On the easel...

[Lordstan]

Graig,

As usual, your painting rocks. You could paint a pile of poo and it would probably look good.

My feeling on this painting is that I prefer your other work more.
For me the attention to detail is the thing that really breathes life into your work. Joe Jackson's hands and glove, Matty's face and uniform, Tyree and Harrison's image, Gehrig's face, Babe's nose and your manipulation of shadows in paintings too numerous to mention are the things that make your work speak to me and elicit that emotional response and connection. (Those of you who have followed this thread will understand which paintings I am referring to)

I can see what Dean means about the eyes, but I don't prefer that as the main effect. There is a certain fluidity of movement to your paintings that I think comes from the detail. We've discussed this before, so you know what I mean. I just don't get that from this one and it's one of the effects that I most admire in your work.

Now, I freely admit, that there are others out there who will appreciate this style. After all art appreciation is very subjective. Perhaps the non baseball people would like these more as Neiman has this looser style to his work and is arguably the most commercially successful sport artist ever. What do I know, I always thought his stuff was ugly. I guess different strokes for different folks.

All that being said, If you really don't know what to do with it, you can send it to me for safe keeping on a wall in my home.

(Note to self: Damn, I gotta start saving money for my next painting)

Best,
Mark


EDIT: Graig, I have a better idea. Why don't you paint the same image in your regular style and send them both to me so I can inspect and compare them in person on my wall. That would be the fairest way to truly see which style I would like better.

[mr2686]

I agree. Although the new style is great, it's kinda going away from what you're known and appreciated for.

[timzcardz]

My thoughts.

Two Kreindler Ruth's.

The first is what we've come to love. The second is nice, but it is completely different.

If I had not known the first, I imagine that I would be more enamored with the 2nd than I am. The implication is that I do not have the same appreciation for the 2nd as the 1st.

In real simple terms, with your usual style I find myself wishing that I could afford a piece, and longing for my sons to finish up college and start supporting themselves. With the second style, it is nice but I don't have a desire to have one.

Again second style is nice, but I think that it lacks the character that your normal style has, which seems to tell a story.

With the second style I find myself looking at it from the outside, as opposed to your normal style where I can feel immersed in it, like I am able to imagine being there.

Would I appreciate it if someone gave it to me? Yes.

Would I buy it myself? No.

If I were to see the 2nd style with your name on it, without seeing it here from you first, I would think that it was a very poor forgery of your work. Without your name on it, I wouldn't be able to pick it out as yours.

That's just one man's thoughts and opinon though.

And since Nieman was already mentioned, I am not a fan of his work either. Go figure.

[jt39]

The above posters have put it very well. I think that what may come to be known as your "Realist Period" is not yet over, and you should wait to begin the "Abstract Period" for a personal/artistic yearning to explore different means of expression, not because your agent thinks you can crank out more saleable work that way!*

*This last clause is totally a joke.

[esd10]

those paintings are amazing and you have a gift

[GKreindler]

Wow, guys. Thank you SO much. This was exactly what I was hoping for.

I'm definitely on the same page as all of you, as it's pretty hard for me to do a quick sketch and call it 'finished'. That has a lot to do with the fact that I can show a lot of OCD when it comes down to the kind of minutia some of these paintings demand. Additionally, beyond feeding into those obsessions, I think those little things are what really make the pictures fun to me. Well, the whole thing is really fun, but you know what I mean. I guess since I end up doing so much research regarding weather, advertisement colors, game situations and everything in-between, I feel like I just yearn to show it all.

And in a way, I feel like most baseball enthusiasts want to see it all. I mean, not in my paintings per se, but in whatever they collect. I think that's one of the reasons the game is so wonderful: their history just becomes so strict, that if done 'right', all of that minutia is able to evoke a specific era that much more.

Now, I don't intend on making a habit of doing these sketches for any purpose other than for color studies, so none of you will have to worry about me changing my approach or anything. Not that you're worried. But you know what I mean. Perhaps when I'm older and can't really get as tight as I want to be, things will become more expressive. Until then I'll be keepin' it tight!!

Thanks again,

Graig

[GKreindler]

Hey all,

Thanks again for all of your opinions regarding that Ruth study - it's nice to have feedback on something that's been sitting in the dark for a couple of months.

Hopefully, everybody on the east coast wasn't terribly effected by Irene. Luckily, things weren't too bad in our part of Brooklyn. So, after a bunch of working this weekend, I feel like I've accomplished something. Well, not much, but a start.

For starters, I just got these back from the photographers today:


Derek Jeter, 2000


Eddie Bennett, 1921


Pat Collins, 1926


Lou Gehrig, 1936

Though I had painted the same image a couple of years back, I had to do the Gehrig over unfortunately, the reason which doesn't make me happy. Though, I suppose at the new size (16" x 20"), it could be a cool start to a project depicting portraits of the '36 Yanks and Giants - something I've had in the back of my head for a while now. I figure in the end, it will encompass about 50 paintings, and in the end, could hopefully be displayed in some gallery somewhere as a set. Or, two sets. So, I guess that's where my spare spare time is going to be spent...

Already next on the list is Mr. Ruffing, which is currently in progress:


Red Ruffing, 1936

After that, I have to take this guy to the photographers in a week or so, after some glazes and a varnish:


Stan Musial, 1942

The Musial is also 16" x 20" and I must say, I REALLY dig that size for portraits like this. It just seems super comfortable, and the heads end up being about 3/4 life sized, which is pretty ideal.

And the big guy on the easel, the one that needs to be done by the end of the week:




Babe Ruth, November 4, 1934

The Bambino is taking part of a pre-game home run derby of sorts, before the start of an exhibition game. Actually, it was the first contest for the U.S. team during their famous tour of Japan, with this scene taking place at Meiji Jingu Stadium.

The canvas is GINORMOUS. I think the final size ends up being about 50" x 64", and since I'm using a different kind of stretcher bar for something this large, it feels like it weighs about 300lbs...well, maybe not that much...but it's hard to move!!

Anywho, I hope you guys dig 'em. As per usual, excuse my cruddy photography on those last few. And comments/crits/problems/tomatoes are always appreciated!

Thanks,

Graig