Mark Hanna "Champion" oil painting

Having not seen the picture in the flesh (so to speak), in common with almost everyone else, it is very difficult to say whether, as Damien points out the rear fuselage is slab sided, or that is a trick of the light; what can be said is the front end including the wings and wing fairings look good, and that would be the hard bit to get right,so if it is an actual fault in the workmanship, one might expect the front end to have suffered as much if not more.

As an aside, I have several paintings of Spitfires (appropriate point to gasp), and even the master Ronald Wong has got a few details wrong; the best of the rest, is by Phil Arbles (if I have got his signature correctly deciphered) , I am told that he used to do the art work for one of the plastic kit manufacturers (possibly Airfix)

A striking photograph does not automatically form the basis for a good painting, besides the dubious artisitic merit of slavishly reproducing a photographic image as a painted one.

The optical effects of telephoto lenses look very odd when replicated in paint, and in my experience as a painter if you need to work from photographs ( which with aeroplanes is often the case) then pictures from WW11 and before are a fruitful source, as they were usually taken without telephoto lenses, and being black/white they strength of the lighting is readily apparent.

This Spitfire looks too ‘squashed in’ by its frame, and needs more space around it, to allow some impression of freedom, movement and flight.

My apologies I shall clarify

Original Photograph – very good

Painting of said photograph – crap (for the reasons Damien has given)

it’s painted better than PT462

Bruce is right about paintings though, they don’t all go up; last year I bought one entitled “duxford scramble” painted in about ’92, the artist had a little tent at an airshow at Duxford, and it was on display (framed and stretched as they say) ; eventually negociations saw a deal at £80- on the back was a sticker with the original asking price, over £400-

I took the pic this morning with a Sony DSC-H5, the pic isn’t great as I was a
it too close to the painting and like most Oils you view them from a distance not up close.
I bought it because it just reminds me why I’m into historic aircraft so much, also cos I was at the airshow
where the original photo was shot, but the main reason was because I’d had the privalage to meet Mark (and later Ray)
when I was young and that was what got me into historic aircraft.
I’d rather not part with it but may eventually have to.

DazDaMan, a friend who was lucky enough to win a trip in the Grace Spitfire in 1975 or 76 (I think),
always comments on it when ever he visits.

Thanks

I hope not, its crap!

Welcome to the forum tyler, everyone is made to feel welcome by the regulars.

The painting may be ‘crap’ but as a painting it will do only one thing over the years: go up in price. Take it to any reputable auctioneer they’ll sell it for you. Best thing to do though is keep it.

Best Wishes.
Robert.

Whilst I have no wish to cast aspersions on the painting in question, it is simply untrue to suppose all oil paintings go up in value. Regular watchers of the antiques roadshow may believe this to be true, but there are many, many paintings by less well regarded artists that sell for very little money indeed.

There is only one reason to buy a piece of art in my opinion – if you like it, and can afford it, then buy it. It may be that only you and the artist share that common bond, but its not up to anyone else!

Bruce

The fuselage aft of the cockpit looks wrong to me – too long, and flat sided.

I think the fish-eye effect of the camera lens may have something to do with it, but it is difficult to tell.

Regards,

Dan

…could this be another example of MotF’s legendary humour?

Possibly not. 🙂

http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=10380&sid=b45dcf8808d7ae7a0b8a1367476b8f4e

Looks ok to me also; could this be another example of MotF’s legendary humour?

The painting may be ‘crap’ but as a painting it will do only one thing over the years: go up in price. Take it to any reputable auctioneer they’ll sell it for you. Best thing to do though is keep it.

Best Wishes.
Robert.

why is the serial number wrong? copyright?

You’ll notice the Spit also has D-Day stripes beneath the fuselage.

My guess is the artist wanted to portray the aircraft which originally flew in those markings, not the modern-day counterpart.

Must say, that was my favourite of ‘434’s paint schemes over the years – just loved the nose-art! 😉 I’ve got the centre-spread from Flypast up on the wall, too. Great pic.

why is the serial number wrong? copyright?

The correct serial and code for G/Cpt. A.K. Gabszewicz.

Mark

why is the serial number wrong? copyright?

I hope not, its crap!

Welcome back. 😉

Were any prints made?

I hope not, its crap!