As rewarding as that experience was, though, I knew that method alone didn't make the artist and didn't necessarily make a good painting. Let me put it this way, If I were to take a page from politics, I suppose I'd have a sign over my easel reading, "It's the subject, stupid!".  However simplistic that may sound, it truly is or should be the focus of any figure painter worth their salt.   An artistic portrait should not be limited to the use of the most expensive paints and canvas or to the painter's ability to re-create someone's likeness.   To me, the object of figure painting is to find and reflect, to the greatest degree possible, the subject's individuality ... whatever makes them unique.  Only then does the value of method come into play. The process, even before I pick up a brush, is an act of discovery.  My earlier years studying theatre at the University of Missouri at Kansas City and, later, scene studies at Herbert Berghof Studios in New York, provided a solid base from which all else in my life has been measured, especially in visual art.   Now and then, people who know of my background in the theatre ask me if I miss being an actor.   How could I miss it?  The process of developing a character for the stage is very similar to developing a well-rounded subject on canvas.  The medium is different, of course.  The tools available to the actor are their body and the written word, the painter's tools are canvas, paint and their subject.  But, the objective is the same:  to re-create a particular person's life, as filtered through the eyes of the artist, with the intention of communicating something specific about that human being.