Why didn't Bob Ross ever paint animals or people?

I like that. People spoil everything

We're really scraping the bottom of the DL thread topic barrel with this one

He said once on his show that he did not have a talent for portraiture. His talent was all in landscapes. As a painter myself I can tell you it takes more than simple artistic talent to be able to do portraits well. Portraits require a talent for intricate brush strokes. His technique would have not worked with portraits at all. I've always been amazed at how rich Bob Ross got on minimal talent

R2 Bob's painting show is being shown over here in the UK on the BBC.

They seem so dated though. Very much of the 80s, I wonder who's want to paint such paintings?

He’s in here in Australia too. Daily, no less! Attracting painting hobbyists during lockdown perhaps? An episode featured on Gogglebox and the viewers were bewildered.

Every painting Ross did on his show was done in triplicate. He had 3 'good-better-best' copies. All the good copies went to a friend of his. Some of the better copies were donated to the Smithsonian Institution to be part of a permanent exhibit at the National Museum of American History. The remainder of the better copies I've been told are displayed at the offices of Bob Ross Inc.. And all of the best copies are held under lock and key there as if they were some sort of artistic masterpieces.

Hands and feet. And hooves.

Oh, and hair.

So hard.

R5 That's exactly the reason they're being shown here.

I'm not an artist, but is his painting style and techniques even useful to today's artists?

Bob is popular because watching his show is like taking this:

His technique is perfect for the amateur who wants to paint as a hobby. Any professional artists would look at a Bob Ross painting and roll their eyes.

Ross used the wet on wet painting technique. Portrait artists usually paint directly onto a dry canvas. The wet on wet technique requires a layer of medium to be brushed over the full canvas before any painting begins, and the actual brush or palette knife strokes uses that underlayer of medium to help blend the colors on the canvas.

Trees, grass, shrubs are all living things.

His technique was similar to water color painting where the artist must wet the canvas or paper before they start painting.

Ross learned his style from German artist Bill Alexander who had a TV show long before Ross. He eventually went to work for Alexander's company as a salesman and art tutor before striking out on his own. Ross became infinitely more famous than Alexander and Alexander was never happy about it. The media would claim that the wet on wet technique was developed by Ross, which was poppycock. That technique was invented hundreds of years ago in Italy, called "alla prima". Alexander wasted few opportunities to besmirch Ross over the years, mainly out of insane jealousy, even though Ross always gave credit for everything he learned to Alexander.

Here's an old Bill Alexander video.

People wrongly call him a painter. He was a prophet.

^ yes, I think he was an enlightened soul

Come on! He was nothing more than someone who figured out how to woo viewers. He used his folksy, southern charm to the best advantage. Stay at home housewives, churchies, and animal lovers were drawn to him, and again he capitalized on that brilliantly. He brought on wild baby animals he'd rescue for the viewers to see. He rescued lots of baby squirrels & bunnies when their mothers had been killed and raised them. People fell in love with him for that. And his patented "God bless" at the end of every show enchanted the church people.

aren't you a sour old thing R15

The elitists who thumb their noses at Ross and those drawn to his method of painting irritate me.

Look. Not everyone has the time, resources, money, and/or talent to pursue a MFA in painting and discuss the merits of Carl Andre's minimalism over black coffee and Parliaments in their off time. And I don't think anyone considers Bob Ross high art. But he made a lot of people happy, and he gave people with artistic ambitions (and perhaps talent) an outlet to express themselves.

Jeez. What's so odious about that?

He is merely visually cataloging all of the high points of nature that the corporate world will eventually destroy.

No, not sour at all R16. I don't fault Bob Ross for anything he did. He seemed a sweet-natured man who gave joy to lots of people with his TV show. He wasn't a deity.

He gives me ASMR, so I watch his old shows to relax.

I used to love the sound his putty knife made scraping against the palette.

One trick pony.

R15 was the kid who went around telling all the other children that Santa Claus wasn’t real.

Jesus R23, I assume you're a grown man. Act like one.

The vast majority of people watch Bob Ross to relax, not to learn to paint. Nature scenes are relaxing. And Ross's technique really wouldn't work well for humans.

BTW, there is now a Bob Ross channel on TVPlus.

[quote] His technique was similar to water color painting where the artist must wet the canvas or paper before they start painting.

Yes, pretty much this. And even though he uses oils or acrylics it’s a legitimate way to apply paint.

