"ACW artists: Rocco v. Troiani ... Who is the Best?" Topic

I'm assuming you agree with me that these two artists are the best (if not, feel free to disagree and make your argument).

Why choose when one can enjoy both.

I too enjoy both of them. Both excellent artists. I have met Mr Rocco, as he recently has been present at the HMGS-East dealer area. Very nice to talk to. Very cool to be accessible to the war-gaming crowd!

When designing new Civil War figures I always referred to Troiani's paintings for inspiration. Rocco is good too, but a little different style.
Jim McCarron, Musket Miniatures

Both are great – my personal taste is more towards Troiani, but art is an individual thing

Troiani. He is the master. Ask again in 15 years time.

I'd be loathe to choose as they are both excellent and one is a personal friend.

And nice to see you chime in Jim McCarron! I bought my first Stone Mountain 20mm figures from you about 34 years ago. I still have them too.

DAF's right. Should just enjoy them both.

Both are excellent. I prefer Rocco's style.

Impossible to declare "best". All subjective and personal opinion. I appreciate each for different reasons.

Both are great.

And what about Mort Kunstler and Dale Gallon? For me anyone who brings the ACW to life is doing just fine. After that it's strictly personal taste.

Both are fantastic artist's. I'd go with Don, though I love Keith's Impressionistic style.
Peter

Don Troiani is a true historical artist.

Keith Rocco is an historical impressionist.

They are two different types of artist. I wouldn't say one is better than the other, but they paint Civil War subjects from entirely different perspectives.

Don Troiani is literally like a photo-journalist. He achieves in paint a literal snap-shot in time as if he were there with a video or digital camera. The level of detail and research in his snap-shots are staggering, and unequalled by any artist alive today.

Keith Rocco captures the emotion and drama of a battle scene, but does it more loosely and more generically.

Troiani is my first choice, always has been, but I also appreciate Rocco's level of emotion and intensity that he captures in his battle scenes. Both artists have the skill necessary to ground their work in realistic movement and flow.

Interesting topic, as Troiani and Rocco have always been my number one and number two favorites artists for historical works. I certainly agree that they are the two best artists currently painting the Civil War genre.

Mort Kunstler for me comes in a distant third, and I mean a a long distant third. I know that this artist was not included in the OP's question, but I think it's siginificant enough to mention, as I'm sure people are thinking about it.

No disrespect meant to Kunstler, but his Civil War paintings I find to be lacking in both historical accuracy as well as lacking realistic feeling movement and realistic flow. His battle scenes are stiff and to me come across more like graphic novel or comic book art. Some may consider that an exaggeration, but put a Troiani print of a battle scene next to a Kunstler, and it's pretty striking and obvious.

So for me it's Troiani clearly #1, Rocco solid #2, Kunstler distant #3.

@corona66

Dale Gallon is an interesting one to me. I find his Civil War art to be slightly better than Kunstler in level of detail and realism and movement flow, but in terms of true historical or realistic art they are both far, far behind Troiani and Rocco.

I'd choose Gallon over Kunstler, but not by a whole lot.

However I will say that Gallon does have some specific works which do achieve a fair level of grounded realism.

Since Dale Gallon was mentioned by another poster, I'll amend my list….

I'd have it:

Troiani clearly #1, Rocco a solid #2, Dale Gallon a somewhat distant #3, and Mort Kunstler a FAR distant #4.

For the sake of complete and open honesty, I will say that there are elements of Troiani, Rocco, and Gallons's works that I can appreciate and become engaged with, even though they are all very different types of historical artists.

Kunstler however, I find very little I can engage with or appreciate. It's just not good Civil War art. I'm sure many will disagree but I feel pretty strongly about it.

Well, I'm presently gazing at Kunstler's Morning Riders hanging on my office wall and I can't find the faults mentioned above. In fact it's my favorite ACW print, which is why it's on the wall. As I said before, personal taste.

I love both Troiani and Rocco. Gallon is OK. The men painted in Kunstler's at always seem too wooden or stiff for me. No sense of action or motion, hence no sense of emotion. He makes a lot of calenders, but I've never bought one because of it.

@Cleburne1863,

Wow, thank you so much, you described Kunstler better in your few sentences than I did in all my long posts. You described what's wrong with Kunstler's art work perfectly, that's exactly what I was trying to say!

As I said, no disrespect meant to Kunstler, but his Civil War art is simply not accurate, and it's very, very stiff and cardboard-like.

There's no battle or action scene that I have seen of his that has impressed me, either on an historical level, or realism level.

I should also say that I like Rick Reeve's art. I don't collect a lot of art, but I do have his Antietam painting, "Run Up the Elevating Screw and Give 'Em Hell, Boys"

The only complaint I have against Reeves is that the combatants in many of his paintings just "look" too close. Its like every firefight is about to climax into hand-to-hand combat, when the specific battle did not approach that type of combat range. I will readily admit that its a matter of perception on my part.

@Cleburne1863,

Very interesting point you make about Rick Reeves, which I think Kunstler also suffers from at times as well. As you said, where it seems that every fight is painted as though it's just about to climax with that cliche Hollywood hand to hand combat melee. Very well said.

If it comes down to a matter of individual perception as you said, let me just say that your perception is spot on, and I fully share it. This is more than simply a matter of personal taste, or a matter of that we "prefer this artist or that artist" for various reasons.

What we're actually pointing out here, are legitimate artistic problems that detract from the realism of their work.

Perhaps one way to put it, is that Kunstler and Reeves allow too much artificial drama into their paintings, whereas Troiani and Rocco are better able to contain it and stay more focused on the realism and reality of a scene.

