1867 - 1943 Australian painter. He moved to Melbourne with his family when he was seven. In 1882 he enrolled as a student of drawing at the evening classes of the National Gallery School of Design and briefly in the School of Painting, but he had no sustained formal instruction in painting. At the same time he began making watercolour sketches of Melbourne, and by 1886 his skill led to an apprenticeship as a lithographer to George Troedel and Co. of Collins Street. The most important early influence on Streeton was Tom Roberts, who had returned to Melbourne from Europe in 1885. With Frederick McCubbin, Streeton and Roberts painted en plein air at a temporary camp at Box Hill, forming what became known as the HEIDELBERG SCHOOL. A little later Streeton established the first permanent artists' camp at Eaglemont, north-west of Melbourne, overlooking the Yarra Valley, where he painted some of his most memorable works. 'Still glides the stream and shall forever glide'   Related Paintings of Arthur streeton :. | The selector hut | Fire s On | Whelan on the Log (nn02) | The Spirit of the Drought | Windy and Wet |
Related Artists:
Raimundo de Madrazo y Garreta
Spanish realist Painter , 1841-1920 Son of Federico de Madrazo y K?ntz. Because of his ability and training with his father, Federico, in the Real Academia de S Fernando in Madrid and with L?on Cogniet in Paris, he seemed destined to continue the family tradition of academic painting. However, due to the influence of the Belgian Alfred Stevens, of his brother-in-law, Mariano Jos? Bernardo Fortuny y Marsal, and the Parisian environment, he exchanged dry historical painting (e.g. Arrival in Spain of the Body of the Apostle St James, 1858, and Ataulfo, 1860) for the preciousness of the tableautin, the small, intimate genre painting. He lived in Paris and New York and became so remote from Spanish artistic life that he and Fortuny y Marsal were the only Spanish artists not to participate in any national exhibition, and because of this the Spanish state never directly acquired their works. In 1882, with Giuseppe De Nittis, Stevens and the gallery owner Georges Petit, he co-founded the Exposition Internationale de Peinture, designed to promote foreign artists in Paris. Madrazo Garreta's most characteristic works are the female portrait and the witty and elegant genre painting, with soft, delicate tones and suggestive poses. The influence of the Rococo and of Japanese art is reflected in his painting, which expresses an exquisite aristocratic or bourgeois ideal, the illusion of a refined, sensual and superficial life. Consequently,
John Frederick Peto
1854-1907 John Frederick Peto Gallery John Frederick Peto (May 21, 1854 ?C November 23, 1907) was an American trompe l'oeil ("fool the eye") painter who was long forgotten until his paintings were rediscovered along with those of fellow trompe l'oeil artist William Harnett. Although Peto and the slightly older Harnett knew each other and painted similar subjects, their careers followed different paths. Peto was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and studied at the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts at the same time as Harnett.[1] Until he was in his mid-thirties, he submitted paintings regularly to the annual exhibitions at the Philadelphia Academy. In 1889, he moved to the resort town of Island Heights, New Jersey, where he worked in obscurity for the rest of his life. He and his wife took in seasonal boarders, he found work playing cornet at the town's camp revival meetings, and he supplemented his income by selling his paintings to tourists.[2] He never had a gallery exhibition in his lifetime.[3] Harnett, on the other hand, achieved success and had considerable influence on other artists painting in the trompe l'oeil genre, but even his paintings were given the snub by critics as mere novelty and trickery. Both artists were masters of trompe l'oeil, a genre of still life that aims to deceive the viewer into mistaking painted objects for reality. Exploiting the fallibility of human perception, the trompe l'oeil painter depicts objects in accordance with a set of rules unique to the genre. For example, Peto and Harnett both represented the objects in their paintings at their actual size, and the objects rarely were cut off by the edge of the painting, as this would allow a visual cue to the viewer that the depiction was not real. But the main technical device was to arrange the subject matter in a shallow space, using the shadow of the objects to suggest depth without the eye seeing actual depth. Thus the term trompe l'oeil??"fool the eye." Both artists enthrall the viewer with a disturbing but pleasant sense of confusion. Letter Rack by PetoPeto's paintings, generally considered less technically skilled than Harnett's,[4] are more abstract, use more unusual color, and often have a stronger emotional resonance. Peto's mature works have an opaque and powdery texture which is often compared to Chardin.[5] The subject matter of Peto's paintings consisted of the most ordinary of things: pistols, horseshoes, bits of paper, keys, books, and the like. He frequently painted old time "letter racks," which were a kind of board that used ribbons tacked into a square that held notes, letters, pencils, and photographs. Many of Peto's paintings reinterpret themes Harnett had painted earlier,[6] but Peto's compositions are less formal and his objects are typically rustier, more worn, less expensive looking.[7] Other artists who practiced trompe l'oeil in the late nineteenth century include John Haberle and Jefferson David Chalfant. Otis Kaye followed several decades later. A pioneering study of Peto and Harnett is Alfred Frankenstein's After the Hunt, William Harnett and Other American Still Life Painters 1870-1900. Frankenstein's book itself is a fantastic tale of solving the mystery of why these artists were forgotten for much of the twentieth century.
Charles Dauphin
Charles Claude Dauphin or Dofin, called in Italian Delfino, a French painter of historical subjects and portraits, was the son of Olivier Dauphin. He went to Turin about the year 1664, and worked there for the Prince of Carignano. He was also employed for the churches, but his works are in no great estimation, abounding as they do with the most ridiculous absurdities. In the church of San Carlo is an altar-piece by him, described by Lanzi as a most ludicrous composition. He died in 1677.