Guest article.

The year 1839 has gone down in history as the year photography appeared. French artist and the inventor L. Daguerre obtained a stable image of the photographed person. The invention was called daguerreotype. The main difference between a daguerreotype and modern photography was to get a positive image rather than a negative one. The photograph was obtained in a single copy.

Due to the low sensitivity of the first daguerreotypes, the exposure time during shooting ranged from tens of minutes to several hours. Not every adult could maintain a motionless pose, and it was practically impossible to photograph children. In Europe, at this time, the custom of taking photographs appeared. dead people as if alive. Portraits of artists were quite expensive, many times higher than the cost of a daguerreotype. Representatives of poorer classes now have the opportunity to order memorable photographs.

IN Victorian era the attitude towards death was different, different from the position modern society. Families of that time had traditions of keeping strands of hair and scraps of clothing from deceased relatives. Photograph dead woman and a lock of her hair was covered in a medallion and hung on her chest. American scientist D. Mainwald admitted that such photographs were a way to cope with pain and sadness for a departed family member.

By photographing dead people as if they were alive, relatives wanted to preserve the last moment loved one. Such a photograph could be the only image of the deceased. In the Victorian era, there was a high mortality rate among children; it was not always possible to photograph a child while he was alive. The parents lovingly kept the photo of the deceased all their lives.

Photographers invented different techniques to create the effect of a living portrait. Living people were photographed with deceased relatives. During filming, the children were made to look alive: they were dressed in beautiful clothes, sat on chairs, took pictures with their favorite toys. We drew the eyes, making them open. The deceased were seated in natural positions of living people. The face of an adult could be given a thoughtful expression. The child was laid down as if he had just fallen asleep. The children were decorated with flowers. The posing child could be on the lap of a dead mother. A smiling mother could sit with dead baby on hands. Traditionally, adults were photographed in a sitting position, lavishly decorating the surrounding area with flowers. The entourage in the photograph was the beloved things of deceased people during their lifetime, pets.

The photographers used special equipment during the shooting. Tripods and brackets helped to give the desired pose dead man. To dead women they could let their hair down to cover the tripod. On vintage photographs sometimes poorly disguised brackets are visible. One of the photographs shows a girl sitting at a table. The table covers the lower part of the body, which is missing from the dead woman - it was run over by a train.

The tradition of keeping photographs of dead people taken as if they were alive still exists in some European countries. With the development of photography technology, the custom of photographing dead people as if they were alive has become a thing of the past. Habitual in late XIX centuries, such photographs evoke mixed feelings among our contemporaries. In some photographs, the gaze of the deceased seems to look straight into the soul.

Photographs of the deceased have now become collectibles and objects of study for researchers. Thomas Harris, an American collector, explains his fascination by the fact that such photographs make one think about the priceless gift of life.

Now the fashion for painting portraits has reappeared, it is prestigious, and many representatives of the middle and upper classes, ordering a portrait from dear artist, thereby emphasizing their position in society. Let’s not dwell now on the fact that hanging portraits of yourself on walls or giving portraits of yourself as a gift is simply bad taste, and true aristocrats quite rightly considered it plebeianism. Let's look at other aspects of this craze.

There are many examples from fiction and documentary literature when one or another person who ordered a portrait of himself soon left our busy world. Moreover, some artists, even from the galaxy of great ones, enjoyed unfavorable fame in the field of painting portraits. For example, such fame was given to I. E. Repin. Some religions, particularly Islam, simply prohibit depicting specific people. The same can be said about Judaism - after all, there is generally a principle “Do not make yourself an idol.” And among Christians, iconoclastic sentiments are quite strongly developed. And a drawing that bears a portrait resemblance to a living person is, of course, a kind of idol, an object for adoration and worship. However, more on all this a little later. A portrait is an extremely magical thing, so making images is one of the oldest forms of magic, known almost throughout the world.

