| Author | Message | ||
  George |
Artcafe.net When you get there look under Café then Artboards then General Critiques & Help | ||
Robert |
George-- When I go to artcafe I get a dead link. Can you please paste the url. Thanks. | ||
Zoe |
Thanks, George - I am already critical of my work (LOL) - I just ripped up three paintings without batting an eyelash...I need a little instruction and the Springmaid Workshops might be an answer. I haven't found a local workshop even by writing to my very local watercolour society. It's not the money, exactly, it's how I spend my money. Two summers ago I went to the best bookbinding workshop in the Universe (joking of course) and the instructor and I got on like a house on fire, but I was a minnow in the wave of whales. As I said, I dabble and that one put me out a couple of thousand (for a week) but it also got me back to my New England. But, it put me off bookbinding :( -- something I had been doing for two years! Eugene says the Springmaid is for all levels and I am below beginner in watercolour and after today I'd rank myself a tired third :) I think I am board-ed up. I spend lots of time at Wet Canvas looking at all their work. Are you sub'd there? | ||
George |
Ah! The answer to my question was right under my nose. That clues you to how much time I spend on this page. If you’re concerned about the cost of the workshop, but wish to receive a professional appraisal of your work, there is another website that gives critiques for free by some very talented professional artists. Search “ArtCafe” and then go to the critique board. Just a thought. | ||
Zoe |
George - if you look down the "tree view" you'll see where Eugene and I, and others, too, talked about these workshops. Eugene is at one now, I believe. I heard about the workshops and have the brochure, but I am always a last minute shopper and hope that I don't miss out this time. It seems like a good investment, but I am such a dabbler I'm not certain I should make this investment. Check it out and see :) And let's hope we all get better! | ||
George |
Zoe, I too am coming down with a cold. It seems to be that time of year. I’m not familiar with the term “Springmaid”. Is it a school? | ||
Zoe |
Actually George, Nuala probably can fend for his/herself, and I was not attacking but defending, or at least I thought I was. Anyway no offense taken, in any serious way, as I'll struggle on in my own way until I can get the proper bearings. Eugene is suggesting I go down to Springmaid, and perhaps I shall. Cheeries. Cold and all! | ||
George |
I think nuala (whoever he/she might be) could use a word of support here. His/her (not clear form the name) comment, "just do it” may well be borrowed from an athletic shoe commercial, but I don’t believe the comment was intended to “rigidly label others.” I could be wrong about that, and nuala may come back and inform me that I’m wrong, but I took her/his comment as a simple statement of his/her own personal approach to watercolor. Granted, I am guilty of the same fault by having taking Zoe’s comment that “technical know-how is essential” as being rigidly applied to others. | ||
Zoe |
Actually I am considered a "maverick" and a free spirit, but I have my limits, too. One of our members did say, "just do it," and I suppose since that is what I am doing --- doing it, but with only a book in one hand, and a brush in the other, I am realizing that this ain't working (for me). I need more instruction! (Home with a cold, so had plenty of time to think and mess up a painting)! | ||
Robert |
if I said, "just do it" we'd probably have another plague on our houses (LOL). LOL I have noted in life that the old struggle between the romantic and the classical still goes on. Some call for structure and reason to dominate, others for a free spirited, intuition driven approach. This is in far more realms than merely the arts and rears its head in areas from religion, to politics, to lifestyles. However, either side, in my opinion is operating at the level of cliche and in real life ewach moment in unique and calls upon us to bring to bear varing amounts of reason and intuition. However some people are more comfortable if they can rigidly label others. It seems to convey a smug self-satisfaction. I find this most ofen among those who consider themselves freespirits who lash out at those who require structure and reason. It's so easy to explain "just do it" and to fault others for not being "freespirited enough." Any 18 year old say such stuff with deep conviction. Where did this rant come from????? Sorry. | ||
Zoe |
Thanks, Robert - I appreciate all the points of view and like to hear what other people think, but I am loath to accept dictate in life or in painting. When presented with an opinion I weigh it seriously but when waged with musts, shoulds, I unfortunately seem to respond poorly. I also seem to find on lists, like in life itself, people often offer formularic answers - just do is not an answer I appreciate. I am mentoring someone right now, in public health, and if I said, "just do it" we'd probably have another plague on our houses (LOL). | ||
