1. "That portrait of Lizzie on ebay last month"
Posted by Stefani on Jan-16th-03 at 10:07 AM

Well, folks, I was the high bidder on that supposed portrait of Lizzie that was on ebay (the one we discussed in the privy in December). The consensus was that this was not Lizzie based on a careful analysis of the eyes, ears, look in the eyes, etc.

The portrait arrived yesterday and I took it apart and put it back together again (the frame, the image, and such) and discovered something neat (no, not an original copy of the Declaration of Independence). The portrait is not a photograph. It is an inked drawing. So well done in fact it looks like a photograph.

But the shoulders are too small for the head. I touched the image and my fingers got the charcoal or whatever was used to make the image on them. Plus the image is on top of the paper and you can feel the surface of the image. The image is 3-D to the touch.

So, this still could be Lizzie in my opinion. Since it is an artist's representation of a woman the problems with the image not being and exact likeness is explained.

I am sure I need more information than my opinion on this, but I am not resigned to the fact that I purchased a phoney photograph, but delighted that it turned out to be a drawing.

here is a copy of the image as it was posted in the Privy in December.

I also had a wonderful find! In between the drawing and the wooden back of this frame was a print of some fruit in a bowl. It is absolutely stunning and I was taken aback by the colors. Then I noticed it. There is a big fat pear in the image. Now isn't that a coincidence?

The colors are great.  Wouldn't it be something if it was worth a fortune!  Be like winning one of those rub off lottery tickets.

If it's a drawing then you are right, it could be of Lizzie.  I still don't like her eyes though.

WOW!
Edisto's comments would be useful here.
That bowl of fruit looks familiar...the style.  I wonder who it is that did that?  The dripping shape of the grapes and the bright color w/ dark background.
I wonder if the seller had opened the back?  I would've too!
Well, I guess I say "Welcome to the family"!

[edit:  Oh I getcha Harry!  The eyelids, right?]

(Message last edited Jan-16th-03  5:33 PM.)

Mmmm...I have to say I'm not an expert on works of art, although I was once very interested in that kind of thing and spent lots of time studying it.  I like that still life mainly because the colors are vivid.  I doubt that it's by a "listed" artist, though.  Mostly I'm interested only in pictures that have people in them.  Much as I would like to believe it's Lizzie in the portrait, I don't really think it is.  (If it's any consolation, I bought a "Lizzie" portrait about the same time that probably isn't Lizzie either!)  It's interesting, though, because it certainly does have some features (and a general look) n common with Lizzie.  Didn't the seller say in the listing that it was a drawing?  I believe I read that and looked at the picture and thought, "This looks like a photograph."  It's so extremely detailed!  Artists who do that kind of work usually capture an almost photographic likeness, which makes it less likely that Lizzie's features would have been idealized or distorted.  However, I could definitely be wrong about this.  I have to agree that it does indeed look like Lizzie.

Thanks for coming and giving us the benefit of your opinion.
When antiques come up, I WANT Edisto!

I suppose next, an artiste, like Susan, might have a comment on the technique?

Are you talking about the still life with the fruit or the drawing of the woman?  The still life looks like its possibly an early print of an oil painting due to the garish colors, is there a year on it at all?

As for the woman, the technique is referred to as Photo realism.  My teachers in school were against this type of art, they were of the mind if you were producing art, it should look like art and not a photo.  If you wanted to make art that looked like a photo, grab a camera.  I personally don't subscribe to that point of view myself, I'm amazed at artists that can do that caliber of work, especially on such a small piece.  What are the dimensions of the drawing?

My thinking is that when the original photo was taken, there wasn't ways of making a copy, I don't think they had negatives then like we do today.  Perhaps someone wanted a copy of this picture and had an artist make a copy of it with charcoal or a soft pencil.  Is there a year given on the piece for when it was created?  Artist's name?  It really is a fine piece, it does look so much like an old photograph. 

