Impermanence Sheryl Luxenburg American Watercolor Society Gold Medal Issue
Posted by ngwoonlam on December 11, 2008
American Watercolor Society 2008 Gold Medal Issue:
Gold Medal winning painting in the 2008 exhibition, “Impermanence” by Sheryl Luxenburg was suspected to be a non-original artwork derived from internet photos.
impermanence Sheryl Luxenburg
impermanence Sheryl Luxenburg
Below is the Painting
impermanence Sheryl Luxenburg
Open Art Forum 艺术家论坛 
ngwoonlam said
Like to hear everyone’s comments on this issue.
I think it is not original. And I doubt the artist’s integrity.
Chen said
The artist has already acknowledge her painting was based upon stock photos from shutterstock.com. (http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=1012502)
But her claim that it is an ‘innocent mistake’ is rather dubious. I doubt anyone will submit an unoriginal artwork to a prestigious international competition without being aware that unoriginal artworks are not accepted – that should obviously be part of the rules & regulations.
But the only good thing out of this affair was this artist donated away the $4000 prize money to charity.
ngwoonlam said
Nice to know that she donated the award money to Charity.
But her award is an insult to all participants.
Patricia said
I hate seeing this type of thing. There is SO MUCH in this world to paint and to get inspiration from.
Laurie said
I’ve seen photo realistic images before, I’ve seen artist use their own photos to paint from. Clearly she used these two images but I doubt that the final image is a painting, if it is then there is no part of her in them. Every aspect that I have looked at is exact to the photo, the man was lighten and color corrected, the door was flipped, cropped and contrast was added all of which can be done in photoshop. From these images on here, it’s difficult to see any changes to the “painting” such as a hair that is going a different direction then in the photo, there is no interpretation on the part of the artist here and I find it hard to believe that anyone that is painting an image does not change a little bit of what they are painting and adding that bit of flair that makes it their own. I will be very surprised if the AWS comes back with a statement that this is a watercolor and not a enhanced photographic giclee image.
Laurie said
One final comment, if this is truly a watercolor I find it pathetic, sad and unethical that she has to copy from what she does not consider “Art Work” simple because they are photographs yet they are good enough for her to make her “art work”. Sad, really just so sad.
ngwoonlam said
Recently, there was a user, using fake name and email to write offensive comments. Please stop doing that.
Please take note :
Open Art Forum is for every art lovers. All comments, articles, publish of fine art activities are welcome. Kindly do not use the forum for offensive contents or to carry out personal attack. We wish the forum could develop into a site for all art lovers to share information and ideas.
Therefore any offensive comment will not be published. We use this forum to help each other. Using it to attack people without basis is IRRESPONSIBLE.
Best regards,
Ng Woon Lam
dondelachichi said
The AWS issued a statement that, in part, said:
“Our prospectus clearly informs artists of these eligibility requirements which were designed to maintain high standards and to focus on originality.
By establishing these requirements, the onus rests with the artists to ensure compliance with the rules set forth. Each artist is therefore free to accept or decline these conditions.
When it was determined that Ms. Luxenburg’s entry violated our eligibility requirements, the AWS requested that our Gold Medal and prize money be returned. The Medal and prize money were returned, and Ms. Luxenburg has been disqualified from entering any future AWS exhibitions.”
The suspicion among many was that the “painting” was nothing more than a print on watercolor paper made on a giclee-type printer. The “artist” claimed orginally that her technique involves the application of innumerable small dots of color, applied under a magnifying lens. This, not surprisingly, is the same method by which an inkjet printer creates an image.
The use of printers to apply images to watercolor paper and canvas has eroded the distinction between what constitutes an original work of art and what is mere applied skill. I know of one artist who adamantly insists that she “paints” when she uses the color picker in a Corel photo editing program. She even refers to the “brushes” she uses….which, of course, are merely one of the options in the photo editing program she uses to modify photos and call them paintings.
Even if Luxenburg actually painted this image, it’s obvious that there was virtually no “art” in doing so. She merely duplicated what had already been created by others, and rearranging the parts and juxtaposing the two images did not elevate this picture to the level of an artistic achievement.
ngwoonlam said
Thanks for your clarification. As an artist, I am happy to know AWS has made a strong decision and move against this issue. I always regard AWS shows and awards as the highest honor for watercolor artists. Many of us work very hard for entering the show every year. I truly appreciate the action taken.
Thanks and best Wishes,
Ng Woon Lam