The business suit in portraiture
 

The business suit has to be the least interesting element in portraiture. A suit is a suit is a suit is a suit. If you have seen one havn't you seen them all?

Artists often emphasize the body with disproportionately long arms and legs, large hands and shoes. They draw the head undersized and the body elongated. Interesting portraiture focuses on something unique in an individual. The head and face capture personality yet 90% of the canvas ends up being the generic, stiff, routinely posed body clothed in the ever-dull business suit. Any number of heads could be interchanged with these suited dummy bodies without detection.

At least unbutton the coat and strike a pose, maybe add some interesting light and shadow from a window, fireplace or candle. Or maybe add the glistening of water from a nearby glass, bottle of vintage wine or rain hitting a window? Wrinkle the suit with folds from a relaxed posture instead of the typical postmortem-totem pole stance. People are more attractive when they are relaxed anyway and you know they want to look their best in a portrait.

Are we artists with creative license and imagination or mere technicians?

The business suit in portraiture
 

We are servants to the client. It's the Money Rule. The one with the money rules. Those paintings with stiff business suits are corporate paintings made to impart an aura of success. You can't do that with open collar poses and wine bottles in view. The client will always tell you how the painting will look. It is our abilities as artists to make it look that way with an artistic look about it. And we, professionals and business entrepeneurs, will follow the age old saying of " The customer is always right."

I think it depends on the client....
 

I agree with Tom that most portraits of men in suits "suit" a purpose - to portray a successful gentlemen in his business environment. Further, they are usually meant to be displayed in a corporate environment, an office or boardroom.

Certainly if you are doing a personal portrait for someone, where the setting will be more casual and the portrait will be displayed in a more family or home environment, then loosening up the suit, and/or adding some flare is completely appropriate.

I also think we have the choice of which genre to paint and specialize in.

Michael,

You said-"The business suit has to be the least interesting element in portraiture. A suit is a suit is a suit is a suit. If you have seen one haven't you seen them all"?

Absolutely not!

If you believe that, don't paint suits. They all look the same only if you believe it's so. A suit can describe the subject almost as well as the face. The posture, shoulder line, and width and form are very important and they should be an important part of the composition. Take a look at the Z.S. Liang painting under Legal/Judicial on SOG and note the beautiful shape of the tie and shirt as defined by the suit lapels. I couldn't find an example to illustrate but have seen some wonderful treaments of suits where the play of light and reflected light made the lapel on one side appear dark against light and light against dark on the other.

Chase said: "
" Do not try to paint the grandiose thing. Paint the commonplace so that it will be
distinguished." I subscribe to that.

Business suits in portraiture
 

As a topic of discussion my comments are intended to describe the commonplace treatment of the business suit in portraiture. It really goes without saying that the client is responsible for selecting the theme and clothing for the commisioned portrait. What the artist does with these limitations is their strength or weakness.

I am speaking of the paper doll treatment that the business suit receives in countless portraits. There are exceptional artists who have made the most mundane elements interesting. My suggestions hint at making something more of a very dull ingredient. Even a brush stroke can accomplish this by the hand of the skilled artist.

Portraiture benefits from the individual style and unique qualities in the subject and in the artist's abilities. Sometimes it is attention to detail (leave it in/out or enhance) and awareness of things overlooked. It happens to make me uncomfortable to view a portrait with someone sitting in an awkwardly stiff and rigid posture. People do not normally sit or stand this way and I either credit or fault the artist for a remedy. The phenomenon stems from the ignorance of substructure and anatomy and should not be confused with a posture that may replicate the client with precision.

I am not suggesting we clothe executives in pajamas for my sake. I am advocating making the most of everything. By some chance we might elevate the painting to a level of art beyond cookie cutter portraiture, with regards to the business suit at least.

A poor painting is a poor painting. It never occurred to me that suits might be a contributor any more than other elements of the composition and think I have seen fewer bad suit paintings than any other outfits and that may be due in part because formal business/executive commissions are not as likely to be trusted to the less skilled artist.

Those suits again
 

Maybe it is like thinking of a carrot. When something bothers you in a certain way you see more of it everywhere.

I don't think the business exec is an art afficionado and the commissioning of a portrait is out of his field of expertise. It is a decision likely resting on company tradition or a referral from a colleague.

This opens another can of worms dealing with fashion, fame, popularity and simple convenience. The art world is driven by this machine. I can't leave out politics either.

