Showing posts with label photorealism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label photorealism. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 11, 2023

Dylan Eakin: Master of Charcoal Photorealism

 After the invention of the camera, there was a question about the need for artists to paint fine detail anymore. After all, portraits of wealthy people with their riches on display could be memorialized by the camera. Yet, certain artists continued to work successfully in the technique of photorealism. 


 

 

These artists caused viewers to wonder in the hand/eye skills of the fine details no matter how subtle. The technique brought into photorealism the knowledge of art, draftsmanship and media such as paint or pencils. (

 

 

Recently, I learned of an artist, Dylan Eakin, who uses charcoal as the base for his portraits. Charcoal for photorealism seemed messy and inexact.  Eakin, who graduated in sculpture, but by 2016 began to train himself in charcoal portraiture also uses graphite for fine detail. 



With the amount of detail that each piece requires, Eakin spends about 200 hours on a single 18"x24" piece. That is the equivalent of almost a month!

Here are examples of his portraits of  faces and hands... truly a master!







Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Why Not Just Take a Photo?

Before photography, hyperrealism was important because people wanted records of events, possessions, and ceremonies.There was only one way to accomplish that goal - hire an artist. (17th Century Flemish paintings)
Since photography came into its own in the late 1800s, artists were free to paint in more abstract manners. The movement that comes to mind as exemplifying this freedom was Impressionism.

Yet, today, there are certain artists who paint works that are referred to as "photorealism." They are so technically masterful that often the question arises, "Is that a photo or a painting?"

There have been several recent articles written about visual artists who paint photorealistically (hyperrealism). The thrust of these articles is to ask the question, "What's the point? "

Those who disagree that photography has replaced hyperrealistic painting insist that a photograph cannot capture what the hand of a painter can do - greater depth of field, understanding of nature, combinations of real and imagined.

Below are the works of three well-known photorealistic painters. The question is: Where do you think? Would it be just as well to take a photo? (click on image to enlarge)
Roberto Bernardi: (Oils)

Steve Mills: (Oils)

Eric Christensen: (Watercolor)
(He also has a video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?disv=RNKk9G-Yzjk)