King's Portrait.

[dextrous63]

Ooh.  Clever old you scrumps 

[Silver Tabby]

I think it is revolting - all that red is so aggressive.  He should have commissioned our Muddy and had a proper one done!

[Michael Rolls]

it's rubbish. A portrait is supposed to convey something of the character of the subject. Look at the great portraits, whether photo or painting. Very, very few have a full frontal face devoid of expression - if one can ignore the dominating red paint, it is a passport photo- and not a very good one as the features are somewhat elongated.

[muddy]

I think it is revolting - all that red is so aggressive.  He should have commissioned our Muddy and had a proper one done!

I only wish I could paint like Jonathan Yeo !

Red is really unusual in a portrait it does suggest anger maybe old Charles had some burning anger inside .

He's king now but it's all come a bit too late .

May 16, 2024, 06:44:49 AM

it's rubbish. A portrait is supposed to convey something of the character of the subject. Look at the great portraits, whether photo or painting. Very, very few have a full frontal face devoid of expression - if one can ignore the dominating red paint, it is a passport photo- and not a very good one as the features are somewhat elongated.

he seem to like the full frontal .
It's a difficult one to pull off .
( now I shall make everyone mad ) but I do think this is a good one of his .

[Diasi]

As a member of Republic I think the photo is a way of pointing out that the monarchy is slowly fading away, just like the robes in the picture. 

[GrannyMac]

You might have a point there Diasi.

[Scrumpy]

The portrait is certainly giving people something to talk about.. Unlike many of those of the past.. 
I think it is interesting.. The face is a kind face and a little vulnerable..
It is portraying a man .. not a king..
It is a painting that will , in my opinion, attract many visitors should it be displayed in a gallery..

[klondike]

I guess beauty must be in the eye of the beholder. I see nothing attractive about it at all and that is pretty much all I can think to say about it.

[Michael Rolls]

the one of Blair is better - an unattractive picture of an unattractive man. Clearly the artist (of whom I had never previously heard) didn't set out to flatter. They say that the eyes are the window of the soul - you can't even see into HM's, whereas with Blair....

[klondike]

I think I've improved the Blair one or at least made it more useful

[Michael Rolls]

      

[Scrumpy]

Having coffee yesterday the portrait was mentioned.. The younger people around really like it.. It seemed to be the older ones who didn't.. Perhaps they don't like change in any form..

[dextrous63]

Pity Damian Hirst wasn't involved.  It'd be a real talking point to have a tank full of formaldehyde with a dissected King Charles floating in it.

[Scrumpy]

Imagine finding one on the side of your house.. painted by Banksy.. !!

[Diasi]

Pity Damian Hirst wasn't involved.  It'd be a real talking point to have a tank full of formaldehyde with a dissected King Charles floating in it.

  As a Republican I have to agree.

Or since he's a King Charles just his head would do.