I hate this artist’s work. To me, and a lot of well-known artists, this guy is way overrated as a viable artist. He only wins awards in shows because he knows people and favoritism comes into play! All his paintings remind me of work you would see by a weekend artist pretending to be a serious viable artist. If you look at any of this alleged artist’s paintings, you can see in many of the sections of any painting he creates, the different colors on every element is painted in with one color painted over another using a wet into wet technique….a beginners technique. I’ll show you in his images below.

This terrible artist also is asked to judge regional art exhibitions once in awhile. Why, I have no idea! He can only paint landscapes and has no knowledge or ability to paint figures. You have to have experience at painting both to be a judge. If he is the judge in any show you are interested in entering…don’t. He does not have the knowledge of figures to be considered a reputable judge.

He also has the reputation of being a corrupt judge in that he sometimes dismisses wonderful paintings by different artists that he doesn’t like for some unknown reason……most likely jealousy issues! One artist told me that he never wins awards from this guy because he is jealous of his work….he can paint figures and Salminen can’t. He is also known for giving the Best In Show award to someone whose painting wasn’t that good. As he was quoted say, “I like to piss people off when I can.” This is not the kind of judge you want to look at your work in any exhibition. Now let’s look at his paintings!

This is a very poorly painted watercolor. There is absolutely no delineation of any elements in this scene. All the colors in the figures just seem to run together in hopes that the subject will be defined enough to work…it doesn’t. This is especially visible on the people’s faces and clothes. If you remember, I said that this artist is not able to paint figures correctly. He really needs to take a figure drawing course to make his figures more convincing in his work. The two figures are crudely drawn and the faces are atrocious!

Not only are the faces painted poorly, but the clothes they are wearing has no indication of folds in the jackets they have on. If you look at the man in front, there is a dark line leading into the man’s right arm, which makes it seem that his arm continues across his back. That happened because all his paint just ran together uncontrollably in a wet into wet technique. In this case, it doesn’t work. The gold area looks very busy and appears to be a paint by numbers work by the use of many separated small dabs of paint….very busy!

 The figures in this painting just do not work. It resembles a paint by number techniques once again that people use when they can’t paint. If you look at the faces of the two men, you can see small flat areas are applied to form the shading. The man on the right is poorly drawn so, it looks like a beginner painted it. It looks so awful that it ruins the painting all together. 

This guy also uses way too much gray in all his paintings. It tends to make all his scenes really somber and dark as if it was a rainy day. That get’s a little boring after awhile seeing all his work like that. To me, that means that Salminen is not that versatile and is stuck painting the same thing over and over again….monotonous!!!!!!  

This landscape is not very successful in that the painting looks very drab and dark with the use of all that gray color. Even though it has some dark areas such as the figure in the foreground and the bottom of the building on the left, it still appears to be very flat looking. That happens when you make all the tones of the different colors the same. This in turn will not show any delineation from one element to the next. They simply run into one another. You can see that in all the pink buildings in the middle ground. 

Lastly, the foreground area, which I guess is snow, is painted so badly that it looks rushed with no concern for correct drawing. You might be able to get away with this wet into wet technique in the background because everything would be out of focus but, not here in the foreground. There should have been some sections more defined so the viewer could tell that this is snow. There also should have been more concern for the correct drawing of all the windows on the buildings. If you look at the building on the left, all the windows are different sizes and not lined up horizontally. Even in very loosely painted pieces, you must show a sense of correct drawing. All in all this is a dreadful watercolor painting…. complete failure! 

The first thing I think about whenever I look at this alleged artist’s work is someone who paints without and definition to any element in his paintings. Every painting he creates has that appearance to it because of all the flat areas of color. I can’t help but think that he went to a hobby shop somewhere and bought those paint by number kits that kids and non painters use just to create something to hang on their living room walls. Let’s look at some of his so-called creations.

This piece is so horrible, I can’t even bring myself to call it a finished piece artwork. To me, this appears to be the beginning foundation lay in of colors that any watercolor artist would do or, it could be a study! To him, it’s completed because he signed it!

