking foolish (or drunk). Early photography followed this lead Not sure I would agree with that. Granted there may be a cultural component in the mix somewhere, but as someone who has painted from observation many faces, the fugitive nature of a smile presents almost insurmountable problems. Franz Hals (below) could do it because he painted insanely quickly. https://www.art-prints-on-demand.com/a/hals-frans/thelaughingchild.html https://www.art-prints-on-demand.com/a/hals-frans/thelaughin... https://images.prismic.io/barnebys/a671f804-2e03-4541-afa0-9aaf4519a4d4_fh5.jpg https://images.prismic.io/barnebys/a671f804-2e03-4541-afa0-9... https://az333960.vo.msecnd.net/images-9/laughing-boy-frans-hals-1625-20f244ee.jpg https://az333960.vo.msecnd.net/images-9/laughing-boy-frans-h... They key issue is that a smile involves the eyes as much as the face. This cannot be faked without the frozen effect: example: https://images7.alphacoders.com/694/694598.jpg https://images7.alphacoders.com/694/694598.jpg As for photography, the long exposures of early photography made the capture of anything fugitive an impossibility. However, the moment that snapshot photography was invented (Kodaks Box Brownie) smiles were being photographed all the time.

by Daub 4y ago

frumper 4y ago

I am not a portrait artist despite having a camera. Instead of hiring a portrait painter, I hire a photographer. It’s much cheaper now, so I can afford to hire many portraits throughout my life. It still takes an artist to get a good portrait.

Daub 4y ago
Portraiture is a good example of what I mentioned. I am a painter, but I would say that a camera is far more capable of capturing the subtleties of the human face your than a painter. Don't believe me? Search for paintings made before 1800 that feature a smiling face. They exist, but even the lamest insta does a better job of showing us those fleeting facial moments. Landscapes are another matter. Try finding any photo of a landscape that is half as sublime as the landscape paintings made by the Hudson river school. An effective painter can improve upon optical reality in a way that beggers belief. They do this with a clever mix of increasing contrast and affinity in a way that would be almost impossible for a photographer.
- bitwize 4y ago
  The Mona Lisa kind of proves your point: the smile is very slight. Were it broad, there would have to be exacting detail given to the configuration of the facial muscles in order to convey the emotion of the smile.
- underwater 4y ago
  People didn't smile in painted portraits because of cultural norms. A smile was perceived as looking foolish (or drunk). Early photography followed this lead. A quote attributed to Mark Twain says “A photograph is a most important document, and there is nothing more damning to go down to posterity than a silly, foolish smile caught and fixed forever.“
  - Daub 4y ago
    > People didn't smile in painted portraits because of cultural norms. A smile was perceived as looking foolish (or drunk). Early photography followed this lead Not sure I would agree with that. Granted there may be a cultural component in the mix somewhere, but as someone who has painted from observation many faces, the fugitive nature of a smile presents almost insurmountable problems. Franz Hals (below) could do it because he painted insanely quickly. https://www.art-prints-on-demand.com/a/hals-frans/thelaughingchild.html https://www.art-prints-on-demand.com/a/hals-frans/thelaughin... https://images.prismic.io/barnebys/a671f804-2e03-4541-afa0-9aaf4519a4d4_fh5.jpg https://images.prismic.io/barnebys/a671f804-2e03-4541-afa0-9... https://az333960.vo.msecnd.net/images-9/laughing-boy-frans-hals-1625-20f244ee.jpg https://az333960.vo.msecnd.net/images-9/laughing-boy-frans-h... They key issue is that a smile involves the eyes as much as the face. This cannot be faked without the frozen effect: example: https://images7.alphacoders.com/694/694598.jpg https://images7.alphacoders.com/694/694598.jpg As for photography, the long exposures of early photography made the capture of anything fugitive an impossibility. However, the moment that snapshot photography was invented (Kodaks Box Brownie) smiles were being photographed all the time.