Susan, is that sometimes referred to as pencil portraits as well?  I've seen some remarkable liknesses on a few web sites but didn't associate it with Stefani's picture.

Stefani's picture is an amazing likeness to a photo. Must have taken a long time.

I understand there is a painting of her in the FR Historical Society. We can always use another...go for it Susan!

(Message last edited Jan-17th-03  6:37 AM.)

Do you mean, can pencil portraits be considered Photorealism?  If it looks like a photo instead of pencil drawing, then yes.  The term, Photorealism, was coined in the 1960s when artists began to produce works that were hyper realistic.  It can be done in any medium, pencil, charcoal, oil paints, acrylics, etc.  Here is the work of one of our contemporary artists, Chuck Close, an acylic painting on canvas.



He is quite the master at this technique.

There is a painting of the woman in Stef's drawing at the FRHS?  Or are you talking about our Lizzie?  My brother is talking about doing a painting of Lizzie actually which he sketched out for me, looks very cool!  Lizzie standing, eating a pear looking out at the viewer, while in the foreground is a hatchet in a chopping block,  Definitely a did she or didn't she moment! 

That is incredible. I'm impressed. You would never know it was drawn.

At least I think there is a  painting in the FRHS of Lizzie. I vaguely remember reading something.  Does anyone know for sure?

Encourage your brother! Sounds like a great pose.

If he does, whatever you do, don't post it on the forum for you know what happens here. Send it privately to those you want to see it. It's unfortunate that decent people have to live that way.

(Message last edited Jan-17th-03  1:27 PM.)

That sounds really cool-please let us know if and when your brother does the drawing. But Harry's right about sending it privatly:phee-phi-phoe-Phart might want a piece of the action on ebay

(Message last edited Jan-17th-03  2:35 PM.)

That picture you posted was incredible, Susan!
Thanks!
The technique of the likeness WAS what I was interested in, in your response.
Stef said her picture was large.
I asked her if it was as large as "Gommie" and she said she thought so.
"Gommie" is a photo portrait of our great-grandmother in a gilded-type frame taken when she was about 20.
That one is just a smidgen short of life-size!
Stef said the frame was similiar, also.
She really is amazed.

Yes, I told my brother about our Phriend and that I wouldn't really be able to post the picture when its done.  I was wondering if the FRHS would be interested in buying it or just accept things as donations?  My brother had the idea that if its just donations they should take the painting and make poster prints of it to sell and hopefully he would get some of the profits from that, who knows?  If not, theres always the B&B.

So, Stef's drawing is almost life-size too?  Cool!  Is there any way that you can post a pic of Gommie?  I'd like to see her, with that name she sounds like she was a really neat lady.

Oh, BTW, Chuck Close works larger than life-size.  I heard a story about him from one of my art teachers which I thought was soooo cool.  You see how incredibly detailed his portraits are?  Well, one day at a gallery showing of his work a man approached Mr. Close and said he wanted to meet the model who posed for the one portrait.  Mr. Close said that he respected his model's privacy and didn't divulge their personal info.  The man said that he was a skin doctor and that the man who posed for the portrait had highly developed skin cancer and needed treatment immediately!  Thats how detailed his work is, incredible! 

Some of those 19th century drawings were done post-mortem.
I guess rather than just having a photograph of a loved
one dead they wanted to "capture" them alive. I know you
can find a lot of post-mortem pictures of babies but not
very many of adults........

Didn't artists sign their works back then?  Even two initials? Perhaps there is a signature of a kind there but it's disguised or hard to see. Have you used a magnifying glass?  Would these kind of drawings have been made with a person sitting for it?  Highly doubtful I would think, too hard on the subject.  Could the bowl of fruit have been used as a stiffener, like we would use a piece of cardboard today to make sure the art wasn't loose in the frame?  But that would mean the fruit wasn't valued except a packing material. Hard to say why it was there.