Naturally, I want to understand why this is so, what is the reason for such attractiveness and sometimes bad fame of the portrait. First, let's think about the reasons why a person commissions a portrait. This could be an attempt to capture the moment, for example, ordering a portrait of a loved one or your children. A kind of time stop. This is not a photograph for you to take (although a portrait photograph professionally done in a studio is the same portrait). Thus, the portrait becomes a landmark thing, dividing life before and after the portrait. Some kind of comparison inevitably begins, as it was then, as it is now.

If a person orders his own portrait myself, there are also problems here with the same time, self-esteem, and self-worth. How you need to love yourself in order to imprint yourself in time. But you should remember: in order to include such complex concept As time goes by in your life, you have to be a very experienced professional. A professional in... magic. Trying to outsmart time or play with it is a very risky business: this is complex magic and you need to be able to do it. It is possible, quite possible, to order your portrait if you can afford it. Besides, why expose yourself to such a risk? “What does it consist of?” - you ask. The image of any individual was considered magical. Using it, you can directly influence a person both for his benefit and for his evil.

Therefore, images of people were often made in order to cure or send illness, to create or destroy love, to waste or increase wealth, to bring success or failure to any endeavor. They used figurines made of clay or wax, used an existing portrait, or symbolically used some object that was given human outlines.

In the latter case, there could be no question of any portrait resemblance; ritual was much more important here. In the Middle Ages, a wave of divination and magic of this kind swept across Europe, and it was imprinted in the form of a deep fear of secret revenge or evil machinations. Now it's all terrible creativity again found its admirers and, of course, numerous literature appeared, seemingly teaching all these techniques.

We wrote “seemingly educational” for a reason. Of course, such literature can teach in a very, very relative way. But for a person who is prone to some kind of magical actions, who intuitively feels something, this kind of book can seriously push him in one direction or another. And this is very dangerous! Previously, such actions were equated to serious crimes and punished accordingly; this stopped many. What do you think, “evil churchmen” created the Inquisition from scratch?

It is very difficult to escape from magical actions. Unless you can attract another such specialist to your side. But this, as you understand, is war. It is necessary to discover the image made by someone as soon as possible and immediately destroy it with fire. And even this is not always enough.

Therefore, be careful with your images, don’t throw your photos anywhere and try to take less photographs in general and send your photos anywhere on the Internet. Do not pose for unknown artists and, in any case, take your portrait from them. Better yet, don’t multiply your images at all, don’t tease the geese.

When we were guessing from portraits which people were married, someone wrote about this image of the queen that one could guess that the picture was painted after her death, by the expression on her face and how she did not meet her husband’s eyes. This is not ironclad proof, but it gave me a desire to talk about how the “posthumous portrait” genre works and what nuances it has.

And here are several portraits of the same people. Can you guess which one was written from a living person and which from a dead person?

***
What it is?
“Posthumous portraits” are completely normal paintings depicting completely normal “living” people. That is, these are by no means “deathbed portraits”, when the artist depicted a corpse. No, it’s just a painting, the need to create which arose when the model had already left this world. For example, like me last time, if a person decided that in addition to the portrait of his father, he needed a portrait of his mother. Or if the palace needs to be decorated with a magnificent portrait of the emperor who built it, and all the existing ones are somehow small. An important nuance: these posthumous portraits try to preserve a portrait likeness, that is, they are based on a real sample, portrait or sketch made from life, during life. If there is no such thing, and the newly created portraits are drawn entirely from scratch (like Rurik and Oleg in the “Tsar’s Titular Book” of the 17th century, or El Cid in the Spanish portrait gallery of ancestors of the 19th century), then these are fictitious, “retrospective portraits.”

Sometimes they can be easily identified, sometimes difficult (in most cases these are just copies of paintings painted during life; we don’t count them, we need the author’s original concepts).
Let's try to isolate some of their features.

