Hello, dear readers and subscribers. It is time for another top list; contemporary portraiture. Who did we miss? I very much look forward to reading your suggestions in the comments. Furthermore, please find all the links mentioned throughout this video below: - Discover Squarespace: squarespace.syuh.net/75a56A - Promo code (10% off): CONTEMPORARY10 - Complete tutorial by CAI: ua-cam.com/video/2MfKKDw_WAA/v-deo.htmlsi=jxTJcnWvuzaEdty3 - Consult the complete article here: www.contemporaryartissue.com/10-portrait-painters-today-you-need-to-know/ Thank you for tuning in and chat soon! All my best, Julien & Perrier
Subtle messages in portraiture portray a reflection of society from an artist’s observation. Seeing significance in a deeper existence than the physical and translating that with quality to a critical audience … I feel is best not to take for granted. Thank you for the work to overview these contemporary artists current works. I recently saw an Italian portrait painter working skillfully and interestingly in watercolor. Not an easy feat. But not recalling his name now.😮 All the best and continued gratitude. Sincerely, Janet
It feels as though there are more women artists in this compilation. And it’s interesting that the topic is portraiture. It is a very female trait to be interested more in people than in things. Thanks for the video.
Thanks for this list. One can always quibble with who is in or out. I feel there is a sameness with much of the work, as if they're all working in the same bubble. I'm also curious if the language applied to the work comes from you, the artist, or their galleries. It seems to give more credit for content than I think is actually present in much of it.
Absolutely. Love a good quibble by the way. I paraphrase the information from the official artist biographies from their galleries for these videos with some personal comments, of course. Thank you for tuning in and wishing you the very best!
Technology has always been used by the artists to improve the quality of their works. I prefer to see a good painting then seeing a painting that was hard(er) to create. I would also add not to underestimate the technical skillset of these artists, who almost all have an art academical background. Thank you for tuning in and for sharing your thoughts, always most welcome!
@ I think a drawing is better when two eyes are used, rather than copying a 2D image made using one single lens. It’s a visual quality issue. We can now look back at some classic paintings and see that they used rudimentary lenses, like Vermeer for instance, and certainly to me their quality is lessened. There’s also a question of skill. Classically trained artists learnt form, structure, anatomy, all of which is missing these days, to arts detriment.
Well, landscape painters turned out to be more interesting and talented artists than portrait painters. Most of these artists have very weak works, quite low quality.. the portrait genre is the most difficult, in my opinion. In any case, like for the content!!!
Personally, I also prefered writing and seeing the video on Landscape art, yet some of my favorite artists are inclded in this selection-so a tough call. Thank you so much for tuning in today and have a great day!
I believe there are many interesting and highly talented portrait artists today. Unfortunately, it would seem their work just isn't being seen by the vast majority.
When a great record, film, book, comes out the world talks about it. When a great painting comes out - crickets, tumbleweeds, and yawns. The only difference is the first 3 are mass produced and paintings are not. Part of the art revolution is exact painting copies sold like records, videos, books! Paintings are one of the last art forms to be mass produced. Want more info - just ask. When I first posted this my friend Gregory K. H. Bryant added his comment, a great artist and brilliant thinker. What's most annoying to me about all of this is that work of this sort has been around for over a century now. There is nothing challenging, cutting edge or avant garde about any of it. From the the absurdism of the Dadaists to Claes Oldenberg's soft sculptures, and Jean Tinguely's self-destructive pieces - among countless others who did it much better - these artists are simply regurgitating well trodden grounds that anyone with a first year college course in art history should be embarrased to repeat for being so obviously, naively and slavishly imitative.
Most of these are not worth looking at. Poorly done, badly drawn, amateurish at best. Dependant upon the "in the know" brainless art critics and gallery owners and curators. Money laundering. . . . .corrupt. How about some artists who know their craft. This wasn't good enough.
