Composition - examples of note

[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

[Mike McCarty]

Here are some interesting compositions of past U. S. Presidents.

The first composition I'll admit is less than remarkable, but the story is worth telling. This portrait of Lyndon Johnson by Peter Hurd was meant to be Johnson's official White House likeness. But that plan was quickly scrapped after Johnson declared it "the ugliest thing I ever saw." Soon the pun was making the rounds in Washington that "artists should be seen around the White House--but not Hurd." How would you like to have that pun hanging around your neck?

When Hungarian-born English artist Philip de L

[Mike McCarty]

I've seen this man's paintings somewhere, but I can't remember where. What I can remember is that they were mesmerizing. What I remember most of all was the surface texture and how it glowed from within. In a past life my master bedroom was designed in all things oriental. If I were to win the lottery I would populate my bedroom walls with Mr. Pushman's paintings, particularly his still lifes. I might even take them down the hall to other rooms.

Hovsep Pushman, later a naturalized American citizen, was born in Armenia in 1877. At age 11, he held a scholarship at the Constantinople Academy of Art. By 17, he had gone to the United States and started teaching art in Chicago. He studied the culture of China, immersing himself in oriental art and perhaps philosophy. He then studied in Paris under Lefebvre, Robert-Fleury and Dechenaud. He exhibited his work at the Salon des Artistes Francais in Paris, winning a bronze medal in 1914 and a silver medal in 1921. He also was awarded the California Art Club

[Mike McCarty]

I think that if someone were contemplating being a portrait artist, that someone could do worse than begin by painting still life's. There is much similarity in the meticulous set up of a still life that informs the portrait artist.

Here are a couple of the still life's for which Hovsep Pushman is better known. Both oil on panel.

1- Austere Solitude 29x26
2- Serenade to a dream 28x23

[John Reidy]

Right you are, Mike.

I can feel the depth and each object seems to occupy its space. Indeed these paintings illustrate all of the elements that a portrait artist tries to achieve.

[Mike McCarty]

John,

To me composition is made up of two main ingredients: the shapes of those things which are being portrayed, with their relationship to each other, and the light which falls upon them.

When these things are well considered some of the other very important aspects begin to fall into place, like values, edges and focus, which can all be a byproduct of good arrangement and good light.

These things are exemplified in the figures, and especially the still lifes above. Each of the figurines and objects is lit and shadowed in their own right. There is little difference in this set up and the set up for a portrait of a live person.

These exercises in "real space," I think are the backbone of a successful portrait. To often we try to piece things together after the fact, create the design as we go. When we proceed in this manner much of the essence of space, light, shadow and atmosphere are not carried forward, mostly because it was never there to begin with.

I would be very surprised if Mr. Pushman painted from anything less than the full set up that we see above, laid out with perfect lighting and all the atmosphere (real space) that now comes through. No matter how you proceed to paint, no matter your method, the set up that preceeds it is the same.

My Past Dreams 21x16 oil on panel

[John Reidy]

Mike,

I agree whole heartedly although, if asked, I would explain composition differently. I agree with your perspective but I would say that composition is like a road map, it directs your eye around the canvas in a pleasing and almost subliminal manner.

The absence of the other aspects that you point out can hinder the composition by throwing up stop signs and detours, spoiling the journey.

In my simple opinion there are other 2 dimensional art forms that can ignore these aspects by substituting other points of interest such as exagerations, distortions or just imagination and still incorporate good composition. And this, I believe, helps to prove the point of portrait art and still lifes' similarities.