For example, a dead man in a new portrait intended to glorify him, usually more beautiful than in a painting painted from life. Since the artist already knows what he is famous for (and why the painting was needed), he seems to be surrounded by a certain aura of fame. The skin may even glow in a different way. We clearly see that there is a HERO or Ancestor here. Well, or the deceased wife, written for a saddened and still in love widower.

1) Zh.M. Nattier. "Portrait of Peter I", 1717 (lifetime)
2) P. Delaroche. "Portrait of Peter the Great". 1838 (posthumous)

Another picture can be more polished, ceremonial, filled with speaking attributes, turning not into a portrait, but some kind of historical painting almost with the plot.
The character may have an overly thoughtful expression on his face (indicating that he is no longer of this world). The painting may contain attributes indicating death (for example, soul = bird). An important key (which is only suitable for those erudite in art), if the painting’s style of painting does not suit the era in which the character lived.

Sometimes you can see that the head from the old, “real” portrait seems to have been inserted into a new picture.

Thomas Sully. Portrait of George Washington. 1842

In general, if you have a chance to compare two portraits of the same person, then the more beautiful, advantageous, memorable one will most likely be posthumous, since its author will be inspired historical importance person, and this talented artist most likely they were hired specifically for this order, they were looking for it. But an ordinary portrait depicting a contemporary will simply depict a “person”, and it was written not by a specially hired genius, but simply by any author who worked in that area in those years.

1) Giotto. "Portrait of Dante" (fresco fragment), c. 1335 (20 years after the poet’s death)
2) Botticelli. "Portrait of Dante", 1495

So let's get to the game! Which of these paintings was painted from life, a living person posing, and which - after his death, based on an ennobled old painting?

1. Portrait Lorenzo Medici Magnificent (years of life 1449-1492)

3. Portrait of Queen Isabella of Portugal (1503-1539)

Correct answers under the cut:

1. Portrait of Lorenzo de' Medici the Old (1449-1492)
A) Posthumous. Hood. G. Vasari, 1533-4
b) Hood. Ghirlandaio. Detail of a fresco in the Sassetti Chapel, c. 1485

2. Portrait of the poet Shelley (1792-1822)
a) A. Clint from the original of 1819
b) Posthumous. Hood. Joseph Severn, 1845

3. Portrait of Queen Isabella of Portugal(1503-1539)
A) Posthumous. Hood. Titian, 1548
b) Hood. William Scrots. 1530s

4. Portrait of the artist Frédéric Bazille (1841-1870)
a) Self-portrait. OK. 1867.
b) Posthumous. Hood. Renoir. 1885

How did it work out? What thoughts arose during the analysis? Please share, it’s very interesting for me to try to understand whether I’m stating it correctly.

In general, aren't the tasks too easy? And the explanations at the beginning, am I going into too much detail, maybe I should leave more intrigue? or what, normal?

Who would refuse to have his own portrait, and a painted one at that? famous artist? Meanwhile, this can turn out to be very risky. In the popular consciousness there has long been the idea of unbreakable connection image and original. Therefore, back in the 19th century in Russia, artists faced reluctance and fear from ordinary people paint their portraits. It was believed that if something happened to the portrait (it exploded or burned), then the person would also suffer: he would get sick or die.
Bioenergy therapists come up with an incredible conclusion: people depicted in portraits often die violently or prematurely. It is based on facts when death befell the people depicted in the paintings famous masters global and national painting. Let's look at some of them.
The mystical connection between a person and his portrait has been known since ancient times.

One of God's first commandments to the Jews, transmitted through Moses, reads:
“You shall not make... any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth below, or that is in the water under the earth.”
The Jews observed this prohibition for centuries, making an exception only for animals.

Islam also prohibits painting portraits. There was a similar ban in a number of primitive cultures. People interested in painting have noticed a number of cases when those whom great artists of past centuries and in our time depicted on their canvases suddenly died. Examples? - Please.

Rembrandt, one of greatest masters brushes

Outlived two wives and all children. Saskia is familiar to everyone from “Flora” and other immortal paintings.