Robert |
"Conversations are like music, too - if you don't listen to the subtlety you might miss the chord. I am not suggesting that instruction is the panacea, nor did I suggest that I was not working the paper, I merely said ..." Zoe--welcome to the wonderful world of newsgroups. Once you post something what may happen, if the newsgroup has several participants, is that someone will start haggling over semantics and hairsplitting nuances. They are usually technically correct but somehow miss the more subtle human interactions that exist as subtext. If they persist beyond a certain point they may be perceived as trolls (intentional troublemakers). I don't think that's the case in this newsgroup. What I heard you saying is that instruction for you was a positive and necessary need. I think more people could benefit from that attitude on many fronts. All the best, Robert | ||
Robert |
Exactly--in the real world, most of us don't have the genius to know in what direction to even begin. It helps immensley to have the guidance of someone. Teaching is an art and part of that art is laying out sytematically a course of learning that will engage and edify the student. Learning is an art also--it's main prerequisite is the humility to admit one doesn't already know it all. | ||
Zoe |
I'll post an example. I have Kosvanec's book, "Transparent W/C Wheel." He really explains the water to paint ratio with examples and why one ratio is going to collapse the bubble and another won't. He makes it so clear, all you have to do is practice it. And now the practice does come into play and can work with repeated trys, trials and probable errors! But, if one hadn't read it, saw it and started to understand that water and w/c do have a physical relationship that will affect how one paints, one might (me, for example) use a ratio that was either too diluted or insufficiently diluted and continue to fail to get the volume necessary for good coverage. He also demonstrates, again, clearly, how to engage your brush in the puddle, something few books address. I like both Mr. Kosvanec and his book because he appears to want to teach and for my bucks, he does! | ||
Robert |
"you can repeat mistakes if you don't know you are making them in the first place and continue to make them over and over and over again." I'll have to agree and in the real world instruction is all but essential. Some may disagree. I don;t think that changes anything. | ||
Zoe |
Conversations are like music, too - if you don't listen to the subtlety you might miss the chord. I am not suggesting that instruction is the panacea, nor did I suggest that I was not working the paper, I merely said "you can repeat mistakes if you don't know you are making them in the first place and continue to make them over and over and over again." This means that I believe some instruction, seeing how it is done is often an important step in learning - it is for me! And "for me" is an important distinction - it may not be for Robert, George, Eugene, Joanna, or anyone else, but it is for me. | ||
Robert |
Trial and error has been the best teacher for me in watercolor. Well, make that error. | ||
George |
Robert, I agree with you. I have never asserted that the “two are at odds, nor have I suggested that anyone should “avoid instruction to preserve one's purity.” However, I do think that many people often place way too much emphasis on “technique” and instruction in watercolor painting (the basis of my response to Zoe). With regard to the idea that “technique is the wisdom of experience passed along by teachers” I have no problem with the idea as long as it is not taken to mean that a teacher is essential in order to learn to paint a proper watercolor. Not that I think you believe this but I suspect that some do. I believe that the term “technique” is a much misused term in watercolor. Watercolor’s not really like music as you and others have suggested (although I understand your purpose in using an analogy to music here). What we call “technique” (all techniques) in watercolor can be reduced to a few variables that a reasonably intelligent and experimentally inclined mind could discover in a moderate amount of time (the same cannot be said of music). I personally believe that the person who wrote the first watercolor manual some two centuries ago realized that all that the student needed to know could be said in a few pages (excepting design considerations). No publisher would publish a book of only a few pages, therefore the author “stretched” out the manuscript by going into lengthy and unneeded descriptions of his working methods which he called techniques (borrowing a term from oil painting). The many hundreds of watercolor manual authors who followed carried on the tradition with the end result that today we give the term “technique” a bloated importance (in watercolor anyway). | ||
