Need some art ID help!

[Dr. Atomic]

I've got a stumper of an art mystery here, and I thought someone here might be able to help. I recently bought a small science fiction painting and I can't for the life of me figure out who painted it. No signature, no date, no markings of ANY kind. Here are a few tidbits I can bring to the table, but I'm not sure if they're really that helpful in figuring out this thing's origins...

1. It came from Forrest Ackerman's collection via a dealer. This is unverified, but the dealer seems REALLY honest, so I've no reason to doubt him. I'm unlikely to run into 4E any time soon, so I can't unfortunately just ask him...

2. I'd guess it's from the Fifties or Sixties. I base this on (a) the artistic style -- dig those crazy aliens, as well as the very mid-century "futuristic" structure in the background -- and (b) on the paint, which appears to be gouache. I've been told this paint was used often during the middle of the century, and much less so in the last couple decades.

3. It's small, about the size of a postcard. I'm guessing, therefore, that it wasn't used as the cover art for a magazine or a book. I could be wrong, of course, but in every instance I've come across, original cover art was oversized (including stuff I own, as well as Bob Lesser's complete collection of original pulp paintings). There are exceptions to the rule, though...

That's about it. Thoughts, even educated guesses -- hell, even blind guesses -- would be greatly appreciated! (Feel free to swipe these pics and pass them on to anyone not on this board who you think might have some ideas...)

[Talysia]

I've checked my art books, but I'm really sorry I can't help you. I don't recognize the style, either. Sorry again.

[BookStop]

Well, I have no idea who your artist is, but here is a scinece fiction cover artist list.

http://www.sfsite.com/fsf/bibliograp...ovartwho01.htm

[HappyHippo]

I think it could be concept art for a movie poster, maybe. I looked on google, and it looks more movie than book cover to me.

Sorry, no ideas as to the artist though. Good luck.

[Dr. Atomic]

HA!

While I wasn't able to find any published instance of this painting, I did come across the ALIEN, which, in my mind, is a pretty good means of at least identifying the artist: Malcom Smith!

He did many covers for Amazing Stories in the Forties, as well as other pulps, before going on to become the art director for Other Worlds. He also continued to paint their covers, as can be seen with the May, 1950, issue, below. He went on to develop a style of art that combined photo prints and painting to create hyper-real fantasy and science fiction images, which supposedly look really cool (though I haven't stumbled across any covers of his which use this technique). A relatively unknown (today), but somewhat important sf artist.

After speaking to a few art and pulp experts out there, it's my guess that the painting I own is a sketch, either to rough out an idea for a possible cover, or for personal use (to give to a friend, to study composition, etc). I'm leaning towards the latter -- it just feels more likely. This would help explain how it ended up in Forrest Ackerman's collection (though it could have done so in many different ways).

I suppose it's possible that a fan artist copies Smith's alien for use in his or her own painting -- but I have my doubts. For one thing, the line work in the painting is pretty authoratative, even in so rough a sketch. It's hard to tell in the posted images, but the woman's hair is pretty finely wrought, and the layered colors, brush strokes, and overall composition speak of someone who knows what he's doing. Also, I'm pretty certain a fan would have signed the painting -- it's well done, and at least good enough to put one's name to. (Heck, I'd be proud to have painted this... but then again, I'm not a particularly good painter!) A professional artist, on the other hand, knowing that this was just a sketch -- a thumbnail of an idea -- wouldn't have bothered with a signature since it's not a "finished" piece.

Anyway, unless someone says otherwise with certainty, I'm gonna be optimistic and call this a Malcom Smith sketch. Suddenly, a weird little painting that didn't cost much at all -- but had a fun, funky, pulpy quality to it that I love -- has become a surprisingly cool treasure!

[HappyHippo]

weeeeell, the alien's almost a clone, so I'd say you're right.

Congratulations! *small trumpet fanfare and confetti* Isn't it cool when things turn out well like that?

[Dr. Atomic]

A number of people helped me confirm the Malcom Smith identification -- some of whom are on this board, but were operating behind the scenes (so much so that I only found out about their efforts after a series of emails in response to my question was forwarded to me by a third party). However, since I don't know if any of these helpful folk want their names mentioned in public, I'll refrain from too loud a shout out.

So for now, I'll just offer a general THANK YOU to those of you who compared photos and did some digging and put up with my emails. It's REALLY appreciated!

[macmcrae]

Whomever did the sketch, absolutely did not do that cover Nowhere close to the same knowledge of anatomy in these two pieces. It is really bad fan art period. Look at the faces of the monster. Look at the arms of the female figure. Noway was this done by a pro. Not even close.

[Dr. Atomic]

You're certainly welcome to your opinion, but I've got to respectfully disagree. Since posting this scan, I've had a number of professional artists and academics say that they think it's a sketch by someone who knew what he was doing. They point to the nature of the line work, the layering of colors, and the general composition as evidence.

(Please keep in mind, the scan doesn't really do the piece justice... ALSO, and this is important -- it's the size of a post card. There's not a lot of room for detail when you're painting small. The magazine cover was probably painted much larger than the cover itself, allowing for a lot more expression and depth.)

I've also had three or four experts in science fiction art agree on the Malcom Smith ID. These are people who've been studying, collecting, and writing about science fiction artwork for over 40 years. They definitely know what they're talking about.

In all of the above cases, I never mentioned my own suspicions and instead sent the scans, or showed the painting directly, without injecting any bias.

So while arguments could certainly be made that it's not his, and that it is fan art -- my initial thought, by the way -- people with more solidly based opinions than mine have taken those arguments into account and still think that it's probably Smith's work. So until I get some more definite proof one way or the other, I'm going to err on the side of the experts. (Which isn't to say you might not be an expert -- but I've had MORE experts tell me it's likely Smith than experts who've told me it's not.)