Some claim the media have tried to manipulate the views of the portraits by using camera/video tricks, shading and lighting.
The first thing I noticed with the Michelle O portrait was that dress. It is a painting of a dress. Michelle, even though it does not really look like her, is faded and appears more as background.
I can hear little children years from now — ‘why is there a painting of a dress?’
I posted in an early thread yesterday that I would not be surprised to learn both portraits had been quietly switched out for replacements.
Heartily agree! I have also been thinking:
In 2020 or later, when some news clipping is buried on the Obituary page (if it ever makes mass distribution, that is), what will be the spin? "Obamas' official National Portrait Gallery works replaced. The power couple say they are honored by new portraits by today's artists, replacing the old ones hurried through in the wake of their retirement from office. . . "
When that happens, will anyone even remember this kerfuffle except a few of us? The news stories probably won't even show these paintings, just their replacements.
It's how the media works.