jdaneman |
Kukana! Your comment on learning in a mistake in the Chopin is so true: I have one built into one of the Ballades and it drives me nuts. As to "experience" or "lessons", there are two things at work here. You need to paint, paint paint to train the muscle memory and muscle action. My aunt, a pretty well-known artist, says "Paint every day! All the time!" But teachers and classes teach you seeing in new ways. I had a very good high school art teacher who would point out things when we went to museums, or when we turned in our projects. Little comments that stuck for years. He was teaching photography, but his way of pointing out what to look for was priceless. Later, I studied a bit of ceramics in the same hs with another good teacher (our high school was abysmal in academics, really poor, but it had several art teachers of note. ) The ceramics teacher taught about appreciating the ancients (pre Columbians) and about letting go and getting that organic form in your work. I learned a lot about abstract art, and expression from him. | ||
nuala |
The best way is to just do it. If it works- heaven. If it does not, what have you lost but one side of a sheeet a paper and a little of your time. | ||
Robert |
I agree George--but, if I may continue with the music analogy, to studiously avoid any instruction to preserve one's "purity" is to court disaster, or at the least, mediocrity. There's a certain amount of arrogance in the person who "don't need no education." In terms of music, there are technics that are recommended, not just because one is following blindly a teacher's recommendations, but because such bits of knowledge make it easier--and in some cases possible--to reach one's goals. If one, for instance, approaches the guitar with some of the usual tension producing contortions of the hand the unschooled musician tends to manifest, the ability to progress beyond a certain point is highly limited. However, primitive playing just as primitive art can produce its own greatness. My point is that such things happen despite poor technique. Technique is the wisdom of experience passed along by teachers. In terms of painting--such things as awareness of values, how to produce a wash etc. are valuable bits of info one could get quickly from a teacher or struggle with for years on one's on. I totally agree that "schooled" art is not the only approach and most great art has in some way gone beyond the pedestrian approach of slavishly copying the teacher. However, schooling has its place in the devepment of the total artist or other creative person. I takes great knowledge plus genius to produce a great symphony. It takes a special genius to write a folk song like "Old Suzanna," but not the sort of genius that carries the art of music to new and higher levels. For that knowledge must be part of the base. However, there is always someone there to remind us, I have learned, that mere education is no substitute for creative genius. It's when they they assert that the two are at odds that I begin to roll my eyes. | ||
George |
Wow, great responses. Yes, it’s very true that if you practice something wrongly you will form a bad habit. In the interest of taking this discussion into every possible consideration I should mention the idea that, “old habits are the hardest to break” holds true for all kinds of habits. The problem being that all habits, both good habits and bad habits, can interfere with the creative impulse. To use Robert’s computer analogy ("garbage in, garbage out") it could be restated as, programmer’s code in, predictable results out. This discussion reminds me of something I read many years ago as a student. As I recall, philosophers theorize that there are five possible sources of knowledge. Authority (a teacher) is considered to be the weakest of the five sources of knowledge. I believe what we were talking about here is how to arrive at the perfect painting. I am not suggesting that the teacher could not, or should not, play a role in a person’s artistic development, but rather I am suggesting that a teacher is not essential. Many great works of art have been the result of an “untutored technique”, as have many great works of art also been the result of a tutored technique. | ||
Kukana |
Amen! To this day I still keep hitting the same one wrong note in playing "Fantasy Impromptu" because for months I praticed and practiced it to get the fluid opening scale. The problem was that I consistanly hit that one note wrong each time. Argh! Art is truely the same. Old habits are the hardest to break. | ||
Zoe |