It takes a knowing eye to see where talent and skill leaves a tool behind. There will always be an artist raising the bar and a buyer defining the lowest common denominator. When money is an issue art often suffers. I need money to live but I would rather die than lose my ability to see the ideal.

Suits/Exec's

Attached is the suit painting I referenced earlier in this thread. It's by Thomas S. Buechner and I can't imagine doing a better job of it. I will keep it as a humbling and inspiring example of what can be done with a suit.

I also must defend executive portraits. Having made a design career within 3 major corporations as Designer, Manager, Design Director and 9 years as Vice President of Color and Design I would say it a mistake to to think them any less open to possibilities then the doting mother or grandmother or any other portrait subjects you might face in this profession. In every case it's neccessary to define the end goal and sell the client.

You might be surprised how much the guy at the top has in his bag of skills. It's common also to assume that engineers and research are not creative but all artist are. Not true.

And I guess "money dictates" in the sense that if you make something and nobody is moved to buy it. But that seems to apply to all products.

I hope, Micheal, that you can pursue your ideals and live a long successful life in doing so but can't help noting that the painter Lucian Freud who has already achieved fame, fortune, and world wide recognition, painted Queen Elizabeth's portrait in what we must assume, (until we learn differently), was up to his ideals and check out what our fellow artist (the bar raisers?) had to say in Cafe Guerbois.

Drat! As Karin would say. The attachment didn't attach here but can be found below in my next post.

Again, The suit image.

Jim,

There are many convoluted shades of thought. It is impossible to gather enough information from this limited dialogue. I agree with most of what you have said.

I opened the topic more rhetorically than my general statement indicated. I was not proclaiming that all business-suited portraiture is inferior. I see a lot that is however. It bothers me enough to speak of it.

I believe all people are creative including bad painters. The guys at the top (corp. execs) have it over many of us and this likely contributed to getting there. Although it is just as likely in error to assume so.

"Money dictates" is often said when referring to the value society places on things and the consequences of that perceived value. In that sense, "value" has great influence on people as it is at the core of self-worth. If you feel worthless it is difficult if not impossible to be constructive rather than destructive with your creativity. I do not think that fame, fortune, and worldwide recognition necessarily denotes virtues or vices.

Yes, the attached image is an example of many beautifully painted suits. The treatment of the suit isn't the only reason this painting is so good. The attitude, the relaxed yet business-staturesque posture -the man could model suits. This portrait has none of the negative characteristics I described earlier.

Imagine painting at least this well. Inspiration empowers. Humility knocks you from ivory towers.

Michael

In portraiture more than any other art field, it is paramount that you work closely and respectfully with your client. All your clients. Sometimes you need to educate them, but never underestimate them.

I sense in you a certain disdain for the client and for the process in which art is produced and money is paid. I caution you to examine this premise. Paradoxically, my best portraits are those in which I have the least leeway.

In simple terms, you have to like people in order to be a portrait artist. You have to respect their intelligence, their taste, their impressions, and their selections. They are the boss. Portrait art bridges the gap between commercial art and fine art. Our goal is to produce the best work possible within those confines.

Peggy

Peggy,

The thought was there but I did not write it. I would rephrase this sentence as follows:
"I don't think the [typical] business exec is [necessarily] an art aficionado and the commissioning of a portrait is [often] out of their field of expertise." Replace this sentence in the context in which it was written.

(When you are trying to make a point sometimes you do not realize that what you have said or written is worded in a manner so open for interpretation.)

For some people painting is their job or a hobby. In my experience art is a spiritually dynamic, profoundly honorable and enriching process. I often feel the intoxication of being in love and connected to some sort of center of all things when I paint. I have known other artists who share these feelings. I also know people who do not create art but who love it and experience these qualities when viewing fine art pieces. I feel a kinship with these people.

I do not think of telling a mechanic how to repair my car. I would not tell my dentist how to fill a tooth. How do you think either of these people would feel if their clientele wanted to direct their work? Unless they had sufficient background knowledge it probably would not go over very well.

I make a living in graphic design because it is about as deep as I can tolerate working with laymen in this arena. I have worked with hundreds of people. A whole lot of dealing with people is congeniality. People will choose you because they like you and you are entertaining to work with. I can handle the tugs and pulls people can throw at you as long as it is relatively superficial and graphic design does not demand the all encompassing investment of soul that fine art is for me. If you have children you might relate this experience to how you might feel if someone harmed your child. The same love, innocence and purity is alive in my creative experience as it is in the created child.