She died 8 years after the wedding. Rembrandt also painted children a lot. Three died in infancy. The fourth - Titus - lived only to be 27 years old. Second wife - Hendrik Stoffelds. A favorite model, depicted in many paintings by Rembrandt. She also died quickly.

Goya immortalized the Duchess of Alba in a number of his paintings: “Naked Macha”, “Dressed Macha”. Three years later, Alba died suddenly.

Modigliani... The master's loudest paintings were inspired by his student Jeanne Hebutien. Three years later, she jumped out of the window and fell to her death.

Picasso's two wives and grandson committed suicide. They also posed for the great master.

About the same story happened with the great Flemish painter Rubens. His regular model was his first wife, the beautiful Isabella. He often wrote to his daughter.
Isabella died before reaching thirty-five years of age; her daughter died at the age of twelve. Rubens mourned his loved ones for a long time and only many years later, when he was already over fifty, he married the sixteen-year-old beauty Elena Fourmens, who also became his model.

Soon Elena...buried her husband herself. Her youth turned out to be stronger... Modern experts claim that she had a very strong biofield that could protect her from being “pulled out” vital energy for the canvas. The first wife was deprived of this quality and paid with her life.

The famous model of the artist Vladimir Borovikovsky Lopukhin died three years after painting the portrait for no reason.

The same fate befell the boy Vasya, who posed for Perov’s painting “Troika.” This is how his mother felt: she forbade her son to pose for the artist.

Many of Serov's models died soon after posing sessions. The most mysterious was the death of the model depicted in famous painting"Girl illuminated by the sun" (popularly called "Girl with Peaches").

In just a month, she burned out from sudden onset consumption. only love Konstantina Somova, who posed for him for the painting “Lady in Blue.”

Vrubel painted a portrait of his little son, who was born with a cleft lip (from last wife - famous singer Zabela-Vrubel), and the painter depicted his offspring without even trying to hide the congenital deformity. After completing the portrait, the boy died. Soon, unable to survive the tragedy, Vrubel himself died.

Has gained notoriety famous painting Leonardo da Vinci "La Gioconda". Delight and admiration for the creation of the great Florentine are mixed with mysteries and fear. We won’t dwell on the famous smile of Mona Lisa, but it’s worth talking about the strange (not to say terrible) effect of the image on the viewer.

Noticed this amazing ability canvases made impressionable people faint in the 19th century, when the Louvre opened to the public.
The first such person from the public was the writer Stendhal. He unexpectedly stopped at the Mona Lisa and admired her for some time. It ended badly - famous writer He immediately fainted near the painting. To date, more than a hundred similar cases have been recorded.
Leonardo's genius? After all great artist I've never worked on something for so long an ordinary portrait. It would seem like an ordinary custom item. But no, the artist will not be satisfied with his work until the end of his days and will rewrite the picture for the remaining six years of his life.
All this time he will be haunted by melancholy, weakness, and exhaustion. But the main thing is that he will not want to part with the La Gioconda, he will look at it for hours, and then with a trembling hand begin to make adjustments again.

Louvre workers, by the way, noted that long breaks in the museum’s work lead to the tarnishing of the Mona Lisa. It gets dark, but as soon as visitors fill the halls of the museum again, the Mona Lisa seems to come to life, rich colors appear, the background brightens, the smile is more clearly visible. Vampire - and that's all!

For many months I suffered over my painting “Ivan the Terrible Kills His Son Ivan...” and great Ilya Repin. On early stage While painting the canvas, the artist admitted that he removed the canvas out of sight. Repin in different time Several sitters posed. Sketches of the prince’s head have reached us, in which we can recognize the artist V.K. Menk and the famous prose writer Vsevolod Garshin, who, soon after posing, threw himself down a flight of stairs and fell to his death. True, Garshin was a mentally ill person, whose illness worsened from time to time. But still...


