You just never know.
Thanks for introducing the term "high art". I can see where this thread is headed next.
Last edited:
Photographer Mark Preuschl recreates Georges Seurat's famous impressionist painting
-
A
- Thread starter VinceInMT
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale 3.25x4.25 adox CHS 100 II
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
For Sale Fuji fp3000b & Fp100c fridgestored
- Started by belichten
-
For Sale Beautiful Tenba Messenger Bag
- Started by chuckroast
Forum statistics
You just never know.
Thanks for introducing the term "high art". I can see where this thread is headed next.
The way I see it, the photos that resulted from this exercise should have the same status as pictures of monuments people take while on vacation - bookmarks of memory.
I think it was a great idea and, most importantly, seems like it was a lot of fun for everyone involved.
It's a larger-scale version of something that photographers—pros and amateurs—have been doing for a while, with many examples to be found on Instagram. Here are some samples, some quite successful, some very amusing:
50 Times People Tried To Recreate Famous Artworks And Nailed It
Ever since last December, people have been entertaining themselves by participating in an open community project called Take a photo of the Rembrandt type. The project’s feed on Vk.com already has more than 300 submissions, featuring people’s best attempts at replicating famous works of Classic Art.
www.boredpanda.com
This one I particularly admire:
Another fantastic one.
As a fun activity, it was probably a very worthwhile thing. It allowed people to pose, take direction, give direction, hang out, take pictures, have a laugh.
Copying paintings like the examples you show can be fun and educational for the people involved. Getting the light correct is a major challenge - that alone makes it worthwhile.
What's interesting is that it helps to show how "artificial", if not downright impossible, the light is in the paintings. Painters cheat, and the greatness of the artist shows in the art of not showing it. Caravaggio is a good example. There is no way to figure out where the light that slightly illuminates the face of Christ comes from — which the photo reproduction shows. Caravaggio was intelligent enough to balance the idea that we need to see the face of Christ but wouldn't believe a lighting there as strong as that on the forehead of Thomas, so he "exposed for the shadows"
and illuminated the face just enough. But that light comes from nowhere.
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure it's from his watch, which glowed to notify him someone liked his Tweet.
I'm pretty sure it's from his watch, which glowed to notify him someone liked his Tweet.
I agree. He is probably checking his heart rate.
Yes, that's the correct saying. I think we often imitate others. It's hard to think out of the box.
Another fantastic one.
Wow, talk about completely missing the point and narrative of the painting....
AI.
I was asking only about this recreation of this painting. Their goal didn't seem to be anything more than a fun activity.
Yeah, in the bottom one, Jesus is getting a suspicious rash examined by a team of doctors....
That's the internet for you. A lot of brouhaha for a "fun activity." Maybe we should be discussing kindergarten art projects, too.
Aside from that, there are a slew of photographers who seem to want to replicate paintings. Why? Because they can't paint?
Some photographers take inspiration from painters--witness the myriad of Hopper-esque photos that are churned out, in particular by Richard Tuschman. He builds miniature sets and composites the people into the scene in post.
Others use paintings as a hopping-off point to make something that has their mark on it. Like Gordon Parks' American Gothic I posted earlier. There are also some who emulate more traditional painting styles but with a sense of humor:
Photo by Hendrik Kerstens
All done with more artistry than the original subject of this thread.
Did you look at the photos? They are all attributed to different people. It was a "Let's set this up and everyone can take a picture" thing - no different from camera clubs hiring a model for the day. This may have been more fun for the models, though. This was obviously not a Gregory Crewdson project.
Why not? Is it that different from taking yet another photo of another rock or yet another photo of another sand dune? Originality is rare and also doesn't tend to generate very much. You don't get in much practice if you always need to be original. Most people who do things that are interesting aren't really that concerned with such things - they tend to only be concerned with what they're doing.
If you went to the trouble of making miniature sets and compositing real models into photos of them, would you have any concern that someone on a forum thought you wanted to replicate paintings?
First, I was not criticizing Mr. Tuschman in particular, just the lack of originality of those who duplicate paintings. I appreciate his efforts, just think the work would be more significant if it were less derivative. And maybe I'm not the only one who sees his work as lacking in value beyond the craftsmanship involved in the production. Nor do I care what he might or might not think of someone on a forum writes about his work. I wouldn't.
