WWM 2010 - Richard Schmid Panel Discussion part 1 of 7

The discussion was thorough and perhaps esoteric to some, but it was great discussion by a masterful panel of artists. This was only a small portion of the wonder that was Weekend with the Masters 2010. Enjoy. (Please forgive my poor hand-held camera work.)

Description:
On the first official night of the Weekend With the Masters event, Richard Schmid lead a panel discussion on the importance and tradition of painting from life. This discussion covered the artists of the past who pioneered this practice and also examined the effects of an over-reliance on photography today. Included in this discussion was the broader topic of technology as a whole, whether our past and present modern inventions are a hindrance or help to the traditional artist, as well as other thought-provoking questions.

About me:
If you are interested, you can learn more about me and my art at www.taaronparsons.com/blog. Thanks for watching.

To watch this series as seamless playlist, go here: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=26D2A8DF27A86AC9

Note: The few missing portions are due to camera malfunction, audio quality too poor to include, or my tired camera-holding arm. This represents about 98% of the discussion.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Weekend With the Masters 2010
• Richard Schmid
• Carolyn Anderson
• Scott Burdick
• Rose Frantzen
• Daniel Gerhartz
• Quang Ho
• Jeremy Lipking
• Sherrie McGraw
• panel discussion
• photography
• painting
• tracing
• projecting
• drawing
• painting from life
• traditional art
• representational art
• resurgence of traditional art

[junfanjkjd]

What a destructive, myopic, arrogant discussion for contemporary realism. Shameful.

[taaronparsons]

@junfanjkjd fair enough. i would hope to have seen such a comment on part 7, after you've had a chance to watch the entire discussion. thanks nevertheless for the comment. this is, after all, an open dialogue in a marketplace of ideas in which all ideas are subject to scrutiny. may the ideas that resound in truth be left standing.

thanks again.

[skipstah70]

From those of us who never got a chance to see this, thank you much for posting it!

[taaronparsons]

@skipstah70 you're welcome!

[taaronparsons]

@brushfour44 well said. and yes, Gerhartz is up there with Sorolla for sure. That's great that you've had the opportunity to paint with a modern master.

Thanks for watching!

[brushfour44]

Sargent/Sorolla both used photos. You paint from life so you can adjust and borrow from photo references and paint with authority. I've painted with Gerhartz twice. He paints 95% of his works directly from life, and the other 5% he works from photos and studies (namely edge studies) rendered from life. In my opinion Dan has equaled or even surpassed Sorolla with a few of his paintings. The power and duration of the artistic expression is the great determiner, not whether photos were used or not.

[junfanjkjd]

@2manysecrets2 Your anger and emotion tells me you are either a student, a relative or someone in a close relationship with one or more of the people on the panel. Your views also scream student, who most have no clue as to the real world of painting. The point of my statements on this video is that although there are some very skilled painters on the panel, none are masters and their self indulgent, self important discussion is myopic at best. Painting should teach, not misinform. Good luck.

[2manysecrets2]

@junfanjkjd : Fair enough. But they are THEIR opinions, not yours.. "Peder Monstad" is the greatest landscape artist?! Your opinon (a silly one).

You are no working artist, realist or whatever..no genuine working artist would ever write this crap.

And those who work from photographs are working from their vast experience working from life. As experienced as they may be, it will never compare to painting from nature.

Youve expressed nothing but your ignorance.

[2manysecrets2]

@junfanjkjd Usually I would not take time to respond to such a fool.

Your bookish immaturity and ignorance are overwhelming.

This discussion was "destructive, myopic, arrogant"? When I view this as well as other claptrap below, it does nothing but embarrass yourself. You use the anonymity of the internet for this?!

Such people are at best academics, which you are not, learning to swim on a sofa. While they swim in the ocean every day.

Return to your parent's basement and practice karate.

[junfanjkjd]

@mittROMNEY666 Ahhh, the element of cheating which is wrapped in insecurity which derives from one telling oneself that one is a failure Barry Bonds Blows. Well, only brain washed students, insecure failures or elitist nobody has beens that have never accomplished anything in painting make such claims. This is usually taught by a teacher who is a failure, or in an art institution that has little relevance. You poor student, a rough road lies ahead for you. Kill your instructor immediately.

[mittROMNEY666]

@junfanjkjd and i suppose you think barry bonds is better than hank aaron? no matter how many famous artists you line up, using photo ref still makes you a fraud.

[junfanjkjd]

@mittROMNEY666 Bullshit! Peder Monstad the greatest landscape painter who ever lived used photography. Your a hack if your painting sucks, regardless if you paint from photos or life. Take off your blinders and see the truth. The two greatest masters living today use some photography, Odd Nerdrum and Steven Assael, I know i studied with both. Rockwell blows Schmid out of the water, everyone knows it. Only a Moron would call Rockwell and Parrish a hack.

[mittROMNEY666]

@junfanjkjd if you use photos, youre a hack. sorry, time to face the truth. just because famous hacks like rockwell parrish etc used photos does not make it ok.