This is a forum for portrait artists. I have been under the impression that this included a wide range of participants, from beginners to people who paint portraits for the experience alone without any monetary interest. If this is correct, you will encounter opinions, such as mine, that do not fit within the restraints of professional portraiture for hire. I am not built inside for portraiture for hire. It goes against my grain. I admire many categories of fine art that may include portraiture.

I do not paint to make friends or to make a living. I paint because I was born an artist and it is the experience of all experiences. It is just what I do along with thinking there are a lot of poorly painted suits in portrait art.

I did not start out so I could go off the deep end and I did start out so I could go off the deep end. You saw something behind my words and offered sound advice. I would benefit from such an adjustment in thinking if I hoped to paint for a living. This has been fun.

Michael and Peggy:

Nice posts. Michael, how great that you can do this without any need to worry about money or mortgage.

For those of us who do paint for a living:

"It's not just an adventure, it's a job!" :)

It is a fact that there are many artists who refuse to do portraits only because they cannot bear anyone telling them to change this or that or how they want the portrait done. They believe that because they were destined to be artists, that their work is beyond criticism. :bewildere

Michael,

I don't know where the quote came from, but I once heard that to be happy in life, you need to choose something you love to do, then figure out a way to make money at it! (Unless of course you are independently wealthy.)

If my mechanic fixed my car and it doesn't run right, I take it back and tell him to fix it. If my dentist fills my tooth and it still hurts, I go back and tell him to fix it. If someone told me I did not get something right in a portrait that I have done, I would fix it. I know there are horror stories out there about picky clients, but for the most part, people are very pleased.
As Cynthia has pointed out in the past, this forum is for everyone. It is interesting to swap ideas, stories, and techniques. And to sword play a bit...as long as it is kept tasteful. But you must be prepared to encounter artists that experience the creative euphoria you talk about, and have good business sense to go along with it.

Peggy, I was interested in your comment that "portrait art bridges the gap between commercial art and fine art." I often think of commercial art as something that's created in order to sell something else and isn't art for the sake of the art itself. Commercial art may be created to sell books, cars or whatever.

On the other hand, most of what we consider the best "fine art" in the world was created on a commission basis. The Sistine Chapel was painted because Michaelangelo was commissioned by the church. (I'll bet they had something to say to him about what they wanted done, too!) Rembrandt's portraits were mostly created as commissions, too. He pretty much supported himself during his lifetime as a commissioned portrait artist!

I think of portraiture as purely fine art, not at all as commercial art, since a portrait painting exists for itself (art for art's sake). Because a portrait is often done as a commission doesn't take away from that, at least to my way of thinking.

Anyone else want a piece of me?

SERENITY NOW Folks!


Michele wrote [quote]

Michael, et al.

Until now, I have not had the benefit of reading any of your posts, Michael. You write well.

This is an interesting topic and I think that Michael is largely correct insofar as a business suit does not seem to be as worthy a piece of drapery as were the capes and flowing garments popular in past centuries. That could be our present-day bias and/or lack of imagination speaking, but I think it is mostly true. So, because of the inherent blas

A suit may be boring to many of us as artists, often because we don't tend to have the sort of jobs where we would wear them as a regular part of our work.

To the man wearing it, however, especially the suit he's chosen to have his portrait painted in, it's anything but boring. A suit can be beautiful. Folds of just the right crispness, fabric not too dull or too shiny, the right shape of jacket, shoulders, lapels... all these are of supreme importance to the man buying an expensive Armani and choosing to wear it for his portrait.

I just finished a portrait of a man in a suit and until I thought about these things I found it to be the most boring part of the painting. Then I remembered how important a suit is to those who wear them and I looked for these subtleties. Then I found that I enjoyed painting the suit that much more.

I agree. There are many subtle variations in a suit such as fabric textures, colors and the cut as well as how perfect the suit fits. The background might have objects that match the color of the suit. There may even be a lapel pin or tie clip of special significance.

I have done suit portraits before, but it's not nearly as much fun as paintings with more elaborate clothing, at least for me. I don't think I consider myself a puppet though if the client insists on choosing the clothing. I have a choice, either do the painting or turn it down. Hmmm...where IS that deposit slip?? Darn, I think I just sold out again. OH well....
Michael, I think you would enjoy reading another similar thread called "Clothing doesn't make the person BUT....by Karen Wells in this Cafe'. Look a couple of pages down.