| Author | Message | ||||
  Windinmysails New member Username: Windinmysails Post Number: 7 Registered: 8-2009 |
The girl by the swimming pool was done at the scene with no photos for reference. Sometimes I do drawings from my head, or photos, or from life. or combo. One thing I do strive for is not to make it look like a photo, but to portray it as an drawing or painting by capturing the essence of the spirit of the person or scene and not be concentrating too much on technique. I also love color. The portrait of the two children started out with some wild colors that as I painted were toned down and looked more natural. | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 725 Registered: 8-2006 |
Cindy, I like your drawing of the girl in the woods very much. It has the kind of enlarged setting I suggested in my earlier post, which to me enhances the subject. The painting either needed that kind of background, or should have eliminated background details altogether instead of inserting the bush. Your drawing also clears up what to me was a confusing treatment of the arms and hands in the painting. On the other hand, the head drawing stands well on its own and doesn't seem to call for a "context." I can see that you enjoy your drawing, as well you should. You could compete with some of the better street artists that do charcoals for tourists! I'm not sure why you posted the girl in the bathing suit. It looks more like a beginning study and is not nearly as finished as your other work. Were you intending to give us a look at a typical preliminary stage or study in your painting process? | ||||
Windinmysails New member Username: Windinmysails Post Number: 6 Registered: 8-2009 |
Hi Grizrev, Portraits with some fiqure drawing is my most favorite thing to draw or paint, especially children. I have taken community college classes off and on throughout the years, but mostly I am self taught. I do a lot of looking and reading of artists that I like how they render their subjects. Unfortunately I do not have much time to spend doing my art. I have always liked drawing. The watercolor of the girl with berries is from my head as well as the drawing of the girl in the woods. I did use some random vegetation photos for the scenery.   | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 724 Registered: 8-2006 |
Windinmysails, I like what you have done with the children on the left in your last post -- it incorporates some of the things I was suggesting in my last post, as opposed to what I was seeing in your post with the picture of the lady with flowers in her hair. Obviously you enjoy working with portraits or the human figure. Have you had training in that area? | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 723 Registered: 8-2006 |
The proportions, features and basic drawing are very good for someone who is an amateur hobbyist, though I am confused about the arms and hands of the girl in the painting on the left. In terms of painting itself, it appears that you have used the same colors on the skin as on the clothes. Was that intentional in terms of seeking some kind of harmony? My personal preference would have been to try for better skin tones (Marie on this board has excellent advice posted on that subject), and somewhat "cleaner" colors and a little more "brightening" overall, working on your use of light, contrast, etc. -- the kind of thing you would do with a photograph in Photoshop. I'm not too keen on the background bush in the painting on the left -- it almost seems like a bussel on her dress. Maybe if the figures were not framed so tightly in both paintings there would be room to work a little on their settings, which should complement as well as contrast with the figures and not detract from or become confused with them. | ||||
Windinmysails New member Username: Windinmysails Post Number: 5 Registered: 8-2009 |
Here is a couple more.   | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 722 Registered: 8-2006 |
Windinmysails, congratulations! I see your pics just posted successfully. Our posts must have crossed in the ether somewhere! | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 721 Registered: 8-2006 |
Windinmysails, be sure that you saved your photograph or photocopy of your painting as a jpeg file. Then use a program to reduce the size of the file to the size restrictions on this board. You can right click on some of the files that have been posted successfully; on the drop down mention, select "Properties" to see the dimensions; something like 400pixels by 640pixels ought to work. You can right click on any jpeg file you propose to upload and check its dimensions in the same way. Hope this helps. | ||||
Windinmysails New member Username: Windinmysails Post Number: 4 Registered: 8-2009 |
Trying again.   | ||||
Windinmysails New member Username: Windinmysails Post Number: 3 Registered: 8-2009 |
Hi! For some reason My pics are not loading correctly. I tried loading them as an attachment both times. | ||||
Garydoc Advanced Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 175 Registered: 8-2006 |
wind... I clicked on your painting links and nothing comes up. You need to make a copy that is about 300 pixels in the longer dimension and actually upload the pix as attachments for us to see them. gary | ||||
Windinmysails New member Username: Windinmysails Post Number: 2 Registered: 8-2009 |
Hi! I am a newbie. I love working in all kinds of mediums. As I lived on islands in Alaska in the Rain Forest, it was more realistic to use photos, especially for outdoor subjects. I usually only have enough time to paint or draw a few peices of art every year. I am not professional and most of my art is given away as gifts. I have never entered an Art Contest and only showed a few of my art pieces at one showing.
