I never get tired of looking at Opper, A. B. Frost, Kemble, Sullivant. Their animals and human characters are so interesting. You have a great channel, you are giving me a great education. Thank you. You are right illustrators don't get enough respect.
Thanks a lot for your comment. And I agree with you about that generation of pen and ink artists. Sullivant in particular is one of my all time heroes. Oh to be able to draw that expressively....
Hello to you and many thanks for your comment - it's much appreciated. The thing is I love making these videos so much it doesn't feel like work. And it gives me some purpose in retirement.
Thanks so much for covering Kupka. ''Give me the illustration over the painting every time.'' ... agreed. He was a truly remarkable talent. You were able to research a lot more information than I was aware of.
I love anthropomorphic animals when I was a little girl .Harry B.Nelison's works are so amazing!After watching your video ,I can not wait to learn more about him.Thanks again.
YOUR VIDEOS , NARRATIONS AND VISUALS ARE. OUTSTANDING / THANK YOU / I VE BEEN STUDYING ILLUSTRATIONS / BIOGRAPHIES AND DOING ILLUSTRATION FOR MY SELF AND OTHERS SINCE THE 1960'S / ALSO COMICS , CARTOONS AND COVER ART
I agree that Kupka was a far superior illustrator than artist. It's as if he had 2 styles battling for control of his attention. Thanks again Pete. Great work as usual.
By joining together four illustrators with often quite diverging styles, you never fail to arouse interest, additionally introducing many unknown, or rather forgotten, artists. For your smile for today: I told my husband yesterday I was watching another one of those “quartets of four” (obviously meaning quartet of illustrators). His raised eyebrows made me realise my error, so I gave him an explanation: A quartet surely is no sextet. But lacking two, it will be just that. If to a trio you add one You have a foursome. Can be done. Math is not quite my favourite thing - “Quartet of four has quite a ring”.
Thanks again for your appreciation and rhyme (which reminds me of Lewis Carroll). But just to keep you on your toes there are others in the series which feature five, and others with only three. I can't be relied on.
Really liked LePape’s fashion illustrations…..also pen & ink illustrations with watercolour…..regarding the other illustrator….takes a good imagination to come up with anthropomorphic characters
Hello yet again... sorry I just realised I've just replied to a couple of comments you made over a month ago. I had a senior moment and assumed they were new, but I realise they had been responded to in another reply at the time. I need a lie down in a darkened room...
*Thanks* for showing Frantisek Kupka's illustration side. 6:46 for what its worth Kupka borrowed Jean-Auguste Dominique Ingres' portrait of Louis-Francois Bertin for this image which is ok. Howzabotz, a nod to *Kathe Kollwitz* 1867-1945 She did illustrate fot Simplizissimus.
Hello again and if memory serves I did check out Kollwitz quite early on but struggled to find enough that could be called illustration rather than graphic art. But following your prod I'll take another look and see if there's more to be found.
Thank you but ... I would agree there may not be enough work of Kollwitz's that qualifies as illustration and as you have already looked into it that's enough. No need to look further. It was just a passing thought. I'm still clarifying to myself the terms graphics, commercial art, illustration ... and on and on. Your series helps to put light on the matter.
@@johannsmithe2570 Like a lot of definitions the harder you look into them the more they confound you. But the Cambridge dictionary defines illustration as follows...
I feel like I would enjoy very much to be like Fred Opper, I live in New York too and I’d love to able to earn a living just from drawing but I feel like there’s too much of a stigma associated with not finishing school, and I’m not sure if my parents would approve
Hello and thanks for liking. In Opper's day it was not unusual to have not gone to art school. Not so much now but it can be done by using online sources - most of them free. Either way I wish you luck.
Thanks for the question, but my answer will have to be rather vaugue. Will it ever have a renaissance that equals the golden age of the early 20th century? Highly unlikely, given the dominance of photography in the media. I can't remember the last time I saw an illustrated magazine or poster. Illustrated books have survived though, and there are some out there who are carrying on with traditional methods I'm glad to say. But digital processes make it so much easier and the quality in general goes down year on year, it seems to me.
Hi Pete, great video as usual. I have been learning more about Lepape recently, his style is so organic. Where do you find the images you put to your videos? :)
Hi there and thanks for your continued support. As to where I find the images I have a reasonable library that's built up over the last 50 years but probably 80 percent is from the internet. Many are too small for use but the good stuff is out there if you know what you're looking for.
@@petebeard It is a channel worthy of loyalty. Thanks for the advice about finding images. Studying Illustration at uni has been fascinating but they have funny academic views on what 'the history of illustration is' so it is so nice to be able to go to these quality videos for contextual studies :)
Ah yes... the academics. Usually people who have never been near a drawing board or mac and use words such as 'zeitgeist'. I miss the students from the years I taught but not the other lecturers. Keep in mind that the quality of your degree means next to nothing in the real world. It's the work that counts.
@@petebeard Exactly! That is genuinely one of the first words we were told to write notes on 😂 I will, illustrating is definitely a job where the portfolio is the thing that counts :)
Oops.. I usually try to check pronunciation of foreign names but this one got under the radar. Mea culpa. And if it isn't his image at 10.33 somebody has miscredited it. On the other hand it looks every bit as dull as the one that follows it and that one's signed so who knows?
@@petebeard We may be looking at different images. The one that isn't Lepape (truly, it isn't!) has a woman in an evening dress with black hair & shoes - with no background - it's @10:55 not 10:33. Strangely, considered what he ended up doing, Lepape had an obvious lack of interest in drawing detailed images of women's clothes. The image just before the non-Lepape (@10:50) is a good example - he was being paid to carefully describe two dresses and clearly was bored to death doing it, the background being the best part of the picture. He was always best while he was allowed free rein.
@@johnvonundzu2170 Hi again and you may well be right. For the life of me I can't find the original picture so where I got it God only knows. I thought it was one of his for Jean Patou but it isn't signed and as Lepape seems to have signed everything else he did that's probably a give away. Put it down to old age - it's not the first and won't be the last. I'll put a disclaimer in the description box.
@@petebeard You're right, Lepape signed everything he did. His more ambitious, less commercial work he signed simply "lepape", otherwise. "grs lepape". In book illustration, his signature would often appear only in the frontispiece - a custom of the time. The "Patou" image is one of thousands done by often anonymous artists for Vogue, etc.
I never get tired of looking at Opper, A. B. Frost, Kemble, Sullivant. Their animals and human characters are so interesting. You have a great channel, you are giving me a great education. Thank you. You are right illustrators don't get enough respect.
Thanks a lot for your comment. And I agree with you about that generation of pen and ink artists. Sullivant in particular is one of my all time heroes. Oh to be able to draw that expressively....
I just love your beautiful videos. It is so obvious that you put a great deal of love and care into creating them.💙🙏🏽💙
Hello and I find it immensely rewarding when viewers bother to tell me they appreciate what I'm doing - so thanks a lot.
Thank you. A pleasure in trying times.
Hello again Michael. As I was already retired it hasn't impacted me too much, but I wonder how the hell we'll recover from this.
Thanks Pete.
Thanks for the massive amount of work you have done to create this amazing series.
Hello to you and many thanks for your comment - it's much appreciated. The thing is I love making these videos so much it doesn't feel like work. And it gives me some purpose in retirement.
Thank you for this series. I am learning a lot. Very inspiring. Cant wait for the next one
Hi and thanks for viewing. Lots more to come...
Thanks so much for covering Kupka.
''Give me the illustration over the painting every time.'' ... agreed.
He was a truly remarkable talent.
You were able to research a lot more information than I was aware of.
Don't thank me - it was your very welcome suggestion. Thanks again
Thanks for another great video
I love anthropomorphic animals when I was a little girl .Harry B.Nelison's works are so amazing!After watching your video ,I can not wait to learn more about him.Thanks again.
Hi and thanks for watching. If you like comical animal illustration take a kook at Keith Ward in Unsung 34. Many more on the way.
@@petebeard 👌
Love this series
YOUR VIDEOS , NARRATIONS AND VISUALS ARE. OUTSTANDING / THANK YOU / I VE BEEN STUDYING ILLUSTRATIONS / BIOGRAPHIES AND DOING ILLUSTRATION FOR MY SELF AND OTHERS SINCE THE 1960'S / ALSO COMICS , CARTOONS AND COVER ART
Hello again, and my sincere thanks to you for the positive nature of your comment, and continued viewing.
I agree that Kupka was a far superior illustrator than artist. It's as if he had 2 styles battling for control of his attention.
Thanks again Pete. Great work as usual.
And thanks again to you for your dedication to the channel.
Great video s very enjoyable many thanks
wonderful work, wonderful stuff, that's on art and presentation thanks...
Many thanks for your appreciation. It's always welcome here.
By joining together four illustrators with often quite diverging styles, you never fail to arouse interest, additionally introducing many unknown, or rather forgotten, artists.
For your smile for today:
I told my husband yesterday I was watching another one of those “quartets of four” (obviously meaning quartet of illustrators). His raised eyebrows made me realise my error, so I gave him an explanation:
A quartet surely is no sextet.
But lacking two, it will be just that.
If to a trio you add one
You have a foursome. Can be done.
Math is not quite my favourite thing -
“Quartet of four has quite a ring”.
Thanks again for your appreciation and rhyme (which reminds me of Lewis Carroll). But just to keep you on your toes there are others in the series which feature five, and others with only three. I can't be relied on.
Really liked LePape’s fashion illustrations…..also pen & ink illustrations with watercolour…..regarding the other illustrator….takes a good imagination to come up with anthropomorphic characters
Hello again and thanks. I know it's a generalisation but 1920s paris has to be just about the most stylish time and place ever.
Hello yet again... sorry I just realised I've just replied to a couple of comments you made over a month ago. I had a senior moment and assumed they were new, but I realise they had been responded to in another reply at the time. I need a lie down in a darkened room...
*Thanks* for showing Frantisek Kupka's illustration side.
6:46 for what its worth
Kupka borrowed Jean-Auguste Dominique Ingres' portrait of Louis-Francois Bertin for this image which is ok.
Howzabotz, a nod to
*Kathe Kollwitz* 1867-1945
She did illustrate fot Simplizissimus.
Hello again and if memory serves I did check out Kollwitz quite early on but struggled to find enough that could be called illustration rather than graphic art. But following your prod I'll take another look and see if there's more to be found.
Thank you but ...
I would agree there may not be enough work of Kollwitz's that qualifies as illustration and as you have already looked into it that's enough. No need to look further.
It was just a passing thought.
I'm still clarifying to myself the terms graphics, commercial art, illustration ... and on and on.
Your series helps to put light on the matter.
@@johannsmithe2570 Like a lot of definitions the harder you look into them the more they confound you. But the Cambridge dictionary defines illustration as follows...
Been to Galleries La Fayette..one of the most beautiful shopping places
Hello and thanks a lot for your recent comments. It means a lot to me.
*Maud the temperamental mule* was funny ... 1904!!!
I feel like I would enjoy very much to be like Fred Opper, I live in New York too and I’d love to able to earn a living just from drawing but I feel like there’s too much of a stigma associated with not finishing school, and I’m not sure if my parents would approve
Hello and thanks for liking. In Opper's day it was not unusual to have not gone to art school. Not so much now but it can be done by using online sources - most of them free. Either way I wish you luck.
pete beard im actually not in art school, I learned to draw all by myself, i guess i just need to find a magazine that needs an illustrator haha.
Given the number of tools available on computers nowadays, do you think the Art of Illustration will make come back?
Thanks for the question, but my answer will have to be rather vaugue. Will it ever have a renaissance that equals the golden age of the early 20th century? Highly unlikely, given the dominance of photography in the media. I can't remember the last time I saw an illustrated magazine or poster. Illustrated books have survived though, and there are some out there who are carrying on with traditional methods I'm glad to say. But digital processes make it so much easier and the quality in general goes down year on year, it seems to me.
@@petebeard Even though your answer saddens me, I must say thank you for your effort.
Hi Pete, great video as usual. I have been learning more about Lepape recently, his style is so organic. Where do you find the images you put to your videos? :)
Hi there and thanks for your continued support. As to where I find the images I have a reasonable library that's built up over the last 50 years but probably 80 percent is from the internet. Many are too small for use but the good stuff is out there if you know what you're looking for.
@@petebeard It is a channel worthy of loyalty. Thanks for the advice about finding images.
Studying Illustration at uni has been fascinating but they have funny academic views on what 'the history of illustration is' so it is so nice to be able to go to these quality videos for contextual studies :)
Ah yes... the academics. Usually people who have never been near a drawing board or mac and use words such as 'zeitgeist'. I miss the students from the years I taught but not the other lecturers. Keep in mind that the quality of your degree means next to nothing in the real world. It's the work that counts.
@@petebeard Exactly! That is genuinely one of the first words we were told to write notes on 😂
I will, illustrating is definitely a job where the portfolio is the thing that counts :)
Lepape's name rhymes with tap and not tape. And is the image @10:55 actually his work? If so, it's very uncharacteristic - very generic 1930.
Oops.. I usually try to check pronunciation of foreign names but this one got under the radar. Mea culpa. And if it isn't his image at 10.33 somebody has miscredited it. On the other hand it looks every bit as dull as the one that follows it and that one's signed so who knows?
@@petebeard We may be looking at different images. The one that isn't Lepape (truly, it isn't!) has a woman in an evening dress with black hair & shoes - with no background - it's @10:55 not 10:33. Strangely, considered what he ended up doing, Lepape had an obvious lack of interest in drawing detailed images of women's clothes. The image just before the non-Lepape (@10:50) is a good example - he was being paid to carefully describe two dresses and clearly was bored to death doing it, the background being the best part of the picture. He was always best while he was allowed free rein.
@@johnvonundzu2170 Hi again and you may well be right. For the life of me I can't find the original picture so where I got it God only knows. I thought it was one of his for Jean Patou but it isn't signed and as Lepape seems to have signed everything else he did that's probably a give away. Put it down to old age - it's not the first and won't be the last. I'll put a disclaimer in the description box.
@@petebeard You're right, Lepape signed everything he did. His more ambitious, less commercial work he signed simply "lepape", otherwise. "grs lepape". In book illustration, his signature would often appear only in the frontispiece - a custom of the time. The "Patou" image is one of thousands done by often anonymous artists for Vogue, etc.