First, Repin's painting, completed in 1885, was shown in the studio to the artist's friends: Kramskoy, Shishkin, Bryullov. The canvas made a stunning and depressing impression on them.
Then “Ivan the Terrible” was presented at an official exhibition in St. Petersburg, and the reaction of the general public differed little from the reaction of the artist’s friends. The realism bordering on naturalism frightened many viewers. President of the Academy of Arts, Grand Duke Vladimir Alexandrovich told his wife before visiting the exhibition: “Don’t be scared, get ready, now you will see this terrible picture.”
In Moscow, the demonstration of the painting was initially prohibited by the emperor Alexander III. And only after some time the ban was lifted with reservations about the undesirability of showing the film to women and children.

By the way, Repin finished the portraits of the surgeon Pirogov and the composer Mussorgsky literally the day before their death.
Stolypin was shot the day after finishing work on his portrait.
At least eight more of the artist’s models suffered premature death.

And there are hundreds of similar examples. But even the experts who refuted these supposed legends admit that some kind of mystical mystery still exists.
Igor Vagin, Russia's leading specialist in thanatology (the science of death), believes that a portrait is a bioenergy-informational phantom of a person. Why do people tear up photos of their partners during divorces? Because they want to bring them misfortune. And a portrait is a more powerful structure. The mechanism of action, according to Vagin, is simple.
To exhibitions famous artists masses of people are walking. At the same time, talented craftsmen have many ill-wishers. To whom is all the envy, hatred, and black energy transferred? Of course, to portraits of loved ones, into which the masters put their love. And the more talented the portrait is made, the more vulnerable the original. Some of the spectators are simply jealous of the beauty of these women.

Bioenergy therapists are absolutely sure that all these facts are not mere coincidences. One of the mechanisms by which an attempt is made to explain this phenomenon is to transfer the negative energy of people to the portrait, which is transferred to the model, as a result of which she often dies untimely.
From this they draw a conclusion, perhaps an offensive conclusion for artists: they should be very careful about posing.
Many sensitive people, for example, Vanga, Edgar Cayce and others, refused to pose for artists. Apparently, they foresaw the fatal consequences of these seemingly honorable proposals.
Rostov dowsing operator A. Babanov has already for a long time studies the influence of works of art on mood and psyche. He is sure that some paintings can provoke illness and even death of the owner of the room in which they hang. The famous psychiatrist Professor A. Bukhanovsky is sure that pictures in themselves do not cause mental disorder. But they can simulate or enhance the psychological state in which a person is. For example, if he is depressed, then the picture can strengthen it. This is especially true for works of symbolism or cubism. According to Bukhanovsky, if a painting causes strange sensations, spoils the mood, frightens or even generates ghosts, one must get rid of it immediately.

Why can't you draw from a photo? What's wrong with groups that criticize drawings?

Recently I was offered to create a group where everyone would post their work, and I criticized them. I became interested in this topic and decided to familiarize myself with existing similar public pages.

And I got the feeling that there aren’t many groups that criticize art and help artists with advice, but they still exist. So today we’ll talk about them, as well as why you can’t learn to draw from a photo.

What are these groups?

The idea is simple: you throw your drawings into the “suggestion”, and the admin prepares a post with criticism, and then publishes it. Comments are usually disabled, so criticizing criticism is not allowed. Or administrators, on the contrary, do not take part in criticism at all, but simply publish art. IN in this case comments are turned on and the work is criticized by subscribers, that is, by all and sundry.

Who are the admins?

I am extremely amazed by the sycophantic tone in the letters of people who direct their work. They apologize for everything they missed. They ask for forgiveness at the beginning, in the middle and, control, at the end. This seems like it should be very cute, but it’s not! Somehow the sugar makes my eyes stick together.

And it seems that after reading all these posts I have an overdose of the word “for” and other pompous syllables, for example: “I’m very grateful, if you please, I drew it just now.” Guys, if you are not sure that you can write without errors, then it is better to use a more familiar and simple writing style. After all, every style presupposes appropriateness - you won’t go for bread in ball gown, and to the beach in a tuxedo?