I am inclined to agree with Robert. After the technique is understood the practice makes perfect takes hold but if you keep repeating the untutored technique it can become habit forming...in the wrong ways! | ||
Robert |
There's a truism in music, "Practice does not perfect; Practice makes permanent." If you practice something wrongly the muscle memory learns the incorrect process and makes it a permanent part of muscle memory. In computer lingo, the idea is "garbage in, garbage out." | ||
George |
Zoe, if you do a wash enough times and you make an honest attempt to improve it each time by varying the approach (method), over time you teach yourself to do it right. It may not be the most efficient way to learn, but along the way (in all those failed attempts) something is learned that may be useful elsewhere. | ||
Zoe |
George - interesting thesis. I am a strong proponent of the PNI of man (psycho-neuro-immunology). I think the triggers I experience in any "intent" state are stronger, some of which are pleasant, several of which are unpleasant, but all are singularly connected. As for experience being the best teacher, I'd say practice makes a better painting, project or outcome, but technical know-how is essential. If I can't do a wash, and I do it a thousand times, I still am doing an incorrect wash. | ||
George |
Poetry and scripture were not my intent – but thank you. I’m not fully sure I understand your question of, “Where does the painting reside?” My guess is that you’re asking what part of the mind “paints” it. The scientist in me might answer that it “resides” in the body (in the larger sense of the word). Many years ago (about 1975) I designed and conducted a research project for my Masters degree in Education. The results of that research showed evidence that subjects with higher levels of creativity (I used a standardized test) showed higher levels of frontalis tension (muscle tension as measured by feedback electromyography) while solving a standardized design problem. My interpretation (the best answer I can give) is that any creative effort, if done well, requires the entire being (both body and mind) be in harmony. If I misunderstood your question please let me know. | ||
Robert |
typo correction: "repetitive structure of poetry, the purity of scripture." | ||
Robert |
This has the repoeitive structue of poetry, the purity of scripure. Beautifully said. Now I have only a few tens of thousands to go before I can make those intuitive and perfect brushstrokes. But let me ask you this: Where does the painting reside? | ||
George |
I think experience is the best teacher. If you make a hundred brushstrokes you learn that the appearance of the brushstroke is the result of the speed, angle, pressure and direction of the stroke. If you make a thousand brushstrokes you learn that the appearance of the brushstroke is also the result of the exact water content in the paper, brush and paint. If you make ten thousand brushstrokes you learn that the appearance of the brushstroke is also the result of the brushstrokes that lie next to it. If you make one hundred thousand brushstrokes you learn that the appearance of the brushstroke is also the result of the brushstrokes that lie on the opposite side of the page. Now you can make just one brushstroke! But, the result is one hundred thousand different possible appearances. If you have learned to control the speed, angle, pressure, direction, water content in the paper, water content in the brush and water content in the paint then you will make the one brushstroke that is needed. A painting is made up of many brushstrokes. If you make one hundred paintings you learn that every brushstroke has a relationship of color, value, and texture to all the other brushstrokes on the page. If you make one thousand paintings you learn that every brushstroke has a relationship of size, position and orientation to all the other brushstrokes on the page. If you make ten thousand paintings you learn that every brushstroke has a relationship of emotional expression and individual meaning to all the other brushstrokes that lie near it on the page. If you make one hundred thousand paintings you learn that every brushstroke has a relationship of emotional expression and individual meaning to all the other brushstrokes that lie on the opposite side of the page from it. Now you can make just one painting and all the individual brushstrokes will vanish. Now one brushstroke by itself is a meaningless and dead thing. Now when you make one brushstroke, you no longer see it. You see the whole. Is there a shortcut to making one great painting? A teacher might be able to point out some of these relationships that are not easily seen by the student. However, my experience is that most teachers fail to see these relationships in their own work, and therefore are unable to identify them in the student’s work. I think experience is the best teacher. |
