The question re mains, where does the noes end ant the cheek start?
That area alone would be of little value.
mando
On Oct 5, 2008, at 8:43 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think Chris's point has its merits, as long as it's made clear it
all
depends on the effect the "artist" wants his work to have.
For example, in photography I've seen photos meant to "portray" a
central
figure but our feeling for and into her was enhanced by showing her
standing
in
the midst of devastation around her (from war, flood, plague). Other
photographers with other aims deliberately want our focus to be on
solely this
rich,
revealing face. I've seen many photos of Abraham Lincoln in situ.
None of
them
compares in impact on me with the ones that are solely head-shots,
with all
"background" eliminated.
It may be my limited visualizing ability that prompts me to say
that the
"edges of the canvas" seem to me largely irrelevant in those
photos. Yes, I
can
imagine someone's cropping down to just Lincoln's eyes to create
what is in
effect a different photo. But once the photographer's aim is to
make it a full
head-shot, I feel background could detract from the desired impact,
and that,
as long as the entire head is presented, the photographer can
acheve his aim
with minimal concern for what the framer does.
In a message dated 10/5/08 11:18:46 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'd be more interested in following Miller's assessments of what
mattered
to painters in premodernist times if he had actual evidence in the
way of
their commentary to back him up. Instead we are left his own
interpretations
which have no support in history. His reference to the supposedly
unfinished
portions of paintings is not any indication that the artist didn't
care
about
subordinate areas because degrees of refinement are no guide to
quality and
primary and secondary or tertiary areas in an artwork are equally
important
to
the whole.
Anyone who has ever painted a portrait or still life in a
traditional manner
knows how important it is to create a sense of atmosphere
enveloping the
objects depicted (both in back and in front). That is the assured
way to
suggest the fullness of round objects. All the great portrait
painters up
to the
late Baroque did that. One can't paint the area around something
with the
goal
of making it seem like real atmosphere and regard it as
inconsequential at
the same time. Velasquez, arguably one of the best portrait
painters in
western art, gave special attention to that issue, as did, of course,
Rembrandt,
and let's not forget it was Leonardo himself who explicated the
importance
of
aerial perspective, which is another term for atmospheric
illusionism.
One more thing: Portrait painters know that the least important
features to
portray are the eyes, mouth, nose; the most important are the
relationships
among them. They also know that it's wise to keep the features a
bit vague
so that the viewer will see the person they project. And people
always like
what they "see" more than what another sees. Even Jacques David
knew that.
When he finished one of his most edifying portraits of Napoleon,
the emperor
was said to reply that David didn't paint him as he was but as the
people
saw
him. Napoleon, always imitating Alexander the Great, believed
that as
Alexander never sat for his portrait, neither would he, knowing
that for a
leader
it's better to be idealized than shown as nature provides.
All of this points to the significance of the flat plane of the
painting
surface, originally -- and perhaps always -- an architectural
feature,
whether
or not perspectival and atmospheric illusionism is sought. It's a
fool's
game
to imagine that artists were visually dumber in one time than in
another. I
think ample historical evidence justifies how artists "converse"
across
centuries or millennia.
Even in literature, writers know that incident, a well chosen
detail or some
slight event brings a character to life, fully imagined and
animate. The
same is true in painting. And 'also' (to use a word made famous
by Ms.
Palin)
no sculptor of any repute ever ignores the space around his work,
but in
fact
employs it as essential to expression.
'Also', owner's marks on Asian artworks are like marginalia in
medieval
manuscripts. Space was alloted for the purpose in both types of
work.
WC
**************
New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.
Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out!
(http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000001)