Please let me know what you think of my paintings. | ||||
Rekha Senior Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 448 Registered: 8-2006 |
A nice painting, Garydoc; it makes you feel you are in a dreamland. Is it affecting your work professionally too? Depressingly so. I stopped work some time ago. | ||||
George Unregistered guest |
Sorry - forgot the illustration.  | ||||
George Unregistered guest |
Gary, that’s an interesting semi-abstract painting. You don’t see many low-key paintings anymore, but I like them. If done right they have much more mystery and mood than high key paintings do. You have a great range of color and value. Also, all the lightest values (inside the white circles) are spread around the composition nicely providing good visual balance. But most of all I like the fact that the verticals aren’t really vertical at all, instead they radiate from a point just below the center of the bottom edge of the painting (see lines adjacent to the pink lines). There are a few really minor things that could be changed, but on a painting as spontaneous as this one is any futzing with minor changes often ends up making a mess of it because the corrections are never as spontaneous as the original effort. Good job Gary! | ||||
Garydoc Advanced Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 174 Registered: 8-2006 |
 Here is an oil painting I did on the Plein Aire workshop that "fell off my brush" in about 30 minutes, and there is no way I could have done this from a photo. I had to sit in the woods and feel the atmosphere to get this one. The reproduction does it little justice...I'm pleased with the way the original came out. Rekha, I'm sorry to hear about your hands. Is it affecting your work professionally too? Gary | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 719 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, glad I pegged your thoughts accurately. Robert Genn had some thoughts today that speak to our topic, especially in regard to energetic and rapid brushwork: "Apart from the emotion one finds in the masterful faces (see Rembrandt's portraits) and the emotion connected to a sensitive place (see Edward Hopper's lonely cafés), there's the tactile emotion that comes out of the end of the brush. Brushwork, energetic and fresh, might be just enough additional emotion for your well-engineered landscapes. In the words of Elbert Hubbard, 'Allow motion to equal emotion.'" Taking time to really absorb a subject helps us avoid wasting time needlessly (and often to ill effect)in the creation of a painting. Deciding how, when and where to invest time requires a bit of wisdom, often gained from painful experience. | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 718 Registered: 8-2006 |
Good thoughts, Joe. Again, the issue is not whether or not to use a photograph as a reference tool, but rather the choice of using the camera as a time saving device -- a substitute for slowing down and taking time to carefully and thoughtfully observe the world around us. Many folks seem bound to a frenetic pace of life that denies them the leisure of enjoying the journey. Have you noticed how many people drive, heavy on the accelerator and light on the brake, as though they were driving an emergency vehicle -- determined to get somewhere ahead of everyone else, no matter what the risk? | ||||
Joe Advanced Member Username: Joe Post Number: 112 Registered: 2-2007 |
A photo should inspire a beginning. Maybe give us a reference for light source, for shadow, an inspiration for composition. Until it passes through our design department, color department and has been filtered through our creativity it is a source of reference. mho | ||||
George Unregistered guest |
Jack, you have explained it beautifully. | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 717 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, having seen some of your beautiful work, I must say that your rapid brushwork is certainly not slapdash, being rather beautifully rendered. This can only come from having completely absorbed and internalized your subject, something that would take enough time for careful observation. Inness was wise to immerse himself in the settings he painted, so that he was able to bring it back in his heart and with certainty render it in the studio. Those who are unsure of their subject tend to overwork, correct and generally futz the material into a hideous mess! Glad you did get to read the article I mentioned. | ||||
George Unregistered guest |
Jack, I feel foolish! I read that article but somehow became confused and mistakenly believed Marie was posting about some other (additional) article. I’ve been thinking about your original question (“What is your rate of speed as you both produce and consume what we know as art?”). Your question has been on my mind because I’ve just finished reading a book about the artist George Inness. He loved to paint en plein air and often packed up his family to go to the mountains to paint as a way to get his creative juices flowing. Everyone who saw him work in the studio commented on the speed of his brush. His rapid brushwork was the result of the fact that his heart, mind and soul were engulfed in his work. My answer to your question is that I find my best work is done when my brush races feverously, not at the direction of my intellect, or from the slow and careful study of the scene in front of me, but rather from a harmonious and deep connection with the subject. Sadly it doesn’t happen for me often enough. But, I suspect most artists do their best work while in this state. Anyway, it was gratifying for me to learn it’s how George Inness worked. | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 716 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, you asked for a summary