Customer Reviews

Dogs Playing Poker 2005 (Workman Wall Calendars)

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

While this 2005 Coolidge calendar is better than the one for 2004, it also includes an egregious error. The version of the painting "Kelly Pool" is not a Coolidge painting, but an obvious and poorly done fake taken from the Coolidge print. If you look at prints that are available, you will see that a lot of details are more "fudged" than in Coolidge's original. Look at the chairs here--they don't remotely have the same rounded, three-dimensional quality that Coolidge gave them. The dogs' limbs are more wooden, more twig-like. There are many areas where the straight lines, the definition of objects, and the fields of color, are quite messy. And lastly, the artist who copied Coolidge--probably in the last five years and probably in (my guess would be) China--didn't even know how pool tables are constructed. There are certain mechanical features in Coolidge's original pool table that are partially omitted here and partially mis-drawn. So you see, this is not a Coolidge painting, but a poorly done copy.

In design terms, the best part of this calendar is the box/envelope it comes in, but then it'll just get thrown away.

If people are determined to have a Coolidge calendar, then they're going to buy this. It just seems sad to encourage a publishing company that isn't using expertise or high standards to judge an artist's work, and may mislead people who actually care about Coolidge's art.

While this 2005 Coolidge calendar is better than the one for 2004, it also includes an egregious error. The version of the painting "Kelly Pool" is not a Coolidge painting, but an obvious and poorly done fake taken from the Coolidge print. If you look at prints that are available, you will see that a lot of details are more "fudged" than in Coolidge's original. Look at the chairs here--they don't remotely have the same rounded, three-dimensional quality that Coolidge gave them. The dogs' limbs are more wooden, more twig-like. There are many areas where the straight lines, the definition of objects, and the fields of color, are quite messy. And lastly, the artist who copied Coolidge--probably in the last five years and probably in (my guess would be) China--didn't even know how pool tables are constructed. There are certain mechanical features in Coolidge's original pool table that are partially omitted here and partially mis-drawn. So you see, this is not a Coolidge painting, but a poorly done copy.

In design terms, the best part of this calendar is the box/envelope it comes in, but then it'll just get thrown away.

If people are determined to have a Coolidge calendar, then they're going to buy this. It just seems sad to encourage a publishing company that isn't using expertise or high standards to judge an artist's work, and may mislead people who actually care about Coolidge's art.

This is a fun calendar for anyone who enjoys Coolidge's paintnings. I don't disagree with the other reviewer. It appears that one of the paintings is not Coolidge and it is not the same quality. On the other hand, I would hate to deprive myself of all of the fun pictures to snub the publisher.