Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Painting Challenge, BBC, again.... Episode 2
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
It seems to be agreed that any random selection of POL contributors could do better than the Challenge participants, although I don't know as I didn't watch this week's effort. However, in order to find some merit in the programme is it possible it might encourage those who would like to paint but are reluctant to give it a go for fear of embarrassment to take the view 'if they can have a go so can I!'
Posted
Thanks for giving me a chuckle Robert!
I thought yesterday's programme was an improvement, I think the contestants are starting to settle in a bit, listen a bit more and are more used to the attention. I enjoyed the subjects this week and there were some useful skills being taught by the mentors. I did think though that the exercise in quick painting that they did before the elephants should have come before the flamingos, as it seemed a number of the contestants weren't skilled in drawing and not comfortable in drawing from life. I don't think many of the flamingo paintings came out well. The elephant paintings were a bit better, and I liked the one that won the vote, as it actually looked as though the lady who painted it was enjoying herself, which I think goes a long way in art. Some people struggled with scale and some with composition, and it's becoming clearer where people's strong / weak points are.
I don't think the programme is a great art programme, but it belongs to a trend of programmes that have followed the bake-off and is more to do with entertainment than serious business. they are the kind of programme that is geared towards personalities, mishaps and mistakes, canvasses falling over and paints running off the page, rather than following the process of people turning out top quality work. For that I prefer the artist competitions on Sky Arts, which is much more of a documentary-type style than an entertainment show. In the BBC programme my favourite part is where Lachlan Goudie does his short film and teaches us about history and techniques. I think I would enjoy a series like this. I'm not giving up on the painting challenge, I love seeing how other artists work, and I want to see who wins now.
Kay M.
Posted
See Tony Palmer's flamingo on the Gallery. He's been painting for around 2 years, I believe - and his painting is better by far than any of those produced on the show. The fact that's supposed to be entertainment doesn't redeem it so far as I'm concerned. Would it encourage people to have a go? Possibly - but there are better ways of doing that, eg that demonstrated by Alwyn Crawshaw, Dermot Cavanagh, Frank Clark, and any number of other painters who have presented popular television shows in the past.
It's true of course that Tony didn't have the handicap of a tv crew peering at him, and I don't know how long it took him - but I'd be prepared to guess he didn't take as long as the contestants, given the programme aired yesterday, and he's posted his picture so soon after transmission.
Edited
by RobertJones
Posted
Tony's picture is very good - good composition and colours as well as atmosphere. And I agree, the best of the flamingo paintings that have appeared recently.
I actually hope the programme does encourage more people to have a go - it looks easy doesn't it? I'd be interested to head over to Edinburgh Zoo this weekend to see how many people are there drawing their flamingos!
Posted
Triduana - our posts overlapped, I wasn't trying to reply to yours and being all aggressive..... and actually you have a point about the winning elephant painting (Suman, was it?) She had looked at the animal, she'd caught something of its character; and the hairpiece girl, Amanda (? I forget names ..) produced her best painting of the series so far and perhaps has started to listen.
There was also one moderately amusing exchange, between Pascal Anson and Camilla - 'you're not painting the pond' - 'what am I painting then?' - pause.... 'a flamingo....' - or something like that. Camilla, who went, of course, was not so much 'out of her comfort zone' (a phrase I'm going to get entirely sick of hearing if I watch any more of these programmes) as just out of it altogether; I've seen a little of her work in the first programme, i.e. what she does when not in competition, and while it's not burnt itself onto my memory she clearly can paint what she likes to paint: but unfortunately, what she likes to paint had absolutely nothing to do with the requirements of the programme, and at some point you'd have thought someone might have noticed that. Anson referred to this in a previous programme - that you won't grow as an artist if all you paint is what you like to paint; but then - don't most of us paint what we like to paint, or that which interests us? And have not artists at all levels of ability always done that?
There's one contestant - name might be David - who clearly has no respect at all for the tutors; he said of one suggestion that it seemed "a bit art school": I think he uncovered something there - he's hemmed in and frustrated by the format of the programme and plainly yearns to break right out of it; he seems not to grasp the requirements not because he's not skilled enough to meet them, but because he finds them footling. And some of them are .... (I'm reminded of another exchange in the previous programme between Camilla and Anson: she said she didn't understand what he was talking about half the time - two totally different worlds in full-on collision; it's not his fault she didn't understand, but that she - whose fault it wasn't either - had never actually studied or even thought about the disciplines he takes for granted.)
It may be that you can't get a competition of this sort right - but the fundamental problem with this one is that the criteria are heavily skewed towards accurate drawing: and that most of the contestants just aren't used to that and seem to have an extraordinarily limited range of experience and to be leaning heavily on interpretation - they've swallowed the stay loose mantra, while the programme demands something quite different. They are amateur artists being put through professional exercises and they just don't speak the language. If you're going to do this - maybe use art students instead, who at least will have some background (you'd hope) in learning art techniques on a formal basis. Amateur artists can be held to certain standards - just not those demanded here.
Posted
I found the response from our 'resident hack' Robert to have hit the nail on the head, namely that that we have two and I quote 'totally different worlds in full-on collision. One of them has a working association with the prestigious RCA whilst the contestants have little knowledge of the basic principles of drawing and painting and of course it's not their fault.
We all know, or should know that observational drawing skills are the backbone of any successful painting (for figurative work), and these skills are so often ignored by many beginners but ignore them at your peril. They are ignored mainly because it's often considered too boring to pick up a pencil and a desire to move straight into colour. None of these contestants have very good drawing skills and it inevitably shows through as a weakness in the finished product.
I do agree with Robert that this weeks winner did produce an excellent piece, way ahead of any of the others and will probably go on to win the whole thing. There was (for me anyway) a modicum of entertainment value in the programme, that's because I am looking at it in a different light this week and my expectations are much lower, I will probably continue through with the series, after all if I don't watch it I won't be able to comment on here and I have to say that it has turned out to be an interesting and lively discussion which can't be a bad thing.
Posted
Well the television company responsible for the 'Painting Challenge' has achieved it's objective and that is to create a talking point whether it be negative or positive. Television nowadays, is all about ratings and not about people. They have taken 10 artists (and judging by the quality of their art before the competition, they are fairly good artists), out of their comfort zone. This gives us the impression that they are poor artists. To expose yourself like this is not for the vulnerable and I do wonder why a few of them, who obviously don't want to change their art, have exposed themselves like this. Perhaps it is to do with the all-important '15 minutes of fame' that so many people seem to crave nowadays. The shame is, I feel, that David (the pointillist), did not go with his 'gut feeling' and put in his second painting for judging, but went with the one his mentor raved over. The judges didn't like it anyway. The mentor, Pascal, in this case, runs up and down in his orange dungarees trying to impose his will on the artists and, if my reading of his body language is correct, is put out, if his 'advice' is not carried out. I have a lot of trouble with the tag 'expert' as some of you will know, because in my mind they are only good at what they do. Also, there have been some odd remarks from him, like "if you only paint what you like, you will never be a good artist". Isn't painting what we like the very thing that inspires us? Also his comment on Sunday is that 'a good artist is a troublemaker' - what piffle! If we all did the same, what a boring world it would be! So, as it has already been suggested here, we should look at this programme as purely entertainment and not get too worked up about it.
I would just be very sorry for these artists, who, even though they went into this competition of their own free will, are just pawns in the money-grabbing world where so many people are willing to put other people down for good television ratings. Let's be grateful we aren't in their place. I also hope that some of these artists don't lose the love of painting and creating after this. Even the judges can't seem to agree on each painting's merits, so what can the artist glean from their conflicting 'advice'?
Bring back 'Watercolour Challenge' where everything was soft, gentle and I think the sun shone most of the time. And, at the end of each programme, we had three lovely and very different interpretations of the finished paintings. Yes, very ideal, but what the heck is wrong with that?
Posted
Possibly Watercolour Challenge gains a little rose-tinted glow in retrospect - I seem to recall some god-awful paintings, hardly surprising given it was always watercolour, and these paintings can go hideously wrong in the most expert of hands if a subject is being attempted which is unfamiliar.
It also bit off just about as much as it could chew, though - i.e., it stuck to watercolour. That, the format, the presenter, and trying to forget the Actor's tones in which the largely irrelevant poetry was read, made it work. Did the sun always shine? Can't remember.... Rupert (oh Rupert, where art thou?) could tell us.
Posted
It's like thinking back to our childhood Robert, I can recall all summer long the sun shone when I was young - well ok perhaps a little of the rose tint! Watercolour Challenge was on during my pre-painting days and any painting was good to me. I cannot recall the poetry though - selective memory perhaps. I do recall Hannah Gordon and the way she tiptoed around the contestants whispering.
Unfortunately it takes me a long long time to decipher what I am seeing in front of me - perhaps another quirk of my brain to go with all the others! Funnily enough I can understand the young lady's comments when she looks at her painting and remarks that other people can't see what she can. Often I have to call Chas in to ask him what I am looking at. Drawing comes a lot easier to some artists than others although perhaps if I practiced more it would become easier but my excitement has always been in the painting of my project and not the drawing. Takes all sorts and that what makes us all so interesting.
Posted
I just wondered if you all know that the male presenter, Rev. Richard Coles used to be a pop musician. He was in the band the Communards alongside Jimmy Sommerville before entering the church. Not my type of music at all but thought you may be interested. I wonder why the BBC chose him and the female presenter. I'm enjoying reading this thread immensely as I too have watched the programme and have all the same thoughts as you lot. But why oh why would you put yourself through the stress of being filmed, I don't understand.