A minor nit-pick: Obama's official white house portrait is an oil painting - both the one you linked to, and the extraordinary portrait by Kehinde Wiley that hangs in the National Portrait Gallery. I'm a little confused as to which image of Trump - there are both paintings and photos - is "the" official one. I don't think there's an official Biden painting yet, but I assume there will be; sometimes they're not painted until after the person is out of office. (Trump's might also be still to come).
In terms of artists incorporating new tech into their work, you mentioned people using photos as reference. But it's becoming increasingly common for people to generate AI images for reference, too.
Thanks! I fixed it in the post. It was simply a sufficiently photo-realistic painting that I just assumed, at a glance, it was a photo.
I suppose there might be an official Trump painting that will displace that one, but as of now, there's a photograph, so I'll stick with it. Of course, if I had *my* way his official portrait would be his mug shot, but I don't suppose that will be a sufficiently popular opinion to gain consensus. (If I ever do a history which has pictures of presidents, I think my official policy will be "use a mug shot, if one is available; for all others, use official photographs".)
That's interesting about artists generating AI images to use for reference—I didn't know that.
That artist is known for his photo-realistic paintings, always portraits, always on a plain white background. He's very good at what he does, but you're right, without a close look, they're easy to mistake for photos.
Honestly, that mug shot of Trump is maybe the most striking image of him yet.
A minor nit-pick: Obama's official white house portrait is an oil painting - both the one you linked to, and the extraordinary portrait by Kehinde Wiley that hangs in the National Portrait Gallery. I'm a little confused as to which image of Trump - there are both paintings and photos - is "the" official one. I don't think there's an official Biden painting yet, but I assume there will be; sometimes they're not painted until after the person is out of office. (Trump's might also be still to come).
In terms of artists incorporating new tech into their work, you mentioned people using photos as reference. But it's becoming increasingly common for people to generate AI images for reference, too.
Thanks! I fixed it in the post. It was simply a sufficiently photo-realistic painting that I just assumed, at a glance, it was a photo.
I suppose there might be an official Trump painting that will displace that one, but as of now, there's a photograph, so I'll stick with it. Of course, if I had *my* way his official portrait would be his mug shot, but I don't suppose that will be a sufficiently popular opinion to gain consensus. (If I ever do a history which has pictures of presidents, I think my official policy will be "use a mug shot, if one is available; for all others, use official photographs".)
That's interesting about artists generating AI images to use for reference—I didn't know that.
That artist is known for his photo-realistic paintings, always portraits, always on a plain white background. He's very good at what he does, but you're right, without a close look, they're easy to mistake for photos.
Honestly, that mug shot of Trump is maybe the most striking image of him yet.