Biggest Waves Ever Surfed - Paintings

[Aquaman2]

Here is my collection of paintings of the biggest waves surfed since Greg Noll at Makaha in 1969. These are true to scale paintings of the biggest waves surfed in high definition. These paintings are from 20"x30" to 30"x40" and several varieties of prints can be ordered on "Fineartamerica.com". Here is the link to my paintings, along with some abstracts, my surfboard design, and model of the Big E:

http://fineartamerica.com/profiles/john-kaelin.html

My standing offer is ALL photogs get 50% of whatever I can get for a print. The most I can get for a single large print 3 x 4 feet is only $20. So if I sell one I will send the photog $10. My paintings are not "manipulations" of photos, they are hand-painted the hard way, 15 years of work. These are real impressionistic paintings of photos. Enlarge the image and you will see the brush strokes. These paintings are not "confusingly similar" to the original photos. Compare my painting with the photo. All the details are different. My colors are rediculously exaggerated, COBALT blue water, which is "candy coating". The founder of Towsurfer.com, Eric Akiskalian, was pleased with my painting of his wave in Oregon, so he contacted the photog, Richard Hallman, who is on board with this. I contacted a dozen of the most famous photogs asking for permission, and ALL of them DO NOT care. So far no complaints from photogs. I welcome all photogs to contact me and give me their contact info so I can include their name, along with the surfer's name, in the title of the painting, and so I can mail them a check for $10 just in case I sell the largest size print of my painting which is based on their photo. This is the only way you will see all the HISTORIC biggest waves ever surfed in one place and in high definition. This is the only way I can think of to bring big-wave surfing to the general public.

[billie_morini]

hi John,
interesting story and stuff. You seem like a straight-forward kind of guy, Therefore, you may receive a straight-ahead comment from this forum regular located in Santa Barbara. No offense intended, but the blue water color you've used is not natural to me. It's almost as bright as a fluorescent blue.
billie

[oldmansurfer]

It's art and not intended to be a painted photograph, the colors are exaggerated for effect. I can see how some might like it or not like it. I think I wouldn't mind one in my house but not enough to lay out a big chunk of change for it. I used to do some acrylic paintings of waves before (more than 40 years ago) and probably could do my own versions. Acrylic is so great for doing waves you can keep adding layers which gives it more depth.

[billie_morini]

Ol' Man,
I like what I'm hearing from you. Now if you paint the picture, then I would buy it. I'd buy it because it would be made by one of my forum Brah's. Because of this, I'd buh it even if the ocean was neon blue!
billie

[oldmansurfer]

I sold my first acrylic wave to a surfer friend of mine. He demanded I sell it to him for $25 which was a lot of money back in 1970. I gave in and let him have it for $15 because he was my good friend. It turned out pretty awesome I guess. I was just goofing around in art class my senior year in high school. I was into bodyboarding at the time. I did another acrylic wave on the dresser drawer at my parents house, that one was the best one I did, no idea what happened to it. I guess being an artist was always a possible thing for me because several people wanted to buy my stuff and I was only learning how to do it. Unfortunately I never kept any of that stuff because I always thought I could do another one....well I guess I still can just not motivated so far.

[Aquaman2]

Thanks for your comments Billie and Oldmansurfer. Often I also think the blue comes on too strong, not soothing to the eyes which as surfers is what draws us to the ocean, REAL ocean blue, or blue/grey if you live in Socal. That neon blue comes from using photo editor, exaggerating the intensity of color and contrast. The actual paintings are much more subdued blues.

This is my big experiement to see how popular big-wave surfing is. So far, I quit, not a single sale since I first started showing my paintings to the world on "Fineartamerica.com" about 3 months ago. The only way I will paint another big-wave surf scene is if there is a new world record for tow in or paddle in, or if someone buys a print.

Anyone else out there ever try estimating wave heights from photos? Here's how I do it. The bigger the picture is, the easier it is to analyze, that is why I began painting these historic waves, to see if my estimates were close to the official Billabong XXL judgments. Figure out the lowest point of the trough by paying careful attention to the height of the camera angle. You know, like at Nazare the camera angle is so high the wave looks twice as high as it really is. Figure out how tall the surfer would be standing up straight, the way I do that is photograph myself standing in the same pose as the photo, then photograph myself standing up straight, and calculate the ratio. Then measure the number of times overhead. You need to know how tall the surfer in the photo is to be more accurate. Times overhead X surfer's height = wave height. I agree with Mike Parson's wave at Cortez Bank on 1-5-08 was about 77 feet high. I do not agree that Garrett's wave at Nazare was 78 feet high, more like in the mid 60s.

[longdream]

paint this