The landscape he painted was thickly painted with a 1980s sci-fi-calendar-art-looking tree line, but the way he painted the clouds and the mountain line was excellent. It was the only thing that was excellent but to me it showed that there is some skill and craftsmanship that people could learn from him, in spite of his obvious taste issues.

[quote]Why didn't Bob Ross ever paint animals or people?

Why didn't Bob Ross ever doing something about his awful fucking hair???

So basically, is his painting style is still relevant to anyone wanting to take up painting today?

Check it out.

His programmes are being shown on BBC4. It isn’t great art, but it is very soothing after a long day at work. His presentation style reminds me of Nancy Kominsky, who had a similar show on British TV in the 70s.

He was an ASMRtist before ASMR was even a thing.

R27 That was a perm he got int the 80s and then just kept as it became his trademark. Here is what he looked like without it.

Ross hated his own kinky hair. His hair was naturally straight but when he first started out traveling the country in a mobile home trying to build his art business he decided in order to save money on haircuts he'd have his hair permed to death. By the time he became well known and promotional photos were taken he knew he had to keep that hairstyle as it was part of his brand.

He was a handsome rascal in his younger years.

Here he is after he'd grown a beard but before he frizzed his hair.

R30 Nancy Kominsky that's a blast from the past.

Wasn't she on ITV in the afternoons? I'm sure I remember her painting at on my lunch break or something.

OP - That's like asking why our resident DL artistes only paint massive penises. You paint what you love.

Was he gay?

[quote]Why didn't Bob Ross ever paint animals or people?

He was Muslim

Actually, Bob was a Jain.

R36, she was on TV at lunchtime. I went home for lunch so I never missed her. I think different ITV regions showed her programme at different times.

R41 Ahhh great thank you. She always had a reassuring voice and a bigger repertoire of painting from what I remember.

I'm watching him right now. Christmas lunch done, glass of verdelho in hand, feet on the sofa. Bliss.

I bet Bob was a nasty fuck in bed.

R40 I think that's plain.

He was a rip-off of his teacher and predecessor William Alexander, the true originator of "happy trees".

yea, we know.

I have no interest in him, but I find this song catchy. And kind of moving (in its sincere, mawkish way)

R9 is spot on, if you search the most boring videos on youtube or the videos that put you to sleep etc, you will find Bob Ross's painting videos are on the top list, along with the (in)famous Microsoft Word tutorial (1989)

r35 A little Carl Betz-ish perhaps?

I wonder what Bob thought of his talent? Did he enjoy it, did it ever become boring and was he just going through the motions because it's what people expected? Do you think anyone ever told him what they really though of his style?

The answer is simple. He is not good at it. He may have trouble painting animals. He is more of a ameteur. His stuff is beginning level.

r17 here. Interestingly enough, I just met a person who does Bob Ross-style paintings. And she has no illusions about who she is -- not just in relation to her artistic ability, but generally. She's the type of person that Bob Ross would appeal to.

I'm in a profession awash with big egos, and frankly, it's refreshing to meet someone who knows their limitations and accepts them, and is genuinely humble, and doesn't try to be something they're not. The older I get, the more I see the value in this type of person.

Much harder to paint, obviously.

Bob Ross got me through the election. I was a nervous wreck worrying about whether or not Trump would win a second term so I put on the Bob Ross channel on PlutoTV and watched him paint happy little trees for hours on end. It helped me keep my sanity.

He had to mostly finish an entire painting in 30 minutes, he didn't really have time to focus on anything that took a lot of detail. You can't make a squirrel with a few scrapes of the putty knife like you can a tree trunk or a mountain.

I assumed that he was painting idyllic post-civilisation landscapes as a way to cope with PTSD from Vietnam. And if he were imagining a world without war, which meant a world without people, or even without predator and prey.

That a good theory r56

I was in a store they other day and they were selling a Bob Ross waffle maker that imprints his head on on your waffle.

I was like WTF. Never in my life did I want to eat Bob Ross.

This is a great thread, including the sourpuss at r15 who adds a little grey cloud over here in the corner above the fir tips.

I think we could all use a few more happy little trees in our lives.

Lol r59! Without the little grey clouds, how could we appreciate the light?

Was his show broadcast on PBS? I seem to remember watching it on Saturdays in the late 1980s

His artwork is robotic shit, no soul.

It has a very 1980s aesthetic r63

For landscape, I love the Dutch Golden Age.

His young pic shows he's probably cute under that trademark afro.

Who had him?