All this means is that in such a situation it is very easy for administrators to imagine themselves as the navel of the earth. Despite the fact that administrators in such communities are anonymous. This means that they may be elementary school students, and in a professional sense, not represent anything of themselves. Not all admins who take on the burden of criticism can draw even on entry level. I'm not talking about everyone, but it's very common.

I saw how, in response to outright rudeness on the part of administrators, some subscribers wrote: “everything is correct, we need to be stricter with us, otherwise we will completely get away with it,” and by the way, among the subscribers there are many adults. Friends, you still need to respect yourself at least a little.

I also noticed that such communities compose multi-volume rules, in the manner of minutes of UN Security Council meetings. And they require subscribers not only to read them, but also to memorize them! Who even cares about the foot wraps of the rules in some VKontakte community?! Not me! There are generally accepted rules of behavior in any community, politeness, adequacy. This is quite enough. Everything else is just a reason for admins to assert themselves, their way to feel like a little big boss. I don’t even know what kind of golden content can keep me in such a group?

What kind of criticism awaits you?

If you decide to send your work for criticism, it’s better not to bother yourself, I will predict the comments you will receive directly through the monitor using special magic. “Not bad, but you need to learn anatomy, the eyes are different, work on the strokes and shadows, you can add more detail.” This is a typical comment, if you remove the ridicule and insults. And they repeat these patterns like a mantra from post to post; they won’t write anything else to you. I also noticed that critics write condescendingly and condescendingly in an ultimatum form: “You need to do this and that” instead of “I think this and that is missing.” In other words: “what I say is the truth, and not just my opinion.”

And what meaning does this criticism carry?

I saw how one girl tried to ask what was wrong with the shadows in the drawing and where were the errors in the construction, but she was simply ignored. The man flicked you on the nose and disappeared into the fog, it doesn’t matter to him to explain anything, he’s not here for that.

Dear critics, if a person asks you to help with a drawing, then you can’t just tell him: “work on the drawing” - you need to be more specific, much more specific. Explaining is a gift, and if you have nothing to say, then don’t make a fuss. Empower yourself through your work rather than putting other people down.

I saw a comment: “Weak tonality, this means that you need to more clearly highlight the areas where shadows and penumbra should be located.” I think it was even the admin. In fact, tonality refers to the coloristic character of a work, as well as the saturation and contrast of colors and tones. That is complex set characteristics that creates general impression from the work, which gives it a certain sound, leaves some kind of mood. The tone can be warm or cold, contrasting, gloomy. Tonality, tone and tonal relationships are not the same thing. That is, the admin misled the subscriber, and did it with a smart look, illiterately using professional jargon.

"Achieve it first"

I urge you not to create authority for yourself out of thin air and analyze the advice that is given to you. Including mine. Criticize the critics! Ask more questions. If a person is arrogant and assertive, knows how to convince that he is right, and is sure that he is always right, this does not mean at all that his advice makes sense.

An anonymous person can be anyone and have more low level skill than you. Answer yourself honestly: will you listen to a person’s advice if his work is weak and has many errors? He will, of course, tell you that you don’t need to be a chef to evaluate a dish, that you can’t say “get it first,” etc. He can evaluate as much as he likes, but he is unlikely to give advice!

For me, the opinion of an anonymous person has practically no weight. I’ve seen too many times how absolutely worthless people, whose opinions no one takes into account in real life, go everywhere on the Internet with their opinions.

What should you never send to such communities if you don’t want to be stuffed into a Panama hat?

• Stroke

This is when people draw using extra layer transparency. They trace the contours of a drawing already created by someone.

• Coating

This technique is used when they want to do something very realistic drawing from a photograph. There are several ways to make the coating, including using different instruments in Photoshop. The easiest way is to move your finger around any photo with the tool.

In these cases (outlining, coating) you use a minimum amount of skills. The uniqueness of the drawing is zero. And you don't get any development.

