Pretty cool paintings

Very cool.

Ian Smith (Sydney Australia)

>

Re: Pretty cool paintings

Ernie Miller

>are they for sale?

Re: Pretty cool paintings

Rich Glisson, Durham NC

>Those are awesome!

It looks like he's grabbing a whiskey bottle in the first one, though.

Re: Pretty cool paintings

Dean Lapinel

>They're OK. Not well composed and likely from photos.

Re: Pretty cool paintings

Greg B�tit, Vergennes VT

>The way he's holding that board he's sawing is interesting.

greg

Kinda have to agree...

Scott Burr in Ben Lomond CA

>It's hard to tell from the low res. pics, but they look Photoshopped to me.

Main thing

Wiley Horne--So. Cal.

>It's really great to have Stephen back posting and hosting. The man is a fountain of knowledge that is not easily come by or widely known.

Wiley ..... agreeing about the paintings

Heartily agree

Jack Guzman from Maine

>I'm glad Stephen decided to come back here. I missed his contributions.---Jack

Re: Pretty cool paintings

wayne anderson

>The paintings are wonderful, though I am baffled at how he manages to stay so clean and white in his shop. ;^) -wayne

Re: Pretty cool paintings

Moses Yoder in White Pigeon, MI

>There are very few artists, but everyone is a critic. The pictures are painted much better than I would be able to myself. If Ellis says they are paintings I am assuming that he is showing us a picture of the paintings. I am not sure why it would make a difference if the paintings were made from photographs; I am quite sure that if Leonardo DaVinci had a camera, he would have used it. I'm sure this is a big issue amongst art people, some of which would probably refuse to be seen with a picture in their hands to paint from. Seems silly to me. The board being sawed is obviously being held in a face vice on the bench, the left hand just being used to steady it. In my opinion the paintings are well done, I love the subject, and I would be very happy to find a print of these to hang in my shop or house.

Re: Pretty cool paintings

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>I agree with Dean that they're pretty lousy paintings, seemingly some attempt to angelicize an old patriarch prototype who has hunched shoulders, quite closed (this isn't intended as a slam on Stephen). As a contemporary woman, I'm not fond of patriarchs.

However, Moses, you're correct about photos and camera obscura and painting. Many more paintings than one would expect were made using camera obscura, and few artists will admit it because it's so close to tracing.

Pam

Lighten Up Y'all - Geez!

Hank Knight from SC

>

Re: Pretty cool paintings

Moses Yoder in White Pigeon, MI

>Do you think the subject is lousy, or the painting? The background in the painting is not really meant to be seen, in my opinion. Therefore it is dark/heavily and roughly shaded, which I suppose could be called lousy painting. I think the detail in the hair is pretty good, and the shades of white are great. The white shades of course would be different in electronic media than the actual paint, so I suppose you would have to actually see the painting to know whether it is lousy or not. In my opinion, the subject matter does not determine whether painting is good or bad; it is the manner in which the subject is conveyed. But then I am not an art critic and actually know nothing about art, but I know what I like. I am not going to like or dislike something based on someone else's opinion of it.

Re: Pretty cool paintings

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>I am not going to like or dislike something based on someone else's opinion of it.

No one is trying to convince you to change your mind. I was simply trying to agree with part of your previous message and specify that part with which I didn't agree and why.

Pam

Like what you want

Dean Lapinel

>Moses. that's the wonderful thing about art...it's up to the individual to like. Whether this is a painting from photos or photoshop is not the significant issue. Actually painting from photographs is extremely difficult and more easily done if you are already capable of painting directly (and know how to draw). The issue for me is poor composition...likely because a photo was used.

The picture on the left would look better with the subject up and to the right. The right photo adds the (very light) hanging coat that distracts the viewer from the subject. The left pic has a nice muted background but the right pulls you away.

I am an artist and yes, taste is subjective. My taste goes with traditional composition that serves a purpose.

