[Leica] Photorealism

[george.imagist at icloud.com (George Lottermoser)]

On Jan 12, 2014, at 9:30 PM, Lew Schwartz wrote:

> I wonder how thoses among us who feel that the final print is the only
> thing that counts, not equipment,  feel about this issue. Photorealism, if
> it's limited to the definition Mark found on Google, is pretty much a
> printing technique.

I believe one really must SEE the painting itself
to determine on which aesthetic levels these works of art actually function.

I've seen a number of these created when the approach first hit the 
galleries.
They take your breath away in scale and technique.
As you move in and examine the surface of the painting
you may discover that they're indeed "paintings"
by talented painters (not mechanical printers)
with actual "expressive" brush strokes;
not unlike the old masters.
The difference being that they're taking into account
a significant knowledge of "how photographs look."

There's another level of "photorealism"
which uses airbrush techniques;
creating a very different aesthetic experience;
much more "photographic" appearance.

Having worked with pencils, brushes and airbrushes
I certainly respect the best of the works, artists
and their place in the history of art and painting.

> Some years ago there was a darkroom guide (by
> Fenninger?) which suggested that you could turn your photos into artistic
> drawings by projecting your negative onto a sheet of drawing paper and
> shading in until you had a uniform grey on the paper. Then, by turning off
> the enlarger & subtracting out the negative image, you're left with a
> positive drawing. The paintings in the article are what I'd call inkjet by
> hand.

Curious if you've seen the actual paintings?
or only the little pixelated copies of the paintings?

As with photography:
Content, composition, color use, scale
all must come into the discussion
and any critique of the art objects

> Doesn't apply to Chuck Close, imo.

While I agree with you about Close.
I'm curious as to why you draw a line here with him?

Regards,
George Lottermoser 
george at imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist