• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

MODERN/ IMPRESSIONIST RESULTS,...November 1 - CHRISTIES

Started by krazykat-migration,

120 posts in this topic

tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
Here's a link to a story about how popular the 76 Kong artwork was when it was first shown.

76 Kong Poster Story

Thanks Sean. Excellent article, and this particular quote took me back because it's also how I saw the poster for the first time:

 

My first glimpse of the image—and I remember the moment very well—occurred in my 6th grade classroom as I unfolded the poster from the back of a brand new DYNAMITE magazine, the Scholastic School Book Club’s “hip” periodical. Mrs. Tepley had just handed out the new book orders (remember how exciting book order day was?) and I couldn’t wait to see the giant gorilla. My friends Lonnie and Todd gathered in to share the experience.

 

No disputing it's a great and vivid poster, but its legacy is undoubtedly diluted by the fact that it's associated with a mediocre movie that most people have likely forgotten. How many of our Gen Xers or younger members here have actually seen it? From the 70s alone, painted posters like Jaws, Star Wars, Raiders, etc. would have to rank well above.

 

I

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted
Here's a link to a story about how popular the 76 Kong artwork was when it was first shown.

76 Kong Poster Story

 

that was a great story. Thanx.

 

But Steve - - seriously, take another look at it. I could swear Kong is painted on top of a C-print of teh WTC. And the city etc is also repainted. The WTC could have been painted painstakingly by hand, but its just too perfectly realistic. Even tracing over photographic reference as he did for the buildings and all of the NJ side, its just NOT what an artists wants to get bogged down in... metal structures in perfectly parallel pattern - - IN PERSPECTIVE!!!!! is a horrorshow that any artist would take the shortcut on...

 

hey Red Hook. You know this stuff too. Doesnt this look like a collage? I might be all wet and Steve can just blow me away by taking a closer look at the painting itself. But just the sides of the North tower look like a photograph. The rest is clearly painted...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rob_react

rob_react

Posted
Posted

 

But Steve - - seriously, take another look at it. I could swear Kong is painted on top of a C-print of teh WTC. And the city etc is also repainted. The WTC could have been painted painstakingly by hand, but its just too perfectly realistic.

 

Assume, that the painting is much larger than you're seeing it here. Assume then, that any not-so-perfect brush strokes are hidden by the reduction to a tiny 72 DPI image.

 

Even ignoring that, remember then that there are people whose entire oeuvre is perfect photo realistic paintings (Art mags are full of them- "is that a photograph?")

 

Remember also, that this is an INCREDIBLY high profile job for which the artist was probably paid an arm and a leg and would want to deliver "the goods" on.

 

 

Even tracing over photographic reference as he did for the buildings and all of the NJ side, its just NOT what an artists wants to get bogged down in... metal structures in perfectly parallel pattern - - IN PERSPECTIVE!!!!!

 

Perspective is only a technical problem in the preparatory drawing. Painting in perspective is like any other kind of painting once the right lines are down. It's not like you have to hold the brush in your teeth. If you've got the technical perspective issues down a straight line is a straight line is a straight line.

 

is a horrorshow that any artist would take the shortcut on...

 

Finally, you'd be surprised what some people enjoy. I have one, on topic, name to offer: Gerhard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

 

But Steve - - seriously, take another look at it. I could swear Kong is painted on top of a C-print of teh WTC. And the city etc is also repainted. The WTC could have been painted painstakingly by hand, but its just too perfectly realistic.

 

Assume, that the painting is much larger than you're seeing it here. Assume then, that any not-so-perfect brush strokes are hidden by the reduction to a tiny 72 DPI image.

 

agreed, so I looked at a Heritage scan of the poster and the realism id deadon, though, In seeing it at a higher resolution, I no longer think the rest o fthe background is painted over a photo. Just the steel columning on the sides of the WTC. And the rooftops are obviously painted since the South tower had an observation deck which is not in the poster.

 

Even ignoring that, remember then that there are people whose entire oeuvre is perfect photo realistic paintings (Art mags are full of them- "is that a photograph?")

 

Remember also, that this is an INCREDIBLY high profile job for which the artist was probably paid an arm and a leg and would want to deliver "the goods" on.

 

Yes there are... Berkey I do not think was one of them. Look at his very brushy style everywhere else on the poster.

 

 

Even tracing over photographic reference as he did for the buildings and all of the NJ side, its just NOT what an artists wants to get bogged down in... metal structures in perfectly parallel pattern - - IN PERSPECTIVE!!!!!

 

Perspective is only a technical problem in the preparatory drawing. Painting in perspective is like any other kind of painting once the right lines are down. It's not like you have to hold the brush in your teeth. If you've got the technical perspective issues down a straight line is a straight line is a straight line.

 

well, no. Have you ever done any commercial artwork? Thats why I asked Red Hook his opinion. The problem with this specific subject matter, parallel steel structures in perspective with a precise shortening of the distance between each pair of steel columns is NOT EASY! Not even easy to trace! Because the actual thickness of your line affects the illusion, either adding to the space between or the thickness of the steel columns and the human eye immediately goes to "what's wrong". So in each scan Ive seen, the side of the WTC is PERFECT, thats why Im interested to see if Steve looking at the original can tell me whats what...

 

is a horrorshow that any artist would take the shortcut on...

 

Finally, you'd be surprised what some people enjoy. I have one, on topic, name to offer: Gerhard.

 

I know some guys like Gerhard get off on detail work. Its soothing and mindless and a challenge. But - - there would still be human error that gives it away as being reproduced by hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rob_react

rob_react

Posted
Posted

agreed, so I looked at a Heritage scan of the poster and the realism id deadon, though, In seeing it at a higher resolution, I no longer think the rest o fthe background is painted over a photo. Just the steel columning on the sides of the WTC. And the rooftops are obviously painted since the South tower had an observation deck which is not in the poster.

 

We can assume that the poster is larger still than the heritage scan so at that level you would probably see that everything is "obviously painted."

 

Even ignoring that, remember then that there are people whose entire oeuvre is perfect photo realistic paintings (Art mags are full of them- "is that a photograph?")

Yes there are... Berkey I do not think was one of them. Look at his very brushy style everywhere else on the poster.

 

I wasn't saying that he was. I was saying that it's more than POSSIBLE for people to do work like that. You're basically stating that it's impossible and that it has to be a photograph when that's just not the case.

 

 

Even tracing over photographic reference as he did for the buildings and all of the NJ side, its just NOT what an artists wants to get bogged down in... metal structures in perfectly parallel pattern - - IN PERSPECTIVE!!!!!

 

Perspective is only a technical problem in the preparatory drawing. Painting in perspective is like any other kind of painting once the right lines are down. It's not like you have to hold the brush in your teeth. If you've got the technical perspective issues down a straight line is a straight line is a straight line.

 

well, no. Have you ever done any commercial artwork?

 

Yes.

 

Thats why I asked Red Hook his opinion. The problem with this specific subject matter, parallel steel structures in perspective with a precise shortening of the distance between each pair of steel columns is NOT EASY!

 

If you're preparatory drawings are correct, it's not impossible.

 

Not even easy to trace! Because the actual thickness of your line affects the illusion, either adding to the space between or the thickness of the steel columns and the human eye immediately goes to "what's wrong". So in each scan Ive seen, the side of the WTC is PERFECT, thats why Im interested to see if Steve looking at the original can tell me whats what...

 

I'm not Frazetta but I can draw a pencil thin line with a #2 Windsor Newton Series 7 brush (not a small brush at all) and a ruler that you couldn't see variation in at the level of resolution we're talking about here. Free hand I can lay down a curved line as long as a comic art board that would have no visible line weight variation at this resolution. And that's with no overpainting to clean up errors. So it's not so crazy to me that someone could paint a straight line. That's ignoring the obvious tool called MASKING THE LINES OFF.

 

is a horrorshow that any artist would take the shortcut on...

 

Finally, you'd be surprised what some people enjoy. I have one, on topic, name to offer: Gerhard.

 

I know some guys like Gerhard get off on detail work. Its soothing and mindless and a challenge. But - - there would still be human error that gives it away as being reproduced by hand.

 

Not necessarily and definitely not at this resolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red Hook

Red Hook

Posted
Posted

Being pretty familiar with Berkey's body of work, Aman is right in saying that his work "normally" is very brushy, I call it high-tech impressionism.....I mean look at the jet that Kong has in his hand......it's just shapes......giving the impression of more detail than is reall there. That's Berkey's genius.

 

I'd say the the twin towers were definitely based on photo reference, which he probably projected on to his board or canvas (what's this thing painted on?) and is more realisticall painted than most of the rest of his work....who knows, maybe he had an assistanct do the lines. But they're painted for sure. I mean, if you were getting $25G or more for a piece like that at the time....you'd give them whatever they wanted and take your time.

 

Red

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

I took another look. And now I see that the Empire state Bldg is way too big considering its a few miles away, so rather than just starting with one photo, clearly he assembled the bkgrnd from pieces to enhance the effects....

 

And in looking at the Heritage scan of the 9.4 copy that my search didnt find last night) the steel stuff does appear to have brushstrokes and vary in thickness etc as only a painting would. I was just approaching this piece as I would have solved it, and thinking back to the technlogies of the time... So unless Steve comes on and sez "goshdernit Aman - - I never noticed that before!"... I'll go along with the painted majority on this after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
delekkerste

delekkerste

Posted
Posted
I took another look. And now I see that the Empire state Bldg is way too big considering its a few miles away, so rather than just starting with one photo, clearly he assembled the bkgrnd from pieces to enhance the effects...

 

I was at Metro this weekend and can confirm that the piece is all painted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
krazykat-migration

krazykat-migration

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I took another look. And now I see that the Empire state Bldg is way too big considering its a few miles away, so rather than just starting with one photo, clearly he assembled the bkgrnd from pieces to enhance the effects...

 

I was at Metro this weekend and can confirm that the piece is all painted.

 

Yep, all painted. Saw her with my own 2 peepers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing