Jump to content

Barack and Michelle Obama's Official Portraits


DeFrank

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, DeFrank said:

This morning, the official portraits of the 44th president of the United States, Barack Obama, and his wife Michelle, were unveiled.

 

PA_NPG_18_55_Obama_R_copy.1518457375.jpg

only thing i will say is what ever happen to official portraits like this:

800px-Dwight_D._Eisenhower%2C_official_Presidential_portrait.jpg

so long and thanks for all the fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Barack's is stunning. For the first three minutes or so I didn't like it, because I was expecting/looking forward to a "conventional" portrait. In the same way I'm excited for the USS Barack Obama, Obama International Airport, and Barack Obama Elementary, because of what that will continue to represent, I was excited for a conventional portrait. But very quickly I began to appreciate the audacity and beauty of what was unveiled. What was considered within bounds for who could be the president changes in 2008, and it makes sense to me that Barack Obama's portrait changes what is considered in bounds for a presidential portrait in such a gorgeous way.

concepts: washington football (2017) ... nfl (2013) ... yikes

potd 10/20/12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/12/2018 at 4:57 PM, DeFrank said:

In the same way I'm excited for the USS Barack Obama, Obama International Airport, and Barack Obama Elementary, because of what that will continue to represent,

MOD EDIT

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a fan of either of these portraits, to be honest. I think I'd prefer Barack's if it didn't look like the chair - and the subject - were floating in a sea of ivy. There's no distinction between the background and the floor on which the chair is sitting. It's jarring. Also don't like how the background (intentionally) competes for attention with the President. Calling it a background isn't really accurate, to be honest. The flowers and ivy are just as much the focus of attention as Barack himself, perhaps even grabbing more attention. There's no white space or relief anywhere in that portrait - everything grabs the eye, everything is competing for attention. A metaphor for modern-day America, perhaps, but not an apt metaphor for the no-drama Obama Administration, which always sought to be intellectual, clear-thinking, and focused.

 

And Michelle's portrait? I'd say it suffers from the opposite problem. Nothing grabs the eye. It's entirely in drab shades. Gray skin, a black and white dress lacking much adornment (except at its very bottom), the plainest of plain backgrounds. Nothing to evoke the style or elegance of the First Lady. And the facial features look absolutely nothing like her. I'd never pick that out as Michelle Obama, ever.

 

Obama in front of a vibrant floral background could've been interesting and visually appealing. This failed, both in its lack of spacial orientation, and in the competition for visual attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Kaz said:

Barack's looks really kitschy.  I could see it as a poster in some hippy's shaggy house next to a Kit-Cat clock.

 

I like the simplicity of Michelle's, but the face doesn't resemble hers at all and I think it would look better if they didn't de-saturate her skin so much.

I felt like both belong in the Smithsonian as conversation pieces rather than their official portraits. If I don't look at Obama's feet I can almost see this as being on a lawn somewhere on the White House grounds. But once I see the chair in the air, I have no clue what's going on here. 

km3S7lo.jpg

 

Zqy6osx.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like both of them, but I prefer Barack's more than Michelle's. The contrast between the bright green background and the dull color of his suit really pops, and I think the leaves are some kind of metaphor for growth during his presidency. And to go back to one of the comments from before about how "It'S nOt LiKe ThE oLd OnEs So ItS bAd!1!!!!" I say that an artistic representation of a president is much better than a boring portrait that has been rehashed president after president.

 

I don't like Michelle's as much as I like Barack's, though. I like Michelle's, and it's not that bad, it's just that her face doesn't look like, well, her face. The piece definitely shows off her seriousness, with bright splotches of color/fun here and there, but there's just something about her face that doesn't capture what it really looks like.

 

Neither of them are bad, though. I like them both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of either of them.  In Barack's the background is too busy and takes the focus away from him where I feel it should be, while Michelle's looks unfinished with no background to provide balance.  However, if the Obama's like them that's what matters.  They're art and whether art is good is a subjective analysis, everyone has their own opinion.

 

At least they're not the worst official portraits I've seen.  That honor goes to the portrait of Jerry Brown in the California State Capitol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, tp49 said:

I'm not a fan of either of them.  In Barack's the background is too busy and takes the focus away from him where I feel it should be, while Michelle's looks unfinished with no background to provide balance.  However, if the Obama's like them that's what matters.  They're art and whether art is good is a subjective analysis, everyone has their own opinion.

 

At least they're not the worst official portraits I've seen.  That honor goes to the portrait of Jerry Brown in the California State Capitol. 

Just looked at that. I'm pretty sure the artist was blindfolded when they did it. 

km3S7lo.jpg

 

Zqy6osx.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, these are "Official Portraits" for the Smithsonian.  These have nothing to do with the White House.  Those won't be out for another 6 months, if not longer.

 

Bill Clinton's Smithsonian portrait was pretty damned weird:

 

national-portrait-gallery.jpg

Compare that to Clinton's actual White House portrait:

 

William-Clinton.jpg

 

 

George W Bush's Smithsonian portrait was more subdued:

 

NPG_George_Bush.jpg

 

compared to the White House portrait:

 

o-PRESIDENT-GEORGE-W-BUSH-OFFICIAL-PORTR

 

Quote
"You are nothing more than a small cancer on this message board. You are not entertaining, you are a complete joke."

twitter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.