Jantz,
Wow. Great observation.
It is interesting to compare the Wagner to the Cobb. Both shots are from the same perspective, but opposite sides of the plate.
Cobb does stand out more than Wagner, between the two. Cobb def has a more 3D effect. In the Wagner, the stands and all the detail do lessen the impact of his figure. Still, there is something to be said for seeing that stadium in all it's glory. The colors, crowd and all those little things help bring me back to that specific setting to feel what it would've been like to to be there.
I think this is a matter of taste. I certainly would be happy with the Cobb as is. Welll, maybe a little more detail to the background. Though I'm sure it will look spectacular, in all it's glory, when fully detailed.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
And Graig, we all have beheld a lot of beauty in this thread.

BTW, how did the final Old Pete come out?

Mark

graig- awesome work. not sure if you have explained this in the past, but i'd love to know what your process is? how do you take the images from the photos and transport them to the canvas? can you explain the pencil marks on the canvas and how you use them, etc, etc...truly great work.

Jantz, it's interesting that you would say that. Normally, in traditional realistic/figurative painting, the artist usually attempts to draw the viewer's eyes to a certain area of the work. More often than not, said area will be more developed than the other areas, whether it's more refined, has a larger range of values, or has the most chromatic color. I guess in the Cobb painting, the eye goes to the most complete part - Cobb himself. The other stuff does indeed become secondary, and its representation becomes less important. In that regard, I'm free to be a little bit more liberal with edges, color contrasts and temperatures. It's really cool that both you and Mark are aware that that's how the brain can work. Honestly, that's something that I think a lot of artists miss out on. But, I guess that in the end, I could never purposely leave the painting 'unfinished' like that, as I'll always want to include as much visual information as possible. If nothing else, it's one of the only ways to satiate my OCD!!

Mark, I'm just so glad you guys are enjoying this stuff, no matter what state the art is in!! Ol' Pete is indeed complete. I'll have to post or send you a scan when I get home on Tuesday morning.

MVSNYC, regarding the drawings on the canvas, well, let's just say that it's a lot of comparing and fixing and comparing and fixing. I pretty much work on getting all of the proportions down with basic shapes, and then from there, get into small shapes. That's actually what you end up seeing in those little squiggly lines. It kind of ends up being a topographical map, as I end up thinking of the image in terms of light and dark shapes, rather than line. When doing realistic work, I find that it's important to have this kind of attitude to get the effects I want. I guess one of my main concerns ends up being whether the objects sit in a realistic space, and that's really done best when light is treated in such a way. Actually, that's just what works best for me, and certainly not the gospel. If you're interested in knowing anything more specific, drop me a line and I'll fill you in as much as possible!

Thanks again, fellas...

:)

thanks for your response! your talent & process is so fascinating! my dad is an abstract artist, so i have always had a love for art...my personal collection is mostly abstract expressionism, but i certainly admire and love photo realism as well. amazing work, my friend...so you do it all by eye, comparing photo to canvas, back to photo? there's no overlay or projected image on canvas, etc? truly remarkable! i'll PM you about some pricing.

Hey Graig,

It facinates me how you break a large painting down to such minute detail right from the sketch stage with all those "squiggly lines". I guess thats what separates you from the rest. Being able to look at a photo and see all that detail and variation. I hope Dean gets around to video taping you. I'd love to see how exactly you fill in and paint around all that squigglyness.

BTW is that T206 Wagner done? Curious to see the finished product.

Mark, here's Ol' Pete!!

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...r_1928_Smi.jpg

Phil, Wagner isn't done yet. Actually, I have yet to touch it since I last posted. I had to put it aside for a bunch of other stuff, but will hopefully finish it up soon, as it only needs about another full day of work.

And the squiggly lines...well...let's just say I'm going insane. Or HAVE gone insane. It's at the point where I just see shapes and nothing else. Wait until you see your painting!!

:)

Surprise...Shock...Awe...:eek:
As if I didn't know it would be magnificent.:rolleyes:
Another beauty.
I wish I had the money for them all.
Mark

Graig,
Your work is magnificent. Just one question? Why is nothing hanging in the Hall of Fame? Wake up Cooperstown!

Thanks Tom!! I would love to have something hanging in Cooperstown, but they're a few hurdles to jump over. Unfortunately, as you may or may not know, they NEVER buy anything, whether it's a painting or an artifact. They're always expected people to donate their stuff to the place, especially since they were pretty much founded under that very concept.

Under normal circumstances, I would be alright with such a thing (though ideally I would love to have the museum actually purchase something), but, if they did get a donated painting, they couldn't guarantee that it would stay in their permanent collection. What that means is that it can basically sit in a warehouse forever and never see the light of day, be sold at a fund-raising auction, or who knows?

I'll admit, it would be awesome to say that the Hall of Fame owns some of my work, but I think if there was any way that they could actually approach me and purchase something, or at least guarantee that the painting would stay in their permanent collection, I'd be MUCH more inclined...

Maybe one day...

Graig,
I know they cannot promise that it will always be on display, but I am not aware of any fund-raising sales of donated artifacts. In fact, it is my understanding that the HOF artifacts once donated become the property of the State of New York. In the early 1980s, the Hall loaned some memorabilia to MLB and it ended up being sold by an employee in the Commissioner's office. When that became public, it created a public relations nightmare for the HOF that took years to die down. Obviously, folks do not want to donate artifacts if the HOF isn't going to keep them. I still hope to see your work in Cooperstown one day soon.