Study of Dean Cornwell

50 Likes

Oh yeah, I really like it. It feels almost as if it was a real oil painting, the colors look believable and you have a good balance of sharpness there. :slight_smile:

4 Likes

thank you!! :slight_smile:

1 Like

Fantastic!! :open_mouth: :grin:

1 Like

nice colours and composition love it. great work.

2 Likes

I’m impressed, you are artist . .

2 Likes

what a wonderful artist to study. such range in value and dramatic flair for subject matter. i just thought i’d add some links to the originals. two different temperatures there from different sites. wonder which is more accurate? they both look good though. cornwell seems to paint those contemplative moments or hanging moments. thanks for sharing this study. to me i see a woman doing something she doesn’t like too much but maybe needs the money so. there’s an air of horror here. to me anyway, like a noir film filled with tragic figures all stumbling into each others scenes. the outlaw, the bounty hunters, the victims, the system.


http://www.thekellycollection.org/a_corn03.htm

1 Like

I like how the colors are expressed, and the figure is very well done.

1 Like

I love that painterly style, keep up the good work!

1 Like

This is not a study but a try to copy a painting and missing the essence of the original masterful composition and presented as if it’s yours with your logo… and the image you linked it’s not even from Cornwell but Mead Schaeffer :slight_smile:

1 Like

Please forgive my ignorance and help me get some answers. And these questions are for any professional artist in the forum or anyone who is an expert on this sort of thing.

When I was in highschool, I was told that if I am using a reference (which was never another artist’s painting but just a photo), I should not draw exactly what I see and pass it off as my work but if I’m doing something that’s gonna be published though I’m using a reference, I have to somehow make it look original (by whatever means I chose to do so). If I’m just practicing, then copying an image as it is, is fine but not if I’m gonna publish it.

Now, I’m getting from what I saw online that you can do studies of other people’s artwork, yes? I didn’t know that. But do you publish it, exactly the way it was drawn, and affix your signature to it as if it is your own though? Because that’s what I see happening here. Isn’t that plagiarism?

Secondly, if you’re practicing to paint and you copy another artist’s painting, that’s okay right?

I don’t know what the rules are, only what I was taught in highschool and I wasn’t taught to copy another painting. Can someone give me some meaningful feedback please?

1 Like

I have been under the impression that copying a painting is called a “master study”:

https://thevirtualinstructor.com/master-study-art-lesson-plan.html

Assignments from Proko:

“Your assignment is to choose a caricature by another artist you admire and do a study of it, focusing on copying the shapes and values as best you can. It’s not important to use the same materials the artist did. If the original is a painting or a sculpture, you can still use pencil or charcoal to do the study. The important takeaway from this exercise is in his or her shapes and to a lesser extent, how they rendered the forms”.

I am not a caricature artist, so my main “take away” from his lesson was to study the different colour temperatures and brushstrokes and exaggerate those in an another medium (digital).

It saddens me to hear that I am missing the essence of the original image as I found it very hard to find an image with the whole painting in good viewing quality. I admire his work very much and this piece was made from a place of love.

I apologize for any misconception that my signature (and not “logo”), for it was intended as such, may have caused. It was honestly just a funny/“modern” way for me to sign stuff I’ve made with a date, and rest assured that I’m very clear on my social media/posts that this is NOT my original work.

Can you please elaborate what you mean with Mead Schaeffer? So far I’ve only been able to see that it was an artwork made by Dean Cornell (Oil on canvas, 36 inches x 30) called “$2,000 Reward,” Alma and Paul Ellerbe, first published in Cosmopolitan, March 1924.

1 Like

I appreciate the message and can understand where you’re coming from! I’ve been following assignments online for master studies (which is a kind of study in which you copy a master’s painting to better yourself), and they do say you should try to exaggerate what you want to get better at and what the master excels at:

Assignments from Proko:

“Your assignment is to choose a caricature by another artist you admire and do a study of it, focusing on copying the shapes and values as best you can. It’s not important to use the same materials the artist did. If the original is a painting or a sculpture, you can still use pencil or charcoal to do the study. The important takeaway from this exercise is in his or her shapes and to a lesser extent, how they rendered the forms”.

I am not a caricature artist, so my main “take away” from his lesson was to study the different colour temperatures and brushstrokes and exaggerate those in an another medium (digital). I’m on one hand very flattered that it looks like I’ve been “copying an image as it is/exactly the way it was drawn” and saddened to hear my exaggerated colouring and brush strokes are not visible.

I try to be very clear on where ever I post that this is a master study of another painting and I in no way, shape or form claim it to be my own original work. I sincerely apologize if that’s how it has come across, and I’ll make some clarifications.

(sidetrack?) I am pretty sure that you’re allowed to draw exactly what you see from a reference AS LONG as you have permission from the original photographer and/or it doesn’t infringe on copyright (like using open source images). There’s a giant sub genre of art just doing that, my favourite being Lachri finart (https://www.youtube.com/user/Lachri). She buys the rights to the image or uses open source photographies.
Also I think that even if you do somehow make it look original, but the reference image is still recognisable within the image and you don’t have the rights, that’s just as bad? Please do correct me if I’m wrong.
In continuation of this; I’ve only been posting studies of paintings older than from the 30’s to make sure that they’re in public domain and safe to use.

That’s basically true. It doesn’t matter, as long as you take something with you. Everybody is different and tries to approach things differently. Even old masters copied from their old masters. :slight_smile:

If you decide to study from a online reference you just never know what the original is doesn’t matter if you studie composition and shapes. Color maybe to some extends even if it’s altered the harmony inside may stay similar.

I have a problem with how artists present their studies. What I would like to see is the reference side by side, if you decide to publish your results online. And the logo isn’t needed at all. At least you mentioned it’s a study and a reference name. :slight_smile:

Mead Schaeffer was a study colleague of Cornwell.

I appreciate the feedback :slight_smile:

I agree with you, Aprisun. I think you brought something new and unique into the piece! You added colour wonderfully in a new and exciting way, and the piece has its own essence! I feel that master studies are not about making it as similar to the original as possible, but as you did, find something you want to focus on and bring a little of yourself into the piece. :blush:

In my opinion, this is totally okay to post, as you made it clear that it is a master study!
The book “Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain” recommended writing “after ‘X artist’” on master studies when you are done, and I really liked that recommendation. In this case, that would be “after Dean Cornwell” (Or “Mead Schaeffer”, I don’t know). That way you can have your logo, and a nice little nod to the original artist under it :smile:

2 Likes

I am very glad to hear that.
I was not aware that you could write that, and I’ll definitely be doing that if I ever decide to do another one. Thank you for the tip. :smiley:

1 Like

also post a link to the original if possible. it takes nothing away from your achievement. it may help your audience appreciate the effort even more. it could also engender a discussion about the challenges and successes you had. we all learn by copying and or appropriating but as long as you give attribution i think your fine. all the best to you…