I would say that Troiani and Rocco are equals, or nearly so, in terms of artistically grounding their work in realistic poses, action, and dynamics. Where Troiani has the edge is in sheer, specific military uniform and gear detail and research.

But Rocco's Civil War and Napoleonic work in particular are very, very good, and he really captures that gritty, real feel in cloth, leather, and gear that is worn and frayed.

I'm also really impressed with how Rocco captures winter subjects, he has a special knack for portraying soldiers out in cold weather.

One of Troiani's biggest strengths, to me, is in his ability to paint what I call "scatter"… he's an absolute master of capturing the essential and most minute details of equipment scatter, i.e. a haversack tossed open with playing cards, food and utensils spilling out, or a cartridge box with cartridges scattered loosely near it. Or an abandoned knapsack with the contents spilled out. He's also a master of portraying the effects of bullet and artillery hits on trees, capturing the moment of wood splinter spray as a projectile passes through it.

The way I like to think of Troiani and Rocco, is that both are gritty, realistic artists, but Troiani actually goes so far as to paint the details of specific models of cartridge boxes, fatigue caps, coats, etc., whereas Rocco is somewhat more relaxed in that regard.

@Cleburne1863,

Was just reading your posts again. That is exactly it about Kunstler and Reeves. Every climactic battle scene seems to portray an imminent hand to hand clash in the classic Hollywood mode, even if that particular part in the battle didn't approach hand to hand. And even when a hand to hand scene is justified, it's still very stiff and stilted. And beyond that, it's as if Kunstler and Reeves don't know what else to do with their battle scenes, so they fall back on the same, stiff format.

I will say this about Kunstler. He does put alot of emotion into his quieter, civilian scenes and quieter, winter scenes. But it's his battle scenes that really suffer from a lack of realism and innacuracy.

Well, in all fairness, I was looking at some of Rick Reeves prints on his website. I have to amend some of what I said as far as lumping him with Kunstler. Reeves does have some pretty realistic scenes, he's far, far above Kunstler in terms of realism. I think I was unfairly drawing from memory some Reeves prints I had seen a while back.

Reeves does sometimes suffer from the dramatic, imminent dramatic hand to hand clash syndrome, but he also has done some work that approaches Troiani-level movement, interaction and dynamics. But not historical-detail accuracy.

That's quite a conversation you're having Campaigner1……………………I've got an ice cream headache after reading you debating yourself.

Wow, take it down a couple of notches and relax, wouldn't want to see you have a stroke like you almost did in the Gettysburg Cyclorama thread.

I'm not sure what Gallon, Reeves or Kuntsler have to do with the original question; I like both artists very much, Keith is also a friend of mine, so there you go….

Thanks for bringing up Rick Reeves. An excellent military artist whose work rivals both Rocco and Troiani in many respects!

I enjoy both for many of the same reasons stated. They are both masters of their craft, just different in their approach. I do love being able to see the paintings in the flesh, so to speak, at HMGS cons.

No one has mentioned Bradley Schmehl. I think his work is pretty good! I have watched his style and skill develop over the years since I was a student of his at PSA&D Art School in Lancaster in the early 90s. I think his work is definitely worth checking out. Maybe it's just because he is a local, but I like his style. Especially how he tackled the esoteric and difficult subject of the burning of the Columbia Bridge…at the time, it was the longest covered bridge in the world IIRC, so getting the perspective right had to be very difficult I would imagine.

I actually appreciate Campaigner1's stream of consciousness. Find myself agreeing with a lot of it.

Well, I think from this we can take it that my old pal Campaigner1 is not that keen on Kunstler! :o)

Have to say that to a degree I think Art is bit like being a fan of Chicago Blues or Delta Blues (I'm a Chicago man) its still the Blues!

Outside of that, I have to confess I have a lot of Troiani & Rocco books but the only Kunstler item I have is a book I got on a whim as a tie in with the "Gettysburg" movie. Wouldn't dream of buying another.

Gallon drives me nuts. His (by my Judgement) best stuff I think is top draw. I wouldn't say better than Troiani & Rocco as they are three different styles but true quality.

However, some times his colour choices are down right odd, artistic effect or no. Also, he has a tendency to over emphasize the foreground in some of his compositions in a way of leaving individual or groups of figures isolated in the perspective that I find very off putting. Particularly where this separates them from the body of troops they are part off.

Rick Reeves can be a little bit 'Chocolate Box' for my taste and I find his compositions cluttered.

I haven't seen too much Schmehl but I like "The Prince and the Professor" and particularly "Jackson and His Disciples"

I prefer Deneuville

Ah good old Alphonse-Marie-Adolphe!

Yes I like him too.

Actually, I think de Neuville is a strong influence on both Rocco and Gallon (don't know if they do) even though he didn't do any Civil War subjects. His Franco Prussian War paintings are great.

Troiani says his idol is Édouard Detaille and that shows in his work too.

Having said that, Detaille studied under Meissonier and de Neuville under Delacroix and you can trace those influences in each of them as well – one generation teaches the next!

Troiami is the U.S. Detaille; Rocco is close behind; the rest are comic book artists.

Mort Kunstler is the Civil War version of Thomas Kinkade.

Troiani and Rocco are closely matched and largely differ on personal opinion. I prefer Troiani better myself. His work is outstanding. He is a true artist who understand scale, perspective, color, light, depth of field, and all the fundamental aspects that are required in making a realistic work look realistic. Add to that his level of detail and historical accuracy and his work is second to none. I know for a fact his work is very accurate because I was doing research in the archives at Gettysburg and came across letters he wrote corresponding with park service historians regarding the placement of fences in the Wheatfield on the 2nd day. Clearly a sign of someone who is trying to get the details correct and who in turn masterfully represents them on the canvas.