• Copy, sketch

Copying someone else's ready-made drawings, without using a stroke.

This type of work is bad only because the uniqueness of such a drawing is zero and you cannot sign it with your name. Plus you don't develop your own creative imagination. But there are also a lot of advantages to this kind of work.

Firstly, you transfer the drawing, albeit from two-dimensional space to two-dimensional space, but still using your own eye, which means you develop it. Secondly, you analyze the work of the author you like very deeply, studying the features of his style that may elude you during normal viewing. The main thing here is to be honest with yourself, not to pass off a copy of someone else’s drawing as your own, and to understand the purposes for which you copy other people’s work.

Don’t think that if you copy or smear it from some picture on the Internet, no one will know about it. How can they find out! And even if they don’t find the source, there are still many ways to determine that the work was copied.

• Drawing from a photo

Some public places do not accept works drawn from photographs. And here we get to the main question...

Why is drawing from a photo bad?

Because you are learning. You need practitioners who develop the maximum number of skills. When you learn, you shouldn’t succeed in everything the first time, you shouldn’t be comfortable. If you find it hard to work, know that you are on the right track. If it is no longer difficult for you, then the learning process has stopped and you need to complicate the task.

Drawing from a photo does not provide enough exercise for your eye and brain. Drawing from 3D life will involve a lot more thought processes in your head. I would even recommend sculpture from life. This will definitely give you the maximum boost.

In addition, when you draw from life, you learn to cut off the unimportant and leave the main thing. Work from the general to the specific and do not get hung up on details, which can ruin the integrity of your work. And it will be even more interesting for you if the nature is in motion and the time for drawing is 10 seconds, for example.

Another point is composition. The photo already has a ready-made composition that the photographer has chosen for you. By drawing from life, you solve the problems of arranging objects on a sheet for yourself. And here you also cut off the unimportant and choose the main thing, on which you focus your and the viewer’s attention. This means you work with accents and even meanings. This is the creative component.

Drawing from a photo will never improve your drafting skills as much as drawing from life will. Which path do you choose: exciting and interesting, which will definitely lead you to your goal, or boring and calm, which will lead you to an unknown destination? Don't waste your time, get out of your comfort zone.

But the argument that “copying from a photo and saying that you are an artist is the same as rewriting War and Peace and saying that you are a writer,” I consider, to put it mildly, incorrect. Not the same. Drawing from a photo requires much more skills, and not everyone who knows how to hold a pencil in their hands can do it.

Moreover, they write about “War and Peace” under every dispute about drawing from photos. Friends, answer me - how much originality is there in your words? This is the simplest everyday skill - to express your opinion, to discuss. And you can’t even do this in your own words, you copy and paste everything. And you think that you have the right to judge those who draw from photos.

Why do I draw from photos?

All of the above is relevant for learning and staying in shape. When I solve other problems I use photography as an auxiliary tool. At the same time, the skills that I learned from nature help me a lot.

If you come to the public and ask for criticism, it is obvious that you are just learning. Administrators have their own point of view on training and do not want to help those who do not adhere to it. They think that you are wasting your time when you could be developing. Hence the irritation on their part, which is why they refuse to criticize photo works. In general, they have the right to do so.

But when they say “why do you need criticism? just look at the photo and correct your mistakes,” I think people are being a little disingenuous. Very often people, even if they have a sample, cannot find and analyze their mistakes.

conclusions

There are some public pages with competent admins and a healthy atmosphere, but mostly the admins there are schoolboys, the atmosphere is boorish, everyone wants only one thing - to assert themselves at the expense of others. Remember, to criticize does not necessarily mean to humiliate the object of criticism. They criticize with a cool head without emotion, then the criticism is useful. If you are not a masochist, then you do not need a public page with useless criticism.

If you are an admin or a subscriber of such a public, but at the same time quite adequate, don’t be rude, criticize to the point, then I wasn’t talking about you in this video and there’s simply no point in you being offended by me and writing angry comments.