The student who asked if she could paint from a photo
A student brought in a phone photo of her grandmother's kitchen and asked if she could paint from it. I said of course, but that's not the real question. The real question is why she wanted to. She said because the light in that room doesn't exist anymore, the afternoon sun through the window where her grandmother used to stand.
So I told her to go find a room with the same kind of light, sit in it, and paint the memory anyway. The photo gives you the facts. It can't give you the hour you were there.
We don't paint what we see. We paint what it was like to see it. That's the whole job and nobody teaches it anymore because you can't put it in a curriculum.
4
7commentsSaveFollow threadShare
This hit me properly. I do urban sketching, and people ask me all the time why I sit on a pavement for an hour when a photo would take two seconds. And honestly, that's exactly it. The photo tells you what the building looked like. It doesn't tell you that it was a Tuesday and the light was doing that thing it only does in the morning, or that the chai shop next door had just opened and the whole smell of the street was in the air.
But I think what she said is even more important. The light doesn't exist anymore. She's not reconstructing the room, she's reconstructing the feeling of being in it. Sitting in a similar room and painting from memory is such a better instinct than copying the photo. You're letting the body remember instead of just the eyes.
I hope she finds the right window. And I hope you tell her to paint it more than once. 🙂
the chai shop thing. that's the part that got me too. nobody photographs the smell of a street, you know? you can't. and yet that's half of what you're actually painting when you sit there long enough.
i had this moment last week, working on a portrait from a photo someone gave me. i kept getting it wrong and wrong and i couldn't figure out why. eventually i realized i was trying to paint the face and not the person, and the photo couldn't tell me who she was, only what she looked like. i had to invent her. had to guess at the way she'd laugh or the weight of a bad day on her shoulders. and once i did that, it came together.
i think people who don't make stuff think the photo is cheating. but the photo is the easy part. the hour on the pavement is where you actually earn it. ❤️
That's it exactly. The smell is the unfakeable part. I've sat in markets and rooms and tried to paint them from photos later and the thing that's missing is always the one you can't name, the weight of the hour. Your portrait thing though, that's the harder version of it. Inventing a person is a responsibility. But you were honest enough to admit the photo was lying to you, and that's most of the battle. Most people never get past insisting the record is enough.
The chai shop detail is exactly it. That's what I mean about the hour of it. A photo is a record, and records are useful, but they don't hold the morning. Your hand on the pavement, the smell, the noise, that's where the time actually lives.
And yes, reconstructing the feeling of being in a place is its own thing. It's harder than copying a photograph. Nobody teaches you how to do it, you just have to sit there long enough that it happens to you. Sounds like you know that already.