If you notice, the first thing Popadics did was to wash a light green onto a sheet of paper. Instead of any delineation in different color and tones, he simply continued on laying in hard edge darker areas over that. This is not the way to work with watercolor. He does have values of the green color in the trees, however, there are no indication of leaves. You can paint using some flat areas but, you need to indicate many more dark and light sections to depict leave

This painting does not show that. All elements simply sit there on the surface looking as if they were pasted on.

Popadics also shows me that he has no understanding of color and how to use it. Has anyone of you seen a green sky….this guy apparently has. It’s all right to paint monochromatic paintings however, you have to bring some kind of realism into each scene you paint. In the case of this horrible painting, he could have introduced a little blue, yellow or ultramarine in the areas where the sky is supposed to be. Also, there should have been some raw umber areas on the ground in the foreground. This painting/study is a complete failure!

Here is another finished painting, according to Popadics. He even thought it was good enough to sign! Once again, it looks to me like a quick lay in of light and dark areas where the final painting in of colors will be added later. As with the other painting above, all elements here are indicated as flat blobs of paint with no detail whatsoever. Whenever an artist  uses a wet into wet technique there always should some areas that show a hard edge so it appears to be completed!

As I already mentioned, this artist has no sense of color. Instead of a somber brown color for the hedge of bushes in front, which he probably saw that way, he could have used a different shade of green or perhaps an olive color. This would have added more interest.

Also, you would never see an element painted all the same value on top as it is on the bottom as in this painting. There would always be a darker area on the bottom and lighter on the top of any object depicted in a painting because of the light from the sky. Here, there is no indication of that in the tree line and the bushes in the foreground.

After looking at these horrible painting/studies, I started to laugh out loud when I saw what the prices are for these two failures. For this 14×10 painting, he wants $1650 and for the one above this he wants $2750 for a 28×16 below. Not only does this guy have illusions of grandeur, but he obviously thinks he’s Andrew Wyeth. For an artist to charge that much for painting  that appears to be created by a child is laughable. You should always be realistic when it comes to pricing and not make a fool of yourself as Popadics has.

Finally, not only is this person considered to not be a viable artist but, his moral character is in question. There are several articles on the internet written by well known artists concerning the corruption this guy was involved with. It is a well known fact in the artist community that several years ago, he went along with a request from Jim McFarlane (president of the American Watercolor Society at that time) to cancel the membership of a well known artist simply because that artist wanted his award money that McFarlane stole from him. McFarlane accused the artist of something which was proven to be false by the artist’s attorney, however, McFarlane wouldn’t give back the money! Knowing what a thief McFarlane is now, he most likely didn’t tell anyone at the AWS and put the money into his own bank account! He, along with Antonio Masi did cancel the membership of that artist but, gave no reason. This is illegal and they all can be sued at any time! After taking with the artist at length for this article, he explained to me that there is no desire on his part to belong to such a corrupt society, so to sue for membership was not an option. However, suing for the award money was still on the table.

Because of this artist’s horrid work, high prices and the questions about his sordid past, I would not suggest purchasing anything from him. His work certainly will have no value in the future!!!!!

The first thing you see when you go to this artist’s website is type that explains that he is a Hall of Fame Honoree recipient from the Pastel Society of America. There is one strike against him right there! I just had to laugh….why was he ever given that title? He’s not that good an artist so, he must have brown-nosed his way in to receive that honor! The fact that he is on this list only backs up my opinion that the PSA Hall of Fame Honoree is a joke now with all the overrated artists on that list from 2000 on. Here’s a guy that paints just like a beginner and for that he gets that title…..very disconcerting! The thing to be noted here is that most of the recipients of that title just happened to be good friends of the society president, and or, hangs out a lot at the office of the PSA getting to know all the officers. In other words, you have to kiss ass to be considered, or, know the president really well. Winners of the title certainly don’t get it on the merit of their work or being a viable artist in the art community!

