Wonderful documentary.

Nice work Yeo.

Lots of artist use photos as refference in the process , but i need the sitter to get the 3 dimensions of the form and flesh tone matching at the end , if i did a high end piece. Sometimes influencual people like the style a certain artist brings to theyre portrait , regardless of the way they got theyre , and that what they pay for , being painted in that style , look at Picasso and freud .

Using the word pastiche to describe his learning-by-copying style, seems accurate.

The painting looks like William Shatner.

I don't think Tom's portrait looks anything like him. The artist has quite clearly flattered him, by making him, younger, slimmer and more handsome.

I recognize alot of people at that party wow. Mostly actors / actresses. His paintings are awesome , i dont see anything wrong with him using photos in the process . There are artist out there who cant even capture a likeness who are silly rich from painting cartoon farts. I can get a likeness Myself but i dont even paint portraits. Chuck close was one of my favorite Portrait artist.

People keep mentioning the photo reference vrs. a live sitting......Didnt I just watch him paint with a sitter in the room?? Didnt he just say his last portrait for the show came down to the wire because he didnt want to finish it with out her in person (she had been out of town)??? Portrait painters, since the invention of the camera, have used photo references between sittings to allow the client/subject more pleasure. No one wants to sit there for hours day after day if they dont have to. Any good painter can tweak basic shapes & values from a photograph....as well as spending time with the live sitter. The negative reference photo debate in itself has become a tired cliche. Or the notion that an artist is not worth seeing if they r not taking the work to a ‘new’ place. These r portraits.....Lighting them on fire & putting them out with snow from the Himalayas may sound great in a bio, but thats not the point. Most people want to see their love ones or themselves in a creative light. Brush strokes, color, interesting composition.....Its not re-inventing the wheel. U can see this painter putting his heart into the work, subjects enjoy the results, & the rest is just a lifestyle. His friends happen to b rich & famous. Oh well.....doesnt mean he cant love painting.

His eyes are very sad

To me all his portraits are soulless and flat more like illustrations

I am not sure about his work. Does he really bring anything new to portraiture? I don't think his work would stand up well next to a Chuck Close work. Is he just a privileged celebrity portraiture artist. When I look at the they remind me of portraits done in the 1950s.

his art is so bad it looks like street art :D /D