Differences between Photographic and Painted Portraiture

2138 Words5 Pages

Differences between Photographic and Painted Portraiture

In this essay I hope to define some of the fundamental differences

between the above two methods. I will discuss the advantages and

disadvantages of each as vehicles of portraiture. However, this is a

very wide question and though it has great scope for deeper analysis,

lack of words and space has prevented me from exploring each point in

more detail here.

When addressing this subject, I feel it is very important to recognise

that artists have very different objectives when creating a portrait.

For some, a portrait may simply be a study of physical likeness

whereas for others it may be a study of the sitter’s character, their

inner personality. This distinction makes it a challenging task to

compare photographic and painterly ideas of what a portrait consists

of.

I must also draw attention to the fact that photography has been

caught up in an everlasting struggle to be recognised as a fine art in

its own right. When first discovered, photography threw painted

portraits to the sidelines of the art scene because of its obvious

technological and economical advantages. Many people at the time

thought nothing could exceed these imitations as portrayals of people.

However, it was not long before photography was slated badly by many.

Artists regarded photographs as mere regurgitations and made clear

that ‘…imagination, rather than imitation is required of art.’[1]

On the contrary it has been said that photography was a new means of

pursuing the ends of painting.[2] This is the view that photography

was a continuance of painting which took one step further and opened

many doors to new innovative ideas which could be applied to

portraiture. Gombrich said of photography: ‘It has drawn attention to

the paradox of capturing life in a still, of freezing the play of

features in an arrested moment of which we may never be aware in the

flux of events.’[3] Along this train of thought, one can see that

photography helped artists achieve something other pictorial media

could not. An example of this use of photography can be seen in

photorealist artist, Chuck Close. Close’s works are paintings of

photographs much more than paintings of the people themselves. He

relied on creating an exact copy of the photograph to compose his

pictures, including details such as the slightly out ...

... middle of paper ...

...istory 1839-1900

Cambridge University Press (1997)

J.Friday Aesthetics and Photography Ashgate (2002)

J. Woodall ed. Portraiture: Facing the Subject Manchester University

Press (1997)

Sources consulted but not cited

G Clarke ed The Portrait in Photography Reaktion Books (1992)

M Rogers Camera Portraits Oxford University Press (1989)

---------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] A. Scharf, Art and Photography, Penguin Books (1968) p.47

[2] J. Friday, Aesthetics and Photography, Ashgate (2002)

[3] E.H.Gombrich, The Image and the Eye, Phaidon, Oxford, (1982) p,116

[4] J. Woodall ed, Portraiture: Facing the Subject, Manchester

University Press (1997) p.126

[5] Woodall, p.128

[6] This is of course excluding editing, altering and airbrushing

which can be applied to a photograph after its completion.

[7] S.West, Portraiture Oxford University Press (2004) p.1

[8] Gombrich, p.115

[9] Woodall, p.240

[10] Woodall, p.240

[11] Gombrich, P.106-7

[12] M.W.Marien Photography and Its Critics: A Cultural History

1839-1900 Cambridge University Press (1997) p.97

[13] Gombrich, p.118

[14] West p.48

Open Document