of the Times article for those who don't read the Times, so here's a try. The author noticed two young women browsing slowly through the Louvre, taking time to really observe what was before them. He found this very unusual, since most people spent far less than a minute observing each piece of art -- most using a camera to snap quick pictures as they raced through the museum bent on "self-improvement." (Perhaps they didn't realize much better photographs had already been taken and made available in photographic albums.) He further noted that the camera to a great extent has replaced the traditional practice of sketching. I must say, however, that I was gratified on my last Louvre visit to see that a good number of copyists were still at work, a few of whom were producing some really fine work. The point of the article, however, was not to decry the use of cameras, but to advocate the benefit of leisurely, direct observation unprejudiced by text or guidebooks full of predigested opinions and information. He ends by delighting in the visceral reaction of the two young women to the last object they observed just before exiting the exhibition. | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 715 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, I read the NY Times online. I posted the link to the article that inspired my reflections and this thread in my originating post (# 711.) Scroll down and try the link to see if it will still work. If not, you can search the archives online for recent articles on the Louvre. | ||||
George Unregistered guest |
Jack, how about a summery for those of us who don’t get the NY Times. Please! | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 714 Registered: 8-2006 |
Thanks, Marie. Glad you enjoyed the NY Times article. Rekha, I'm sorry to hear about the problem with your hands! Again, my thoughts were not so much about the subjects we paint, whether from photos or life, but about the time we spend (or fail to spend) to truly observe the subject whenever we are creating or appreciating art. Now that you cannot create with your hands, I wish you long and enjoyable hours appreciating the world around you and the art that interprets that world. Dale's daisies are excellent and most enjoyable. Thanks, Dale! | ||||
Marie Senior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 484 Registered: 8-2006 |
In a way, it all boils down to why we paint. For me, painting is about learning to observe and understand the world -- light, space, color, texture, arrangement of shapes, and such. Ideally, each painting should help me to see a little more clearly. The product is not as important as the process. If you are interested only in product -- in creating something to hang on a wall -- then it's fine to copy a photograph. For me, that's not a reason to paint. If you are just looking for decoration, then you can go the store an buy something for much less money and effort. Of course, we live in an extremely product-driven and consumer-oriented culture. In a way, there is something a little subversive about doing something such as painting that is not product-oriented. When we are busy worrying about observing nature, there's not as much time to worry about getting the latest and greatest product being hyped on television. By the way, Grizrev, that was a phenomenal article in the New York Times. | ||||
Rekha Senior Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 447 Registered: 8-2006 |
No, George, I am not flagging up support for anyone; I am asking to only judge the end result, the painting. As Joe says ...never had an issue with folks who paint from photos but I do have issue with folks who paint A photo; isn't this our objective? As far as painting from 'nature' goes, about a century ago you could do that. Now the landscape is largely manmade. If art is only when painted from nature then abstract art and portrait painting don't count as art. To me what Joe writes means that we are looking for inspiration from any source - abstract, landscape, streets, golf courses, a human face or body, and we put our interpretations of it on paper/canvas, unique to each individual. | ||||
Eugene Senior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 513 Registered: 8-2006 |
Rekha and all. I cannot fault anyone for using photos as a tool, or shortcut Thomas Eakins did! But he didn't just copy the photo, he used it as reference. He could draw like a whiz-- but why slave over a figure drawing if you can have a camera do it for you? I NEVER JUST COPY (RENDER) A PHOTO. and I can't understand why some people do. (except to show their skill of rendering.) If you want a photo copied exactly, why not just print a duplicate? Although I use photos and sometimes even trace, I do it to save time and effort, not because I can't draw.. I move things for better composition, change values, change colors. But I don't think this is possible without first mastering the basics. I can tell if someone can draw or is just a photo copier in almost every painting I see in a show. Look at the hands in a figure painting--even if you trace, they're hard to paint convincingly if you can't draw. Notice how a lot of artists find ways to hide the hands. Unfortunately, too often jurors are overwhelmed by dazzling technique. tis is a good discussion. Dale | ||||
Joe Advanced Member Username: Joe Post Number: 111 Registered: 2-2007 |
I have never had an issue with folks who paint from photos but I do have issue with folks who paint A photo. | ||||
George Unregistered guest |