Quite obviously reams of words are needed to support these "modern masters" much like the best music requires careful study and education before listening to and the highest forms of literature requires a cypher to decode the random letters that are written within the secret texts that only the learned understand.
Not necessarily. I think these works are as good, if not better, without additional information or context. However, for an informative/educational video, text is of course very much advised. Have a great day!
Modern Art Modern art you’ve lost your way. I’d rather see a comic book, fashion drawings, or children’s art, an illustration, or anything but Modern art you’ve lost your way!
Thank you for sharing your most honest thoughts. Always welcome! Yes, the influence of AI is already very visible, with some artists being really good at using it!
Consider this... art without isms and more Most modern art substitutes weird for quality, narrow isms for scope, and trendy for depth. It also refuses to change or even talk about progressive ideas in art like those that follow Too many treat art as a marketing scheme. Modern art has become a trendy clique and the art now is mostly over promoted footnotes to greater art that was done 100 years ago. But art is too important to be reduced to a trendy clique. Post-ism, is art for a new century, not a continuation of last century trends. 1 Mass Market Paintings like Prints. When any art form is mass marketed it enters a golden age. This has happened with books, records, and film. Let's add paintings. Most art is in storage in museum basements. Mass Marketing allows art to tour in copies and allows artists to make royalties on copies. Why do you think the world gets so excited about a new great book, record, or film; but no one cares about a new great painting? All are mass produced except the painting. 2. End a Century of Isms. Dump the genres and formulas and let all kinds of art be a part of the art world. 3. Shift Emphasis From Trendy to Quality. Shift emphasis from the latest trendy art, to quality art in any style. Just because art is weird does not mean it is great art. 4. Free the Art From Museums and Galleries. Get the art out of the ivory elitist museum and gallery towers and back into the world. Have city art centers open to all artists. Make art that is relevant and communicates with people. Start with the first generation of artists online. 5. Postism is Part of a Bigger Revolution. Postism is part of the bigger art and media revolution out of Dallas, that includes art, music, lit, film, media, and a lot more. 6. Postism online: Online artists are the new wave of art. We had all the isms of last century. Now we have a free for all, of all kinds of artists, that are not sanctioned by any museum or gallery, displaying their work. Out of that comes the next wave and revolution of artists. Last century the goal was to fit the ism. This century the goal is to do great art - no ism, no boundaries. Fractionalized art then, synchronized art now. Even calling something modern art is a type of ism that separates that art from the art of the past. The 20th century was a century of experimentation in art. Now in the 21st we can choose from all those styles and / or start one of our own. Then too if someone devises a way to charge and collect a penny per view on a webpage, that would allow any great artist to get money for their art and have a career without any middlemen. Duchamp broke ground 100 years ago - but now his clones are just shoveling dirt. Weird art is easy, you put a strip of raw bacon across an expensive violin, but it's not good art. Join the art revolution and pull the art world out of last century. Musea since 1992.
I would say contemporary art has been without -isms for the last four decades now. I strongly disagree with mass-market paintings as prints, the materiality and uniqueness are exactly what makes them special. Who is going to pay for those art centers? And with approximately 5 million active artists creating between 25 and 50 works per year, the scale of those art centers would simply be impossible. Ad income per view is very much possible these days with ad platforms such as Mediavine, Ezoic, or Adthrive, the traffici would however be tremendously low considering the vast amount of artists. Thank you for tuning in however and wishing you the very best!
@@contemporaryartissue Modern art now is last century Derivative! Multiple exact prints can now be made. I am an artist and I'd rather have my art in thousands of homes, rather than a museum basement or a millionaire wall. For display, any empty building will work. BTW if I gave you prints from Rembrandt, Picasso, and Durer, you'd toss them in the trash as not unique?
@@TomHendricksMusea Multiple exact prints are being made right now, and the viewing experience is not the same as a real painting. Furthermore, we have the desire the see the "real thing," that's why a live concert beats listening to a CD, and why the real painting directly from the artist's hand in a museum context will continue to beat a mass-produced print at home in a setting with most likely a lot of visual clutter. The experience is different. However, your thoughts are most welcome!
@@contemporaryartissue I am an artist and my copies are as good as the originals. They have everything the original has. My art is for all not just one buyer. Can you imagine a great Beatles song, owned by just one person, and not shared through a million copies Here's the test: take the original art work and 4 copies. Put them each in a similar frame, place them in a row on a wall. Then see if anyone can choose the original.
Each artist seems to rely solely on an insignificant mannerism that no one else has yet used. I guess that's what the galleries want. Not impressed at all.
It's a lot of c*** Only one artist in there is actually a better painter Than myself, the whole art industry is a bit of a joke People think that Rothko was a genius and that Jackson pollock was a good painter and that Picasso could actually draw a picture, oh and don't Even get me going on That idiot Banksy,and his team of Stencil makers 🤣
Panting good and a good painting are two different things in my opinion. Everything can be taught to do the first-for some, this will come more naturally than for others-but doing the latter is a lot harder. Picasso, Rothko, and all 10 from this list succeed in doing this, in my humble opinion and in the opinion of the vast majority of art professionals and collectors. But, of course, I respect your opinion. There is more than one way to enjoy art. Although I do encourage people to enjoy what they enjoy the most without decrying what others enjoy. Art is a feast!
@@contemporaryartissue Henry W. Dixon title Mari Watercolour Florida. Paul Cadden Watercolour Scotland. April Kamunde Kenya. Title Sunday and not rest day 11 Oil on canvas. Jose Quirino. Oil on canvas. Spain. Rajkumar Sthabthy. Watercolour. India. Stan Miller. Watercolour. USA. Stanley Rafield. Oil paint.
Well I'm just glad that these people aren't painting the "covid nose" on everybody, like so many painters on social media 😂 Covid nose 🐽=overly red nose 😂
These artists are far better than the artists you are promoting @contemporaryartissue Henry W. Dixon title Mari Watercolour Florida. Paul Cadden Watercolour Scotland. April Kamunde Kenya. Title Sunday and not rest day 11 Oil on canvas. Jose Quirino. Oil on canvas. Spain. Rajkumar Sthabthy. Watercolour. India. Stan Miller. Watercolour. USA. Stanley Rafield. Oil paint.
I respect your opinion and personal preferences. Yet, these artists have been measurably more pertinent and relevant for portrait painting, hence being included in this list regardless of my personal taste or opinion. Have a great day!
Hello, dear readers and subscribers. It is time for another top list; contemporary portraiture. Who did we miss? I very much look forward to reading your suggestions in the comments.
Furthermore, please find all the links mentioned throughout this video below:
- Discover Squarespace: squarespace.syuh.net/75a56A
- Promo code (10% off): CONTEMPORARY10
- Complete tutorial by CAI: ua-cam.com/video/2MfKKDw_WAA/v-deo.htmlsi=jxTJcnWvuzaEdty3
- Consult the complete article here: www.contemporaryartissue.com/10-portrait-painters-today-you-need-to-know/
Thank you for tuning in and chat soon!
All my best,
Julien & Perrier
Subtle messages in portraiture portray a reflection of society from an artist’s observation.
Seeing significance in a deeper existence than the physical and translating that with quality to a critical audience … I feel is best not to take for granted.
Thank you for the work to overview these contemporary artists current works. I recently saw an Italian portrait painter working skillfully and interestingly in watercolor. Not an easy feat. But not recalling his name now.😮
All the best and continued gratitude.
Sincerely, Janet
I keep hearing about squarepace, yet among all the people who are sponsored by them. Only one that I know of, actually use it.
Used it for decades....not the only website space design company but pretty simple. Others use wordpress which I also use on one of our sites.
Sir, thank you 🎉for this video ❤
The pleasure is all mine, thank you for tuning in!
It feels as though there are more women artists in this compilation. And it’s interesting that the topic is portraiture. It is a very female trait to be interested more in people than in things. Thanks for the video.
I love your videos. Thanks for sharing.
The pleasure is all mine, thank you very much for tuning in
I love that gray, petite sweater she wears. Those bangs... my goodness.
Thanks for this list. One can always quibble with who is in or out. I feel there is a sameness with much of the work, as if they're all working in the same bubble. I'm also curious if the language applied to the work comes from you, the artist, or their galleries. It seems to give more credit for content than I think is actually present in much of it.
Absolutely. Love a good quibble by the way. I paraphrase the information from the official artist biographies from their galleries for these videos with some personal comments, of course. Thank you for tuning in and wishing you the very best!
Love. Thank you
The pleasure is all mine, thank you for tuning in!
very happy to see Jenny Saville on this list. - best and most unique portrait artist alive imo
A true master indeed! Thank you for watching and have a great day
Phil Hale, Adrian Ghenie, Mircea Suciu, Lita Cabellut, Jonathan Yeo, François Bard, Eberhard Havekost,
Great list! Thank you Bore for your interesting insights as always. Greetings from Belgium
I'm a big fan of Francois Bard
So many painters working from photographs. Can barely make out anything observed directly from life.
Technology has always been used by the artists to improve the quality of their works. I prefer to see a good painting then seeing a painting that was hard(er) to create. I would also add not to underestimate the technical skillset of these artists, who almost all have an art academical background. Thank you for tuning in and for sharing your thoughts, always most welcome!
@ I think a drawing is better when two eyes are used, rather than copying a 2D image made using one single lens. It’s a visual quality issue. We can now look back at some classic paintings and see that they used rudimentary lenses, like Vermeer for instance, and certainly to me their quality is lessened. There’s also a question of skill. Classically trained artists learnt form, structure, anatomy, all of which is missing these days, to arts detriment.
Painting from photography is awful, but it is so difficult to find someone very often available for modelling.
@ true. What about self portraits?
so many are painting photos which to me creates this uniform look ... it feels like looking at a bunch of photoshop filters
I did feel like many of them are so similar in their expression and composition. quite repetitive.
Well, landscape painters turned out to be more interesting and talented artists than portrait painters. Most of these artists have very weak works, quite low quality.. the portrait genre is the most difficult, in my opinion. In any case, like for the content!!!
Personally, I also prefered writing and seeing the video on Landscape art, yet some of my favorite artists are inclded in this selection-so a tough call. Thank you so much for tuning in today and have a great day!
🎨👍👍👍
I believe there are many interesting and highly talented portrait artists today. Unfortunately, it would seem their work just isn't being seen by the vast majority.
first painter maybe inspired by Odd Nerdrum...
Photography has forced the artist to go deeper. Bacon.
Exactly!
When a great record, film, book, comes out the world talks about it. When a great painting comes out - crickets, tumbleweeds, and yawns. The only difference is the first 3 are mass produced and paintings are not. Part of the art revolution is exact painting copies sold like records, videos, books!
Paintings are one of the last art forms to be mass produced. Want more info - just ask.
When I first posted this my friend Gregory K. H. Bryant added his comment, a great artist and brilliant thinker.
What's most annoying to me about all of this is that work of this sort has been around for over a century now.
There is nothing challenging, cutting edge or avant garde about any of it.
From the the absurdism of the Dadaists to Claes Oldenberg's soft sculptures, and Jean Tinguely's self-destructive pieces - among countless others who did it much better - these artists are simply regurgitating well trodden grounds that anyone with a first year college course in art history should be embarrased to repeat for being so obviously, naively and slavishly imitative.
I can never get used to portraits of violence against women but that is the point, like in the portrait of Mao Zedong, they affect me deeply.
Absolutely. The impact of a portrait can be tremendous indeed!
Most of these are not worth looking at. Poorly done, badly drawn, amateurish at best. Dependant upon the "in the know" brainless art critics and gallery owners and curators. Money laundering. . . . .corrupt. How about some artists who know their craft. This wasn't good enough.
Quite obviously reams of words are needed to support these "modern masters" much like the best music requires careful study and education before listening to and the highest forms of literature requires a cypher to decode the random letters that are written within the secret texts that only the learned understand.
Not necessarily. I think these works are as good, if not better, without additional information or context. However, for an informative/educational video, text is of course very much advised. Have a great day!
These “artists“ are poseurs. It is the text that's written about these paintings that is the work of art: imaginative fiction.
@@michaeljohnangel6359 I respectfully disagree. The artworks do not come with text, just this video does.
I’m surprised Andrew Salgado isn’t on this list.
❤
❤🙏
Modern Art
Modern art
you’ve lost your way.
I’d rather see
a comic book,
fashion drawings,
or children’s art,
an illustration,
or anything but
Modern art
you’ve lost your way!
Oh funny! Actually all of those are modern art are they not?
@@wendywatson2566 No
👍👏
Twentieth century has turned into a hard place to escape from, at least art wise. I guess AI robot art schools is one trend to look for. 🎨
Thank you for sharing your most honest thoughts. Always welcome! Yes, the influence of AI is already very visible, with some artists being really good at using it!
Consider this... art without isms and more
Most modern art substitutes weird for quality, narrow isms for scope, and trendy for depth. It also refuses to change or even talk about progressive ideas in art like those that follow
Too many treat art as a marketing scheme. Modern art has become a trendy clique and the art now is mostly over promoted footnotes to greater art that was done 100 years ago. But art is too important to be reduced to a trendy clique.
Post-ism, is art for a new century, not a continuation of last century trends.
1 Mass Market Paintings like Prints. When any art form is mass marketed it enters a golden age. This has happened with books, records, and film. Let's add paintings. Most art is in storage in museum basements. Mass Marketing allows art to tour in copies and allows artists to make royalties on copies.
Why do you think the world gets so excited about a new great book, record, or film; but no one cares about a new great painting? All are mass produced except the painting.
2. End a Century of Isms. Dump the genres and formulas and let all kinds of art be a part of the art world.
3. Shift Emphasis From Trendy to Quality. Shift emphasis from the latest trendy art, to quality art in any style. Just because art is weird does not mean it is great art.
4. Free the Art From Museums and Galleries. Get the art out of the ivory elitist museum and gallery towers and back into the world. Have city art centers open to all artists. Make art that is relevant and communicates with people. Start with the first generation of artists online.
5. Postism is Part of a Bigger Revolution. Postism is part of the bigger art and media revolution out of Dallas, that includes art, music, lit, film, media, and a lot more.
6. Postism online: Online artists are the new wave of art. We had all the isms of last century. Now we have a free for all, of all kinds of artists, that are not sanctioned by any museum or gallery, displaying their work. Out of that comes the next wave and revolution of artists.
Last century the goal was to fit the ism. This century the goal is to do great art - no ism, no boundaries. Fractionalized art then, synchronized art now. Even calling something modern art is a type of ism that separates that art from the art of the past.
The 20th century was a century of experimentation in art. Now in the 21st we can choose from all those styles and / or start one of our own.
Then too if someone devises a way to charge and collect a penny per view on a webpage, that would allow any great artist to get money for their art and have a career without any middlemen.
Duchamp broke ground 100 years ago - but now his clones are just shoveling dirt. Weird art is easy, you put a strip of raw bacon across an expensive violin, but it's not good art.
Join the art revolution and pull the art world out of last century.
Musea since 1992.
I would say contemporary art has been without -isms for the last four decades now. I strongly disagree with mass-market paintings as prints, the materiality and uniqueness are exactly what makes them special. Who is going to pay for those art centers? And with approximately 5 million active artists creating between 25 and 50 works per year, the scale of those art centers would simply be impossible. Ad income per view is very much possible these days with ad platforms such as Mediavine, Ezoic, or Adthrive, the traffici would however be tremendously low considering the vast amount of artists. Thank you for tuning in however and wishing you the very best!
@@contemporaryartissue Modern art now is last century Derivative!
Multiple exact prints can now be made. I am an artist and I'd rather have my art in thousands of homes, rather than a museum basement or a millionaire wall. For display, any empty building will work. BTW if I gave you prints from Rembrandt, Picasso, and Durer, you'd toss them in the trash as not unique?
@@TomHendricksMusea Multiple exact prints are being made right now, and the viewing experience is not the same as a real painting. Furthermore, we have the desire the see the "real thing," that's why a live concert beats listening to a CD, and why the real painting directly from the artist's hand in a museum context will continue to beat a mass-produced print at home in a setting with most likely a lot of visual clutter. The experience is different. However, your thoughts are most welcome!
@@contemporaryartissue I am an artist and my copies are as good as the originals. They have everything the original has. My art is for all not just one buyer. Can you imagine a great Beatles song, owned by just one person, and not shared through a million copies
Here's the test: take the original art work and 4 copies. Put them each in a similar frame, place them in a row on a wall. Then see if anyone can choose the original.
👍🏻🍀✝️🇺🇲👊🏻
🙏🙌👋🐶
Why are they all so similar? similar composition and expressions. many of them doing celebrities. it's getting repetitive.
Yikes
There are better out there…Frances Bell, Michael Shane Neal
Each artist seems to rely solely on an insignificant mannerism that no one else has yet used. I guess that's what the galleries want. Not impressed at all.
It's a lot of c*** Only one artist in there is actually a better painter Than myself, the whole art industry is a bit of a joke People think that Rothko was a genius and that Jackson pollock was a good painter and that Picasso could actually draw a picture, oh and don't Even get me going on That idiot Banksy,and his team of Stencil makers 🤣
You don't like Pablo Bigarsehole? (I don't either,)
Panting good and a good painting are two different things in my opinion. Everything can be taught to do the first-for some, this will come more naturally than for others-but doing the latter is a lot harder. Picasso, Rothko, and all 10 from this list succeed in doing this, in my humble opinion and in the opinion of the vast majority of art professionals and collectors. But, of course, I respect your opinion. There is more than one way to enjoy art. Although I do encourage people to enjoy what they enjoy the most without decrying what others enjoy. Art is a feast!
I see far better painters than these. SMH
I respect your opinion. Feel free to share your favorite portrait painters today here in the comment section. Have a grat day!
@@contemporaryartissue Henry W. Dixon title Mari Watercolour Florida. Paul Cadden Watercolour Scotland. April Kamunde Kenya. Title Sunday and not rest day 11
Oil on canvas.
Jose Quirino. Oil on canvas. Spain. Rajkumar Sthabthy. Watercolour. India. Stan Miller. Watercolour. USA. Stanley Rafield. Oil paint.
Well I'm just glad that these people aren't painting the "covid nose" on everybody, like so many painters on social media 😂
Covid nose 🐽=overly red nose 😂
I think Frans Hals or Peter Paul Rubens would disagree with their 17th century covid noses 😅
These artists are far better than the artists you are promoting @contemporaryartissue Henry W. Dixon title Mari Watercolour Florida. Paul Cadden Watercolour Scotland. April Kamunde Kenya. Title Sunday and not rest day 11
Oil on canvas.
Jose Quirino. Oil on canvas. Spain. Rajkumar Sthabthy. Watercolour. India. Stan Miller. Watercolour. USA. Stanley Rafield. Oil paint.
I respect your opinion and personal preferences. Yet, these artists have been measurably more pertinent and relevant for portrait painting, hence being included in this list regardless of my personal taste or opinion. Have a great day!
@@contemporaryartissue SMH. Do you look at these artists works? Good day