•  Looks fantastic @shahin. What are the dimensions?
  • @GTO, thanks my freind. 24 by 35
  • I am a fan of your work. Lovely painting.
  • Your art is quite good, but are they all painted with the DMP method, which is what this site is about?
  • @broker12, interesting question! here's my view. I truly do not understand nor believe in a single person's so-called "method!" it almost seems like referring to someone's "ism" or "doctrine" as we would name such things as realism, impressionism, and so on. these ISMS are created naturally toward time in my view and no one can really create or add their own to them anymore. Of course, people do but people are people! All this background talk just to paint a picture for you of how I think. As to Mark, I like "some" of his work and dislike some other. For example, the movement of his brush on the one single pear he painted is the peak of realism to me at its very best but I don't necessarily feel these movements and approaches on his portraits. So, I have tones to learn on that pear approach but take a pass on some of those faces. I think it is important to understand that there is this one entity called realism. if understood properly "which I could argue that %99 of the time it isn't" then one's approach toward that versus someone"s else"s is simply a difference between your and my fingerprint. you and I, provided that we both understood realism correctly are going to naturally sing the very same song but you will still do yours in a different way than mine even though our notes are the same because we are both realists. Again realist here not to be mistaken with "paint exactly what you see since its called realism! Mark here is simply a student of realism. he is on his way toward his own growth which can not really end since realism is a dynamic notion. the idea that he has to show you and I are simply the idea of realism which says, think logically and move in abstraction, because that is how nature works. his pointers and opinions about his paint are the businessman in him and nothing more and I respect that in him and wish I could also create such business. He deserves the best because he has made his idea work both for himself and others. I think he is a great guy. his method though? I was familiar with this method long long before I knew who he was because for years I have been rowing my little boat toward realism. All roads end there! 
    I'm going to see if I can find a picture for you of someone's else's portrait and I want you to be the judge yourself when comparing. again this guy who is probably half my age is also another realist just like Mark. 
    their fundamental ideas aren't two but one. you could argue that he has succeeded to work on his faces like mark showed us on his pear! take a look at it and enjoy his so-called approach but know that it's just realist. the key is to understand realism in its truest meaning first and then to realize that once this is understood then all roads lead to the same point with millions of different fingerprints. I don't know if that answered any questions for you but take it with the grain and salt. 
  • HilaryHilary -
    edited September 2020
    broker12 said:
    Your art is quite good, but are they all painted with the DMP method, which is what this site is about?

    ‘Quite good’.  
    I don’t think that’s an accurate and fair description of the above painting. Talk about ‘damning with faint praise ‘! 
    Many of the paintings here are not adhering strictly to the DMP method. The forum would soon burn out if this were the case.  
    I’m sure Mark himself would approve of the above portrait. 

  • @shahin I agree with your take on realism.  The painting of the man in the red cap looks to be posted at the eleventh street atelier.  A Jacob Collins school.  He’s one of my favorite artists.  They are classical realists.  Sight size methods, school of Florence, etc.  
  • @Hilary, my dear friend, I really am not sure if @broker12 really had any sort of ill thoughts or purpose to his comment. He knows as well as I that my work is just a series of attempts toward something better and like all of us I make a step forward and two backward and the entire worthiness of it all for all of us is just being a part of this progress. you may have mistaken his intentions. I would want you as a bodyguard though any day  ;)
  • @GTO, I admire you. always so damn knowledgable. sometime I'm going to call you and get some more info on this. if I could paint like this I'd die happy and fulfilled. 
  • edited September 2020
    broker12 said:
    Your art is quite good, but are they all painted with the DMP method, which is what this site is about?
    You are right that it is the DMP site but there is no strict rule that does not permit any non DMP paintings.

    Consider the Drawings section, I don't think any of us that have posted in there are following DPM in our pieces.

    I don't follow Mark`s method either (I also like to blend) but I have definitely been influenced by some of his teaching.

    Just as Mark encourages those that follow his method to then go on and work in their own way I think he would welcome those who do work in other ways to contribute to the site.

    Its all good

  • Regarding the DMP method comments.  I started out exactly as Mark teaches and then when doing one of the paintings that way I noticed how a certain amount of blending brought the object into focus.  Since then I’ve continued to do some blending to try and achieve a higher degree of realism .  Here’s the post where I realized that.  The 2nd DMP.  The vase got a final very light blend to bring it into focus.

  • @Shahin, I also agree with your view on Realism.

    I don't follow the DMP method strictly either, as I use blending but with a lot less value steps (normally 5).
  • @Catlady, you're truly kind. thanks
  • @GTO, what you're saying is true. again my point of reference for absolute success is in this painting I posted of this guy. I'm not certain where in that face is "softened" as you call blending and which areas are just pure strokes. my thing at this moment and where I'm almost stuck is this need I seem to have not to soften. perhaps soften but not in a smearing kind of way. I have this thing in my head that however your brushstrokes begin to sit on the canvas should be entirely the same. for example, if you're doing the tip of a nose where it needs to be sort of marblelike texture it is natural to want to take that brush and massage the colors into one another whereas I have this idea that a better painting is one where that marblelike texture is shown but not through the massaging of the brush or even using a softer brush but with the same way that colors were roughly put next to each other like the rest of the painting. why am I so disturbed about this and so heard headed about it? I really don't know! I guess it comes down to the ability to maintain a language original plus the fact that rubbing colors into one another creates that plastic look that bothers me too much.  long story short, this seems to be a knot that many of us struggle with
  • @Richard_P :o) yes. thanks. listen, I really have pretty much "zero" disagreements with what Mark says. my only observation is that his faces are a bit too tight as compared to let's say that amazing single pear he painted a long time ago. in that sense, it seems to me that his philosophy is a bit ahead of his ability which is also very normal for any human being! 
  • @shahin I get what your saying about the visual language of the brush strokes. 
  • I'm late to this one. The girl is very well painted. The values and drawing are great. The fabric reads so well and I like what you've done with the background. 
  • @tassieguy,.... at the time it was my best. would have done it so very differently now. :o)
  • shahin said:
    @tassieguy,.... at the time it

    was my best. would have done it so very differently now. :o)
    I’m curious to know what you would do differently with this portrait @shahin
    How do you think it could be improved? 
    This is a genuine question. I hope you don’t mind my asking it. 
    The beautiful floaty feeling of the fabric is surely something you wouldn’t want to change ? Her face ? Her hair ? Her skin ? The background? 
    What could you possibly want to do differently? 
    I’m pretty sure the girl herself would have been more than happy with how you’ve portrayed her. You have made her look like a goddess ! 
    The pose and the ethereal fabric and background just work so perfectly. 
    So please tell me your thoughts on how you would now approach the commission differently. 

  • @Hilary,... well that's an easy one to answer. I think brush strokes evolve. that much is certain in my case sofar anyway. Strokes evolve, the thickness of paint on canvas evolves, and also the texture of the strokes on canvas evolve. so, let's say the fabric I painted on her. today I would have done that with only a thousand percent more and thicker paste and yet maybe shown a thousand times softer and more real texture of that material.  same goes for the skin and the same goes for the hair. the background is a licked up surface on that painting. today, I would have scratched the crap out of it with a thicker amount of paint that would have still given you the depth that I wanted to achieve.  all this happens in a four-frame of realism though. I'm not sure if this evolution would or really could occur through any other doctrines of painting as I personally don't consider them dynamic enough? 
Sign In or Register to comment.