Rekha, you are right to stand up for the artists who enjoy painting from photographs. The joy a person gets from painting, by the method they like, is not for me to judge. It's fine to say; I believe the best way for me to paint is to immerse myself in nature. But, I was wrong to suggest others (artists who enjoy painting only with photos) would do better to paint as I do. This is a public forum and I need to remember to respect the fact that others may come here who believe differently than I do about how art should be made. | ||||
Rekha Senior Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 446 Registered: 8-2006 |
Societal changes are always complex to decipher and the consequence of growing old does play a role. I wonder whether there was a public outcry when: -lead got enclosed into usable and convenient wooden cases -you didn't have to grind your own paint -you didn't have to make your own special paper -you could use the pantograph to alter the size of your drawing Of course, in earlier times changes were slow and probably imperceptible to the contemporary public. What matters is that people enjoy what they are doing not reproach them for the means to an end. Take Eugene, for example, if he had the choice he'd be out there painting from nature; we don't criticise him from using photos. In my case, my hands don't co-ordinate for fine work so I have temporarily had to give up painting altogether. | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 713 Registered: 8-2006 |
Rekha, it's good to hear from you again. What you say is absolutely true -- generational gaps and differing generational perspectives continue down through time. In this case, I probably made a mistake in suggesting that the failure to take more time in the creation and appreciation of art was age-related. It really rises from the current pace of society around us and, as George suggests, society's use of labor saving and time saving media technology such as the camera, which affects all of us, regardless of age. Television and computers throw images at us at an accelerating pace. Have you noticed that there is hardly time to develop a thought on tv before the program host calls fo a commercial break? Having said that, we need to remember that the use of camera-like devices in the creation of art has been around for quite some time. I remember that Toffler warned us about the impact of all this on our lives some time back in his book "Future Shock." I simply intended to raise a warning flag that we currently might be exceeding an optimal speed limit in creating and enjoying our art! It really doesn't matter whether or not the causal influences are societal or personal. | ||||
Rekha Senior Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 445 Registered: 8-2006 |
I am getting deja vu here! My parents used to take us to visit my grandparents in a village. You'd see scrawny old toothless men wearing a bright white pugree (turban), sitting on a charpai (a coir rope woven and supported on a wooden frame with 4 wooden legs) under the flimsy shade of acacia trees. I would hear them say the same things about the golden past gone and how the young generation was unruly and not keen to learn anything. I have a feeling that as we grow old we don't like or can't tolerate changes; the old familiar routines of life seem superior | ||||
Joe Advanced Member Username: Joe Post Number: 110 Registered: 2-2007 |
My friends, whom I paint ourdoors with, are beginning to learn we are not a camera nor do we need to try to be. Working together they have seen me approach things differently day after day and are rapidly learning it is about making a piece of art and not a reproduction of what they see. I have much to learn myself but I am learning. I met them at a coffe shop and told them today I am going to paint something different, a rock your world approach. Half way done passersby were coming over and saying that is absolutely beautiful. The color and composition was mine but the people believed I was painting the river. Maybe so but it was the river as I saw it and absolutely not as a reproduction. | ||||
Eric Member Username: Eric Post Number: 35 Registered: 4-2008 |
Joe says to him a photo is a beginning, a jumping off point. I agree. I also look at being outside, painting in the great outdoors, as a jumping off point also. I don't want to painstakingly copy nature. Just as a copy of a photo is boring, so is a copy of nature. I want my paintings to be more than that. | ||||
Joe Advanced Member Username: Joe Post Number: 109 Registered: 2-2007 |
Sorry for my ramblings.Give my mind a thought and it runs amuck with it. Photos? Rendering. Yes. I agree with all of you. I use photos for reference when the weather is bad, and so on, but the photo is an idea to me and is only the beginnig, a jumping off point. I also understand how a camera sees and see that it traps and gives away the people who render a photo. | ||||
Joe Advanced Member Username: Joe Post Number: 108 Registered: 2-2007 |
I paint outdoors quite a bit and find the public is very interested in what we do. People say how do you find the time? It is really about time allocation so I make time for it just as you make time for the things that involve you. I will say that a lot of these people are people who come to parks and museums. I really feel they are one of "us" so to speak. As many of you know television has taught many to function in specific time slots, the time between commercials. Time ends in commercials, half hour segments, hour segments or what ever programming dictates, but time always ends.They/we have been programmed and are very use to being entertained. One of the curiosities of modern times is the endless need for noise. As mentioned below there are endless tv sets, music, etcetra. Are we so afraid of our own thoughts? Can we not stand our quiet musings, the voice of God or the dreaded silence? Another thing:I have a fellow artist, who has the studio down the hall from me who has been teaching a senior high school art class. She has them making small chairs from gatorboard because she discovered they have limited digital skills. Where am I going with this? I don't know but I feel our society is headed down a short road to the edge of a very high cliff.I spent most of my early years fishing, hunting and camping in the midwest. I had a lot of time for interspection, reading and thinking. | ||||
