MARTIN STAINFORTH: AN APPRECIATION 115 



opportunity of examining his work. As a draughtsman he was fine. His 

 pencil studies of horses showed expert facility, yet when he employed colour 

 as his medium, though he produced an artistic study, the animal often lacked 

 that lifelike quality so essential to a successful portrait. Stainforth may 

 not be able to do with the pencil what Fry could, and I am sure he doesn't 

 know the horse as Fry did, yet he far out-distances his late rival, not only in 

 his facility for technical expression and in his gift for infusing life, but because 

 he has the power to delicately handle his subject without robbing it of its 

 strength and character. 



Aylyng Arnold, who from 1906 to 1910 was a special correspondent for 

 the "London Sporting Life," happened to be visiting Australia in 1915 and 

 saw some of our artist's w^ork in Melbourne. He did not know Stainforth, but 

 he went back to his hotel and wrote him a letter in which the following words 

 occur: "I can confidently say I have seen as many portraits of horses as falls to 

 the lot of any one man, but never have I seen anything approaching yours." 



It is surprising to find how few notable Australian horse-owners have a 

 sufficient affection for their animals to desire their portraiture in paint. 



1 once asked Stainforth to give me some idea of his methods. He replied 

 that he first examines the horse carefully, making small pencil sketches with 

 remarks on characteristic features, and then, with the impressions fresh in his 

 mind, makes a small sketch in colour from 8 to 1 2 inches in size, giving as far 

 as possible the pose, proportions and colour, without any attempt at fine 

 detail. This study is then compared with the horse, and any alterations that 

 are necessary are made, and further notes are made all round the study. In 

 some cases he makes several sketches, each one getting nearer the perfect 

 representation. The head is the part that requires the greatest care, and many 

 studies of this alone may have to be made before he is satisfied with the 

 results. Having decided the size of the canvas, he next decides on the pose 

 which w^ill best suggest the character of the subject and the direction from 

 which the light will fall to show to best advantage such salient features as the 

 head, shoulders or quarters. An appropriate background has also to be 

 chosen. 



When we come to sum up the merits of Martin Stainforth as a painter 

 of horses, the first point which must be conceded in his favour is his power 

 for conveying a faithful delineation of the particular animal that he is dealing 

 with. He possesses a gift for detecting a horse's chief characteristics and is 

 thus enabled to interpret anything in the animal's conformation that is vital 

 in helping to make the completed work an accurate portrait, in addition to 

 its being an agreeable work of art. As regards his medium, he is equally at 

 home in either water-colour or oils, but he tells me that oils give him much 

 more scope for his large pictures, while water-colour is more suitable for his 

 small studies. His technique has reached such a pitch that he can paint a 

 horse's coat with such fine detail and beauty of texture that it resembles the 

 work of a painter of miniatures. 



Stainforth's love for the horse helps him to strike the ideal pose for each 

 particular animal, and this is most happily shown in his studies of the brilliant 

 Woorak, who was noted for his exuberant spirits and playful, contented 

 nature. Perhaps there is nothing more difficult to achieve in painting a horse 

 than the successful suggestion of his muscular body by means of delicate light 

 and shade. The ordinary painter of the horse generally represents exaggerated 

 muscles, but in Stainforth's horses, though we do not actually see muscles 

 brought into relief, we are nevertheless made aware of their presence under 

 the glossy skin with its vivid sheen. 



