Judging an art work

[Gita]

This theme has crept into my thoughts during the past days. Is the excellence of a painting rated according to the likliness to a photograph? If so, is it not more a talent to reproduce rather than the expression of ones creativity with the mediums we use?
As for me, I am impressed how some paintings look like photographs but I am often more impressed how creatively some artists present there art work where likliness to a photograph is not the main aim.
Do we want to reproduce a photograph and judge the result by comparing it? 
I would like to brainstorm this topic in PB and would love to hear your opinions. 

[Kathysutterlin]

This is a great question, Gita. I feel both original expression and ability to paint or draw a life like piece hold value. As a new artist, I am still getting a feel for my personal style. I  find that I am delighted by and drawn to realistic looking art. That said, I admire the creativity of personal expression. In my novice opinion, I don't think one holds a higher value or level of talent than the other.

[dennis]

Judging is a very subjective matter, and is open to many different types of interpretations. There are differences of opinions even between officials judges at competitions.
Having said that, I personally, here on the PB site, always try to judge a painting according to the capabilities of the person submitting the piece of work. IOW, a beginner's work will not be judged the same as one who is advanced. I try to judge each one's work at the level I think he/she is at.

I look at techniques and creativity more than I do at actual photographical representation. Obviously, portraiture should be photographically correct as far as proportions are concerned, but not necessarily the actual finer detailing and colouring.

We have some lessons about painting from photographs, for example, on how not to copy landscapes exactly as is. This is one of my favourite topics

[Steve Weatherwax]

Photorealistic art has its place. But I'm not a fan of trying to exactly copy a photo. As references, they are great in that they suggest how you should draw something. I once saw a demo by a painter who used five or six different photos to draw his landscape. He took the foreground  rocks from one photo, mountains, trees, water, etc., from other photos and made a painting that looked like none of the photos, but was beautiful. Even the elements he used he did not copy exactly, but used his artists license.

[MaryAnne Long]

Steve,

I agree.  I have done that quite a bit lately.

aloha

mea

[nolan]

it all depends on what you personally rate as a good painting. So for one person the more photorealistic it is the higher they will rate it. For others how quick it was painted will affect their rating, Other things like the creativity involved or how fine the detail is, etc will make them rate it higher.

There is no right or wrong - only personal preference.

Never worry about what anybody else says or what you think you should rate a painting - only "rate it" according to your own personal preference. 

[Gita]

Thank you Dennis and Nolan for your opinions. Personally,  I find creativity of an art work impressive. Like Steve said I'm not a fan of trying to exactly copy a photo. A camera does this job better and faster.

Just wanted to brainstorm this topic. Thank you again for your valuble opinion. 

[Gita]

  Kathy and Steve for sharing your opinion. 

I like realistic art work, too. I find the process of painting by transferring colours (and sometimes changing them...) fascinating by taking a photograph for "guidance" or for "reference" like you are saying Steve.

An exact copy of a photograph is impressive due to the work involved in it, but since there is an original, the copy does not offer more information which attracts additional attention.

Actually, one starts comparing with the original photograph and the mind subconsciously begins to compare and start to find flaws or differences.

I am aware that my question involves a lot of subjectivity in the answers I get.

[Steve Weatherwax]

Years ago on a tour of Universal studios, I got to see some paintings done on glass that were used as cityscape backdrops in the movie "The Sting". They were the most realistic paintings I've ever seen. I imagine nowadays they use more computer animation to do this. I like this style also, but I'm more fond of art where the artist's soul is mixed with their paints.

[Happychappy]

A very interesting topic. I love photorealism in painting but since we all "see and interpret" things differently, we never seem to be able to replicate what we see exactly the same, as is evident in our monthly challenges.  We all do the same topic but each one is different which I find very interesting. I agree with what Nolan says in that it depends largely on the person/judge's personal feelings and choice as to what they judge as a good painting.


Patricia