Portraits of the British Royals

[Lorraine]

http://www.richardstoneuk.com/dukeofyork.html

A painting of Prince Andrew, Duke of York - sittings for the painting were at Buckingham Palace. Oh, isn't he such a handsome darling. I always love a man in uniform.

 

[Lorraine]

The late Queen Mother - posed for this painting at Clarence House.
http://www.richardstoneuk.com/queenmother.html

 

[Lorraine]

Prince Charles - sitting at Highgrove, Glouchestershire

http://www.richardstoneuk.com/princeofwales.html

 

[Lorraine]

Portrait of HM Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain. She look so Regal and powerful.

http://www.richardstoneuk.com/queen.html

 

[selrahc4]

Portrait of HRH The Princess Royal by David Cobley
souce: http://www.davidcobley.co.uk/home.htm

 

[mandyy]

Artist Rolf Harris officially unveils his oil portrait of Queen Elizabeth II at The Queen's Gallery in Buckingham Palace on December 19, 2005 in London, England. Harris was permitted two sittings at Buckingham Palace, which was recorded for a BBC One documentary. More than 120 official portraits have been made of the Queen, by artists ranging from Dame Laura Knight to Lucien Freud.

Photos from Getty images

 

[ysbel]

I'm not a fan of this latest portrait. The Queen looks washed out and her smile looks weird.

I've done some portrait painting myself and we had a model who insisted on smiling for a whole three hour session. All our paintings looked really odd. I think Rolf tried to get the Queen to hold a smile for a long time and it doesn't look natural on anybody.

That's why you don't see a lot of formal portraits of smiling people.

 

[Saragli]

Worst potrait of her majesty Ive ever seen. I dont really see the real elizabeth that he tried to portray. He certainly has a unique vision.

 

[james]

I think it is great. It almost looks like a photograph.

 

[ysbel]

It's not really a bad painting but being a painter myself I do nitpick a lot. It comes from nitpicking my own paintings.

Her hair is white, her skin is pale, and he painted a light background behind her. So there's no contrast of light and dark (chiaroscuro) to draw your attention to the most important part of a portrait - the head. Its a shame because from the neck down its a really nice painting and the green really works well with the rest of the colors in the painting but for portraits a painting that just looks good from the neck down doesn't work too well.

 

[Lady Marmalade]

I saw the painting on the BBC News on Channel 20 here in Chicago earlier this evening...while the painting is interesting, what I loved the best was hearing the Queen talk so informally and the relaxed look on her face. It was worth it to catch the BBC News to see that special moment of her behaving just so informal and relaxed.

 

[Danielle]

I personally think it looks good, but I do have a problem with the Queen's teeth (in the painting). One 'critic' said they stuck out, and I have to agree. I laughed so much when Rolf asked Her Majesty if she was okay with the turpentine (i.e she wasn't going to faint or anything). She said "well, we'll soon find out". I know it's off topic, but I think it's the first time I've really seen her humour. It was a real eye-opener. Anyway, it's this humour and generosity and warmth I can see in the painting. As she said herself, she looks friendly and I think Rolf has done a good job in capturing this.

 

[Margrethe II]

I personally think it looks good, but I do have a problem with the Queen's teeth (in the painting). One 'critic' said they stuck out, and I have to agree. I laughed so much when Rolf asked Her Majesty if she was okay with the turpentine (i.e she wasn't going to faint or anything). She said "well, we'll soon find out". I know it's off topic, but I think it's the first time I've really seen her humour. It was a real eye-opener. Anyway, it's this humour and generosity and warmth I can see in the painting. As she said herself, she looks friendly and I think Rolf has done a good job in capturing this.

I was lucky enough to have seen footage of a relaxed QEII quite a few years back so I have been aware of this terribly funny yet dry sense of humour that is very much HM the Queen for quite some time. Not to forget her renowned gift as a mimic.

The Queen was very much aware of the camera crews presence so I personally believe that if there was no company apart Rolf's, than she would have most likely been more relaxed and talkative.

I must say the first thing I thought when viewing the teeth was that they resembled those of an Ork (Lord of the Rings.lol.)

But, he should be most proud of this accomplishment!

 

[Australian]

I like the portrait, i think it really captures a relaxed and informal queen, which is not often shown in her other portraits, in the other portraits, she looks more regal and royal. The painting really looks like a picture of someones aunt or granny, like Rolf saif himself.
I also have a problem with the teeth as well, it was the first thing that i noticed and it doesnt look right, but overall, a good portrait.

 

[Saragli]

I like the informalness and colors of the painting but there are some heavy features on the painting that the queen doesnt have. I know he wanted an impressionist painting so that might be why he painted her not as she looks but the way he felt she looked when he was painting the soverign. It is unique, I may not be my favourite but its good there are a variety of potraits of the queen.