More Dutch Golden Age -- spectacular clouds

Have you seen the Mountain Dew ad where they “bring him back from the dead” with CGI, then dub him for the commercial? So creepy. So wrong.

r68 I'm not sure I want to watch ...

"I think a happy little can of Mountain Dew lives over here."

r70, that's how his show was broadcast on Florida stations

[quote] I've always been amazed at how rich Bob Ross got on minimal talent

It's a nice commentary on life. He maybe couldn't do everything well but he got ahead by being mediocre at one thing and generally pleasant to listen to.

Nicholas Fairford has studied Bob Ross, bitches.

Does DL have a Nicholas Fairford troll?

Young sexy Bob with a '50s greaser pompadour

Utica Queen's Bob Ross is the most profoundly bizarre Snatch Game take on a celebrity ever.

Bob Ross was really human Xanax. I confess I often wondered what his kitchen cabinets looked like. Full of warm and friendly spices? And, did he grow his own vegetables? He must have. Did his grandmother smoke weed with him ? Somehow I can see it. His paintings were amazing.

I think Bob Ross had a really BIG bush

His show was about teaching the lay person to paint a decent looking painting with the least amount of talent or effort. No he wasn't going to put difficult animals or people in there.

Bob Ross was the original FLORIDA MAN, after him it all went left

Two possible reasons:

He couldn't do them; and he didn't think his viewer-students could, either. At least, not with the simple techniques he demonstrated.

Has anyone here actually attempted a Bob Ross painting?

He makes it look so damn easy

I find landscapes almost totally boring. They're just nothing to me. I need some kind of subject.

His paintings look like the crap in hotels.

What about the Dutch marine landscapes r83?

He was the Thomas Kinkaid of the 1980s

Another observation ... he never painted desert or barren landscapes.

I am an artist. You are born with artistic talent and a Bob Ross course will not give you talent. His paintings are atrocious. I've painted in oils, tempera and watercolor. Took classes all over the country. Some at Carnegie Mellon. Sold a few works here and there. I had a career in another field, but the art is always evident in the way I combine my clothes and decorate my homes. I also loved going to Italy and viewing the major art works as well as the unsung art in small Tuscan villages.

His artwork was okay, but it really is like the kind of artwork you’d learn in an adult community college evening course where they serve coffee and donuts.

He was an idiot savant, painted soulless mechanical landscapes.

What do you paint, r89?

Also: do you find landscapes inherently boring? (Just curious -- this question came up recently with an art historian friend)

"His paintings are atrocious."

Back before he was really famous, when he was still on the air and wafting out a new painting every week, I called his paintings "motel art". Because they were exactly the sort of unthreatening slapdash oil landscape that was found on the wall of every motel room in the world, that had been decorated between 1950 and 1975.

I do find marine landscapes kind of boring too, but at least those have boats in them. I don't feel bad about feeling this way. I know I don't have the same mind as Hitler. (Supposedly, Hitler drew lots of buildings but never people.) I want to see people and animals. That's just the way I'm wired. Still lifes (still lives?) are fine with me because there's something to concentrate on or think about.

r94 I love the still lives (lifes? I don't know either) of Edward Collier:

In real life I love a landscape with no other people in it! It means I am one with nature!

But yeah, it's hard to make a landscape *painting* interesting with no people or animals in it, not that some artists haven't carried it off. But Bob Ross was not "some artists", he was a terrible artist really, but his whole schtick was "Everybody paint and don't feel bad if the result is crap, because look at me I'm painting something terrible on national TV!".

I love the Dutch Golden Age marine paintings, r96

[quote]Everybody paint and don't feel bad if the result is crap, because look at me I'm painting something terrible on national TV!

This gave me my first genuine laugh of the day

I have a pair of "Happy Clouds" socks.

I used to work with an older woman who thought Bob Ross was the pinnacle of modern art

No accounting for taste

Which one of you bitches has this?

He was one step away from paint by numbers.

You are correct, I dislike landscapes and still life paintings. Anyone can paint the sky and/or grass easily. A good example of an artist I adore is Gustave Caillebotte. I am attaching a link. He is a master of perspective.

Bob inspires confidence

r103 thank you so much! I was not familiar with Caillebotte but I like his work.

Thanks (105) I first encountered him a while back at the Art Institute in Chicago. The large street scene is mind boggling. The painting is around 9 ft across and a bit smaller in height, so the figures are almost life size.

Bob Ross always gave me creeper vibes.

Also, white men look terrible in 'fros. What's was the deal with that?

Thanks r106. I will be sure to check him out the next time I'm in Chicago

I like