Garydoc Advanced Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 173 Registered: 8-2006 |
Hey All!! I just got back from my annual trip to paint & went to N.C. this year. I went to the Ringling School of Art's Wildacres retreat and the course I took was "Plein air" specifically for the reasons Dale says...to learn what's going on in the shadows and to break my reliance on photos. Keep posting guys (and ladies) and I'll keep lurking and chiming in once in awhile! Gary | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 712 Registered: 8-2006 |
George and Eugene, I couldn't agree more with both of you. We may be three old fogeys out of step with the present technological age, but we can take comfort in knowing that the newest is not necessarily the best. It's always a pleasure to read your thoughts and know that all the dinosaurs are not dead! Eugene, you are an inspiration, pressing on and doing such great work despite your health limitations, utilizing what must be a remarkable memory. Use any crutches you like! | ||||
Eugene Senior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 511 Registered: 8-2006 |
George- you said it so well. I cringe at many of the prizewinners today, because they are nothing but skillful copies of photos. I can paint from reference photos today only because I've had YEARS of plein air painting and know what happens in the shadows, etc. I'd still prefer to paint on site but am physically unable. I now use photos as reference, but never make direct copies. The only way to really learn to do landscapes is to paint plein air! The same applies to figure painting and live models | ||||
George Unregistered guest |
Jack, or anyone else who comes to this site. At the risk of sounding overly negative, I’d have to respond honestly that I believe modern culture has produced a breed of zombies drowning in “an ocean of passing stimulation.” I could give a dozens of examples, but I’ll just list a few that are typical of what today’s generation is subjected to. Today when I go to “experience” a new restaurant I find a half dozen televisions, all on different stations, flashing images from all directions. The building I work in has a television in the hallway flashing images at me whenever I leave my office. When I go to an athletic event I can watch the game as well as a super sized screen flashing images of the same game I’m attending as well as other annoying commercial or data filled images. If I go to the Doctor I can’t read a book because of a television blaring sounds and images at me. All of this, and much more I don’t have time to list, has an effect on how the human brain functions. Even the supposedly immune artist is not truly immune. Up until about 30 years ago over 80% of watercolor painters worked both in plein air, as well as in the studio. Today over 80% of watercolor artists work from photographs without any plein air experience at all. Why? The major reason is that it’s faster and easier to copy what the camera has reduced to a picture than it is to actually SEE all that nature is, and reduce it to a picture in the mind (consequently art suffers). But, this explanation ignores the deeper, more complex cause of the current superficial approach to art. With the vast ocean of passing stimulation getting wider and deeper (more invasive) every year, most artists can no longer immerse themselves in nature without a painful overload. And, that’s only the few who are even able to immerse themselves in nature. Many haven’t developed the observational tools to even get close to something that could be called an immersion in nature. When thousands of images are flashed at you every day you learn not to study any image. A habit of the mind that weakens the mind like a powerful drug until life itself is merely a blur of images. And, that life is as lifeless as the flash card like images it records. Anyway……agree or disagree, as you like. | ||||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 711 Registered: 8-2006 |
I've been thinking about the current speed of life. Are we living too fast to really enjoy living? Do we as artists exemplify life appreciation, or are we part of the problem? What is your rate of speed as you both produce and consume what we know as art? There is an interesting article in the New York Times today on "doing" the Louvre that deals with this question (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/03/arts/design/03abroad.html?_r=1&em) Here's a sample of the musing: "Recently, I bought a couple of sketchbooks to draw with my 10-year-old in St. Peter’s and elsewhere around Rome, just for the fun of it, not because we’re any good, but to help us look more slowly and carefully at what we found. Crowds occasionally gathered around us as if we were doing something totally strange and novel, as opposed to something normal, which sketching used to be. I almost hesitate to mention our sketching. It seems pretentious and old-fogeyish in a cultural moment when we can too easily feel uncomfortable and almost ashamed just to look hard. Artists fortunately remind us that there’s in fact no single, correct way to look at any work of art, save for with an open mind and patience. If you have ever gone to a museum with a good artist you probably discovered that they don’t worry so much about what art history books or wall labels tell them is right or wrong, because they’re selfish consumers, freed to look by their own interests." |
Watercolor