BTW, the human eye doesn't distort and has a higher dynamic range than a photograph. You can't walk around in a photograph to see more detail of texture, color, form. Photography for painting is not cheating but it is more difficult. Many professional artists use photographs but as a replacement for sketches and ideas before painting live.

Re: Like what you want

Todd O. Cronkhite Maine Native, Presently Away

>traditional composition that serves a purpose.

Dean, would you break these down a little bit for me me?

Traditional Composition?: As in not Abstract, or other funky style, just paint it as it is

Serves a Purpose?

T.O.

not an art critic, but thought the painting where pretty good. Seems to me they merely dipicted a woodworker working. Weather the final product was made from looking at picture, or from a live model is of no interest to me.

Painters qualify as hand tool enthusiasts

just another guy

>This may be the best example of what one can "do" with hand tools that I've seen posted on the Hand Tools forum in some time. I guess it could be better if it were a relief carving in Cuban mahogany or a marquetry pattern of exotic wood and tortoise shell set into a bar top. BTW, Kepler detailed how the human eye distorts back in the 1500's. ;-)

Re: Pretty cool paintings

Stephen in Utah

>The artists name is Zack Proctor, he lives in St. George Utah. He took photographs and told me he was an artist. Hundreds of people take my picture everyday, I work in a living history museum.

A friends sister told him she saw the paintings in a Gallery in Salt Lake and I went up and took these photographs. They were priced at $875.00 each and sold within a month.

The whiskey bottle is a carver's mallet, but everyone that knows me thinks it is a whiskey bottle.

I am holding the wood in a face vice on the other painting where I am sawing.

As for my white clothes, all is I can say is that I work clean. This was the middle of the summer and I wear white during the hot summer months. I also wear an apron when I glue and finish to protect my clothing, all of which is nineteenth century.

Stephen Shepherd

I do not appreciate and resent the ad hominem

Re: Pretty cool paintings

mikew

>Hi Stephen,

Been absent of late and just saw this thread. Weird direction and it wasn't even over BU/BD or sharpening techniques

I had to look at the the paintings a couple times before I realized the subject--you--wasn't someone I know. This other person works in a historical setting in CA. His hair is white, however, but it took me a few moments to realize the difference when looking at the smaller photos Ellis posted.

If I had been a touch more computer literate I would have realized clicking on the buggers made them bigger. Got to figure out how to do that on WC one of these days...

Not that it will matter to anyone, but I also try to keep angled cuts held in the vise so that the cut is pretty vertical.

Take care, Mike

Re: Painters qualify as hand tool enthusiasts

Dean Lapinel

>"This may be the best example of what one can "do" with hand tools that I've seen posted on the Hand Tools forum in some time."

If you study photography or art in general you will learn about focus and composition (just components of art). Learning this will enable you to enjoy many forms of art at a greater level of understanding.

"BTW, Kepler detailed how the human eye distorts back in the 1500's. ;-)"

Yes....like in near sightedness etc...Not the same as in camera distortion that we automatically correct when we look at photos.

ad hominem?

Pam Niedermayer - Austin, TX

>To which definition do you refer?

1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect

2 : marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

OED

Stephen in Utah

>1748, [L] Of arguments, etc.: Directed to the preference or principles of the individual, not to abstract truth.

Stephen

Re: OED

Todd O. Cronkhite Maine Native, Presently Away

>Well, as I said before still not knowing diddly-do about being an art critic, I still like the paintings.

Stephen, I for one having never met you didn't know it was you, but in fact Stephen Shepard, as Ellis mentioned in the orginal post.

Do you really use a whiskey bottle as a carvers mallet in your position as a re-creator? Does it ever break?

T.O.

Re: OED

Stephen in Utah

>No, I have more respect for whiskey than that. However I did turn the carver's mallet and I may have been under the influence.

I am currently turning twenty 50 gallon used whiskey barrels into refuse recepticles (garbage cans) and it it difficult to keep the school kids from enjoying the lingering fragrance. When I open them I have to roll them outside to air out. But my shop does smell sweet.

Stephen