I have to say, when I looked at this alleged artist’s site, I’ve never seen such a horrible group of paintings from one artist in one place. They simply remind me of how my daughter used to paint back in high school and…..her paintings were better….really….they were!!!!! When you look at the group of crap on his site, you get the sense that the paintings are more drawings than anything else. There are way too many black lines being used! Let’s look at some of his very dreadful images.

To most artists, this would be a very quick study. To this guy, it’s a finished painting….he signed it. Therefore, that is the way I will approach speaking about this monstrosity. To me, this painting looks like it was created by a high school student. There is way too much color of the paper’s surface showing, which gives it the appearance of a study. The application of the medium is immature….simply washed in very quickly with no attempt to blend into the other colors around it. He is known as a pastel artist, but this looks to me to be a watercolor on color paper. You can see the lack of blending in the clouds and the shadow areas on the grass. There is absolutely no concentration on creating pleasing painted strokes!

The next thing I notice is that Flatmann has no sense of drawing correctly. If you look at the columns of the building on the right, they all tip to the right, which is odd, because the lines behind them are straight! Even though a painting, or even a study for the matter, is quickly rendered, it must show the viewers that the artist understands the correct drawing of all elements in his or her painting. This guy doesn’t convince me of that rule! This is a definitely horrible painting!

This is yet another one of his alleged paintings. This is a pastel. Once again, there are too many black lines showing. I think this guy believes he is back in France during the time of Degas, Lautrec, Monet and Manet…all who drew in objects with black pastel, only this guy uses way too many. If you look at this pastel closely, you will notice all the black lines he uses to define the buildings and boats. That is not the way it is in nature. Many of these areas can be blend in to create volume! If there is a dark area at the bottom or side of an object, you should use another color for that dark area. The painting will then be much more interesting and correct.

Once again, there is also no attempt to blend in certain areas, such as the building. Color is simply added by stoking the paper with the flat side of a pastel stick and leaving it as is. You can also see this is the horrible way he rendered the clouds and sky. There is no blending whatsoever. All in all, this is yet another disastrous painting!

Lastly, I heard about a story concerning the lack of professionalism of Flatmann years ago. I talked to some offices of the Degas Pastel Society about this issue and whether it was true or not…it was. Flatmann has been the president of this society for years. Apparently, about nine years ago, their annual exhibition was once again coming up. Being that Flatmann has complete control of their shows by being the president and Exhibition Chairman, he invited one of his very good friends to be the Selection and  Awards Judge. When the awards were handed out, he gave Flatmann the Best in Show Award. This is a classic case of favoritism and it never should have happened. First of all it’s really tacky for any officers of any fine art society to enter their paintings into their very own show. This says that there may be favoritism….and, there was in this exhibition. Then, for the judge to give the top award to his friend who is president is shameful.

 After this happened, the society officer told me that one of the better pastel artists in America was in that show and contacted Flatmann to show his disapproval of what just happened. There was no response back. Then, next year this same artist entered the show again only to be rejected with a painting that had already won  Best in Show from another society exhibition…hummmm!!!! Flatmann had his feeling hurt that the artist told the truth about what he had done and now Flatmann was apparently paying him back for speaking out. This goes way beyond doing what was professional and it’s certainly not the way a respectable art society handles the selection of what they believe are the best paintings available at that time for their show! A sensitive person who conducts himself like this has no business being in charge of what used to be a really nice exhibition to enter. If I were you, I would look for other pastel society shows to send paintings to instead of one like this where favoritism is condoned!!!!

When I first saw this artist’s work, she had just won an award in some regional show. I remember looking at her painting and wondering, “what the hell was the judge thinking?” It didn’t say much for the judge’s knowledge of what a great painting should look like because Conover’s painting was horrendous! As I found out later, the judge was a very good friend of Ms.Conover. Oh right….That explains everything! This is called “favoritism”…….the giving of unfair preferential treatment to one person at the expense of another. That is what happened in this case. Conover won an award which should have gone to another artist all because her friend was the judge. This happens all the in society exhibitions whether the officers of those societies want to admit it or not.