I don't know why you think originality is rare, I see it all the time. Quantity should not trump originality and you can be both prolific and original. And, yes, I am tired of seeing another photo of a rock, tree or sand dune. As a matter of fact, most landscapes bore the crap out of me, but that's my personal view. There are other things to photograph.
Speaking of derivative, the Chicago photographer Sandro Miller did a whole series with the actor John Malkovich recreating famous photos with Mr Malkovich being the subject. Interesting, funny, and they made a whole project of it, emulating each photographer's style. But in the end, a bit of a novelty rather than art.
Originality is rare even for the most "original" of people. It's especially rare in photography. I don't know where you could see it "all the time".
Unless you have a different idea of what "original" means.
-
- Alan Edward Klein
- Deleted
- Reason: religion
Try going to some museums and galleries, maybe more so in major markets.
I doubt they were aiming at the point and narrative of the painting. Just having fun.
{moderator's deletion of response to post concerning religion}
Last edited by a moderator:
That's a lot of effort to just have some fun. Besides, it looks like AI to me.
Artists can make light do whatever they want. The do not have to obey the laws of physics.
Last edited by a moderator:
And what will be seen there other than what is extremely rare? Not that everything in those museums and galleries will be highly original or even terribly unique - but a higher percentage will be than in other places.
And your point is?
{moderator's deletion of rsponse to deleted post, plus ensuing discussion}
Have you ever trekked for hours with a heavy backpack full of gear just to get that one shot? Lots of effort, but lots of fun—and sometimes you don't even get that shot, or it's not that great, but it doesn't matter because the effort was worth it.
If you don't understand the correlation between the two, either you don't like effort, or you don't have fun very often.
Well, it's obvious now that if I want to recreate a painting of St. Thomas, you're going to be my model
.
So this dates from around 2017-2018. Very doubtful that it could have been AI.
BTW, the tradition of tableaux vivants isn't new, dating from at least the early 19th century, if not sooner.
In a more modern context, portrait photographer Rory Lewis has done a lot of these recreations, acknowledging Caravaggio's influence in his photography.
www.rorylewis.studio
Have you ever trekked for hours with a heavy backpack full of gear just to get that one shot? Lots of effort, but lots of fun—and sometimes you don't even get that shot, or it's not that great, but it doesn't matter because the effort was worth it.
If you don't understand the correlation between the two, either you don't like effort, or you don't have fun very often.
Well, it's obvious now that if I want to recreate a painting of St. Thomas, you're going to be my model
.So this dates from around 2017-2018. Very doubtful that it could have been AI.
BTW, the tradition of tableaux vivants isn't new, dating from at least the early 19th century, if not sooner.
In a more modern context, portrait photographer Rory Lewis has done a lot of these recreations, acknowledging Caravaggio's influence in his photography.
Caravaggio Influence on my Photography — London, Los Angeles, New York Photographer — Rory Lewis: Portrait & Headshot Photographer
Welcome to the jottings of London & Los Angeles Portrait Photographer Rory Lewis, read about Rory’s latest work and exhibitions, comments always welcome.
www.rorylewis.studio
Last edited by a moderator:
You didn't read me right. Caravaggio certainly believed in light—as well as in darkness. What I doubt is that he believed in God.
Have you ever trekked for hours with a heavy backpack full of gear just to get that one shot? Lots of effort, but lots of fun—and sometimes you don't even get that shot, or it's not that great, but it doesn't matter because the effort was worth it.
If you don't understand the correlation between the two, either you don't like effort, or you don't have fun very often.
Well, it's obvious now that if I want to recreate a painting of St. Thomas, you're going to be my model
So this dates from around 2017-2018. Very doubtful that it could have been AI.
BTW, the tradition of tableaux vivants isn't new, dating from at least the early 19th century, if not sooner.
In a more modern context, portrait photographer Rory Lewis has done a lot of these recreations, acknowledging Caravaggio's influence in his photography.
Caravaggio Influence on my Photography — London, Los Angeles, New York Photographer — Rory Lewis: Portrait & Headshot Photographer
Welcome to the jottings of London & Los Angeles Portrait Photographer Rory Lewis, read about Rory’s latest work and exhibitions, comments always welcome.
Fun?
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |