Evening star., 1924-10-30
The North Window
BY LEILA MECHLIN

an equally appropriate answer to a
conundrum which has lately come to
mind-"When is an Oil painting not
| an oil painting?" The answer in fact
Is. When 1t is a Photograph; but
this answer leaves no room for mirth
and therefore does not satisfy the
requirements of a conundrum
An oil painting which begins as a
photograph is sorry thing indeed,
| and yet in the realm Of portraiture
it is astonishingly popular 1t is
quite possible to order from any one
| of half a dozen prominent photog-
| raphers in this and other cities life
lfkenesses. To insure this matter OF
likeness the head is photographed
upon the canvas; the artist is re-
lieved of the necessity of drawing.
This is then colored, after which the
background and figure are filled in
free hand. The miracle is that any
semblance of a work of art could
thus be secured. The pity is the
even small measure of success at
tanned, for the ignorant are deceived
and in some instances such spurious
limitations of. what should be a work
OF art are being taken into well ap-
pointed homes and given place in
permanent public collections The
credulfty of an uniformed public is
!, Delns used as an asset in trade.
But some will object, if such pho
tographic portraits satisfy the de-
mand. why are they not good enough?
ihere is saying that the public gets
the art 1t deserves. A photograph
which pretends to be nothing more
snah II Is Is an excellent substitute
TOT an Oil portrait, If one has not
the means to obtain the latter.
portrait painted in oils is essentially,
II 1t be successful. q work of art. the
WORK OF a mans hand and brain. an
Interpretation, a rendition.
ihere Is the same difference be-
tween 1t and the Photographic OIL
colored portrait as between niece
OF woolen goods and shoddy; the one
Is woven fabric. the other is made
OF scraps pasted together; the one
wears, the other does not.
VI course, If a genius were willing
70 30 employ his talent he might pro-
duce. through the medium of the
photographic oil portrait great
work OF art. 1t is possible to supnose
enat rembrandt, reborn, might attain
this end. but Rembrandt would not be
willing either to SO prostitute his talent
or TO consent to the handicaps which
mecnanical process imposes Hence
most OF this painting of PHOTOGRAPHIC
portralts Is done by not second, third
or fourth rate painters, but fifth.
sixth and even tenth rate painters
VINO nave learned the trick of paint
ing' ana have no comprehension of it
as an art. No wonder the work is
pad; the wonder is that it is SO good.
sooo enough to pass, like a clever
counterfeit, even sometimes those who
should be On their guard
The artist who paints these Dor
,aaIls tWnlcn' by the way, cost little
less than would a portrait by an artist
or standing) gets no credit for his
Work, for the pictures are signed by
the nrm name of the PHOTOGRAPHER.
Ihls' too, is an offense against art.
Even In industrial art today the chief
manufacturers see that individual
credit goes. to the designers for their
designs. There is no such thing as
synofcated art production.
One trouble is, in connection with
portraits, that the first thing the
average observer looks for is like
ness, and ii this is found he looks no
farther. Now, likeness is an eyasive
thing, and II one is observant IL NAV
be noted as only the background Of
expression. There is nothing deader
IN TINS world than an expressionless
portrait-a portrait which has moth
ing to its credit but a fairly correct
rendition of features. Place such
portrait beside one of Sargent's mas
terpieces or between two Of the great
portraits OF the English school in
the same room with a velasouez.
Titan or our old friend Hoibein-
here is the test. The people who
these masters have interpreted are
living personalities.
The subject OF the trick portrait is
dead-repulsively dead. How much
better would a good photoeranh
which makes no pretense, be than
this.
PORTRAIT painting was a great art
oe1ore photography was discovered
photography has become an art, but
1t Is not and never can be a sub
stltute or an auxiliary to portrait
painting, beyond bearing witness to
certain facts. Commercial photog-
raphers. as purveyors Of portraits to
the public. could well serve the in
terest OF art by securing commissions
for painted portraits from accom-
plished artists. They would then be
profting art and would help to raise
the standard Of living, through ap-
probation of the best
+ X r
The man or woman who buys what
he or she supposes to be an Oriental
rug and brings it home, admires it.
shows 1t to a connoisseur and learns
that it is only an imitation. feels
modification. and later, learning to
discriminate between the real and
the imitation, wonders how he or she
could have been so deceived. There
Is just as much difference between
the oil portrait done by an artist.
which is a work of art, and the OIL
colored Photographic portrait, which
Is not a work of art, but which is
ordered, executed and delivered as
such; and the modification Of those
VINO order them when some day they
acquire sufficient knowledge to dis
crimlnate will be no less, particularly
Wnen they are aware that the price
paid was sufficient, or nearly sufi-
cient, to get them the real thing. 1t
Is like buying paste for diamonds,
beads for pearls. But, Of course, if
Let 1t be fully understood that the
commercial photographers are not
attempting to deceive the public: II is
the public which is deceiving itself.
This whole subject Of portrait paint
Ing is full Of interest and intricacies,
The early painters Of America were
peculiarly gifted. and the possession of
portrait by Copley or Gilbert Stuart
even Chester Harding, Waldo and a half
dozen others. is today regarded as a
page OF aristocracy, as well, incidental
~, as source Of income. A Gilbert
stuart portrait has. been known to
bring $4,000. Five thousand dollars
can almost always be had for a good
Copley, while portraits painted by Others
mentioned, even Of perfectly obscure in
dividuals, command their price, and it is