This woman also has the reputation of turning in artists who contact her with with personal critiques of her show judging conduct. I heard from several sources that if  Ms. Conover hears from an artist criticizing her work or the way she judged a certain exhibition, she won’t contact the artist who emailed her, but rather contact the art society where she judged. That’s call fear and passing the buck for someone else to yell at and discipline the artist. One time, she heard from an artist, who really knows what he is doing, concerning her lack of judging expertise. She was so intimidated by this person, she didn’t even contact the society who’s show it was but rather, emailed Bill Bailey, president of the National Watercolor Society at that time and complained to him…..why????? Unbelievably, Bailey listened to her and decided to get involved by writing a short article in the NWS newsletter about the incident……….the wrong thing to do…..very confusing! He should have told her that this doesn’t make sense and to talk to the society where the exhibition was located. This is a very odd, confused, intimidated and mean-spirited woman!  Now, let’s look at her very somber busy paintings.

This is an absolutely horrific watercolor painting. At first glance, it seems to me that she was trying to use the same color scheme that Andrew Wyeth did for just about all his watercolor and tempera paintings. That would be a very somber combination of black, gray and brown with an occasional touch of green. By mixing gray with the burnt sienna brown she created a burnt umber brown. The problem here is that this worked for the great master Wyeth because he painted landscapes during the winter and fall months….people too. However, in this case, being an abstract, it just simply doesn’t work. This became a boring very somber lifeless painting. Almost all abstracts are very bright and colorful!!!!!

The second thing I noticed about this terrible painting was that her technique is not quite mastered yet. If you looked at the application of the watercolor, it appears splotched in all the elements, especially the telephone pole and tree trunk in the center. In an abstract, it should be flat or starting out as a light shade on top and blending into a darker shade on the bottom. 

Another problem I see in all Conover’s work is that she does not have the ability to draw correctly. All the elements in all her paintings are drawn very clumsily. They all look as if a child painted them. That’s the way it looks in this painting.

Just looking at this particular painting gives me a little acid reflux….just simply a dreadful painting! Once again, she uses this uninteresting color scheme that just does not work in abstracts. It is also devoid of any knowledge of drawing. She also seems to be fixated on telephone poles…not exactly the most interesting subject!

However, the main problem with this painting is that it is just too busy. There are way too many lines going in all different directions. What she was trying to accomplish doing this…I don’t know! Nothing would have helped this painting to look successful, but she could have left out all those lines that look like she scratched them on in an up and down fashion.  Also, there are too many birds depicted….just a few would have been enough!

These are truly some of the worst watercolor paintings I have ever seen. After establishing that fact, I had the biggest laugh when I saw what price she is asking for these two horrendous paintings. The one on top is  22×30 and she is asking $2800. The one the bottom is 22×30 and her price is $4000! You have to be kidding me! I wouldn’t give her $200 for both of them. This is the kind of work you would see in the art section on eBay! To think that she actually believes that this crap is worth that much is laughable. It makes me think that she not only stole Andrew Wyeth’s color scheme but also, his asking price for his wonderful paintings. This is a common problem with most artists working to day. They have illusions of grandeur and think that they are much better than they really are! A great example of that would be Dean Mitchell…..another over-rated artist who stole Wyeth’s color schemes, design setups, subjects and to put it bluntly, his whole vision as an artist. All his paintings are overly priced to the point of being ridiculous….thinks way too much of himself!!!!!!

The odd thing about Conover’s pricing is that not only are her paintings priced too high, but you have to wonder why these two are exactly the same size but the one is $1200 more. This is something an artist should never do. You have to be consistent. Sometimes artists will charge more for one of their paintings the same size if that painting took at lot longer to paint or, won many awards in shows. I can assure you that these two pieces of crap took exactly the same amount of time and they did not win anything in any art society shows ever!!!!!

Lastly, I don’t consider an artist to be viable in the art community if they only create paintings with one medium only. This is what Kathleen Conover does. She is as close to being a weekend painter as you can get. She does not have the ability to paint figures and only uses one medium to paint only one subject. I don’t consider her to be a real artist because of the lack of versatility, and what she paints is really not that successful! I would advise you to never purchase anything from this excuse for an artist. She simply gives the rest of the art community a really bad name!!!!