 

[pollyemma]

I like the informalness and colors of the painting but there are some heavy features on the painting that the queen doesnt have. I know he wanted an impressionist painting so that might be why he painted her not as she looks but the way he felt she looked when he was painting the soverign. It is unique, I may not be my favourite but its good there are a variety of potraits of the queen.

i agree. it's a very good painting. i like the 'soft' style a lot. colors were great.she's wearing a lovely suit. though if i was the queen i wouldnt be too happy with the facial expression, it kinda looks like she just smelled something bad, but hey, i'm not the queen so she may think that's fine.

 

[selrahc4]

In the days before photography, especially color photography, artists were almost obligated to make a portrait as true to life as possible. That isn't true today when there are a gazillion (I counted) photos available for people to see what their royals look like. Thus, in a kind of contrarian way, artists are more likely and more free to depict them impressionistically (good grief, is that a word?).

 

[Alexandria]

I've been going through old files and cleaning up old magazines. I came across an old issue of Hello! with a feature called "Keepers of the Kingdom: A Fascinating Look at the Ancient Offices of the Royal Family on the Eve of the Golden Jubilee."

HM Queen Elizabeth: The Sovereign

 

[ysbel]

RadioTimes recently ran a poll asking readers to pick their favorite portrait of the Queen from her 80 year reigh.

The overwhelming favorite was a 1955 portrait of the Queen in her splendid Order of the Garter robes by master Italian painter, Pietro Annigoni. This is truly one of the most stunning portraits of the Queen I have seen. It expertly shows the majesty of the monarchy and the character of the young Queen. No wonder it is a favorite.

A good look at the portrait on Brigitte Gastel Lloyd's site

link to BBC article

 

[fanletizia]

A handout picture released April 18, 2006 by artist Jemma Phipps shows a new portrait of Britain's Queen Elizabeth II. The portrait was commissioned by the Ascot authority to celebrate the Queen's 80th birthday and the completion of the redeveloped racecourse at Ascot in southern England

from yahoo/reuters

 

[BeatrixFan]

A bigger version of the Jemma Phipps portrait from her website;

I think it's a lovely portrait. One of the best of the older Queen we know an and love. Better than Rolf's at any rate. But I think the gold buttons are a bit wrong.



http://www.jemmaphipps.com/portraits-recent%20work.html#

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

I don't like that portrait at all. It is the worst portrait I've ever seen of the Queen. It does not look very majestic and the Queen has such a nasty look on her face. She looks nice in her outfit, very pretty suit, but the painter has not captured any of her essence, in my opinion.

 

[BeatrixFan]

I think it's more the Queen that we see most often. It's not posed in the Palace with a whopping tiara or in a long white gown - it's as if it's been painted at the races and I quite like it. It looks good on my wall at any rate.

 

[Amy]

I quite like this new portrait of the Queen, but if i may pick at at a little i don't like the darkness of her face or the colouring on her hands.

 

[HRH Mims]

I quite like this new portrait of the Queen, but if i may pick at at a little i don't like the darkness of her face or the colouring on her hands.

I agree with you. but this is really good.

 

[BeatrixFan]

The painter has been quite generous with the Queen's hands. Seeing them close up when she hasn't got gloves on they are covered in liver spots and are quite wrinkly - well, why wouldn't they be at 80? So I think it's an attempt to shade out the wrinkles!

 

[Incas]

I think the Queen's portrait would look nicer with a cream background. The shade of blue looks sickly to me.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

I think it's more the Queen that we see most often. It's not posed in the Palace with a whopping tiara or in a long white gown - it's as if it's been painted at the races and I quite like it. It looks good on my wall at any rate.

But I think a really good portrait would capture something of her personality and still retain some majestic quality. As an artist myself, I would try to capture her very queen-ness, for lack of another term, yet also capture something of her extraordinary sense of humor, at least have her smiling!

 

[mandyy]

A handout composite image obtained 03 May 2006 shows a private collection of portrait minatures by London artist Gertrude Massey, (1868-1957) depicting three generations of the British royal family that will be auctioned by Bonhams auction house in London 24 May 2006. The portraits from L-R, a double portrait of the eldest sons of King George V, Prince Albert the Duke of York (1895-1952) and Prince Edward the Prince of Wales, (1894-1972) valued at between Ł800-Ł1,200, (1164euros/1471USD-1746euros/2207USD) a double portrait of Princess Maud of Norway (1869-1938) and her son Crown Prince Olav, (1903-1991) valued at between Ł600-Ł800, (873euros/1103USD-1164euros/1471USD) an unfinished portrait of Queen Alexandra, (1844-1925) valued at Ł200-Ł300 (291euros/367USD-436euros/551USD) and a French bulldog called 'Peter' owned by King Edward VII, valued at between Ł300-Ł500. (436euros/551USD-727euros/919USD)

From Profimedia

 

[Prince of Chota]

I've always thought how very funny it is when people are so critical of HM's portraits. There are hundreds of them! And it really isn't necessary that each one convey the exact same characteristics or moods of the queen. After all, she is more than just a monarch: she's a mother, a daughter, a sister, a wife, a grandmother, and a human being. I think she would be bored to watch the same kind of portraits done so many times over. She must be dreadfully jaded at the run-of-the-mill stately thing.