| Author | Message | ||
  Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 222 Registered: 8-2006 |
Does anyone remember how this thread digressed from the original topic to a consideration of the principles of design (primarily due to George's critique of Eugene's painting and subsequent discussion). In that conversation, a distinction was made between the classic and universal principles of design and "rules of thumb." I find the "rules of thumb" topic intriguing. I'm going to start a thread asking you "What Are Your 'Rules of Thumb' For How You Paint?" | ||
Anonymous Unregistered guest |
Of course this arguing is unnecessary, but it certainly has caused the board to be active and lively. Maybe this is better than silence, though far from perfect. My guess is this will blow over by tomorrow and the post following this one will be back to discussing art. | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
In the words of Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?" | ||
abcd Unregistered guest |
Sometimes we spend time in asking who is responsible or whom to blame, whether in a relationship, in a job or with the people we know. By this way we miss out some warmth in human relationship. | ||
abcd Unregistered guest |
Why don't we just sleep over all this and talk about it another day | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Eric, yes, I agree that Eugene's question/request was a fair one. I even sent him a private e-mail to explain to him that my comments about rudeness were not directed at him. However, for others to put excessive pressure on me (or anyone who chooses not to post paintings) is, I believe, rude behavior. | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
I assume that these thoughts come into my mind because after 35 years of studying the principles of design, and spending thousands of hours in over fifty art museums, and countless hours of experimenting with brush in hand, my subconscious mind has somehow become a partner in my efforts. The above is a statement made by George a few days ago. Please don't take this the wrong way George. I'm not bullying you into posting and I hope this isn't rude. But when I read this and your other thoughts/criticisms about art, I'm naturally curious about what your own artwork looks like. If you don't want to share your artwork, that's up to you. But just know that big statements explaining your qualifications might make those reading it curious. Eugene's question/request was a fair one. | ||
grayfang Unregistered guest |
to start with terry can make a change that only people who register can post | ||
Marie Junior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 18 Registered: 8-2006 |
Maybe it would be a good idea for one us to volunteer to put together some basic guidelines or etiquette for posting on this forum. I don't have the time to volunteer at the moment. Does anyone else want to take a try at it? | ||
grayfang Unregistered guest |
George I admit the person shouting was rude, but did you listen to what he said....... | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Gary, I’m not the slightest bit upset. But, even you must admit that when someone posts; (“WILL U GUYS DISPLAY YOUR PAINTINGS THERE”), it’s being rude. As a self professed computer nerd you know that all capitals is shouting. I’m certainly not put off by the silliness that is common on this forum, but since I have a choice between different art forums, my preference is for the one where I’ll not be shouted at. | ||
abcd Unregistered guest |
garydoc, it was me who asked you that why do you paint that, and yes i had intended it in a very polite way. I meant what inspires you to paint it. thanks for understanding | ||
Terry Member Username: Terry Post Number: 31 Registered: 8-2006 |
No offense to the comments on "this board is too hard to figure out" etc. It is a vast improvement over what we had and my tech guy tells me that an upgrade (coming soon) in this software will automatically resize pictures. My offer still stands: I will personally help anyone to post pictures. Send them to me and tell me what to say and I will upload them. Til that time..... | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
Well said, GaryDoc. I'll cosign. | ||
ANONY Unregistered guest |
WILL U GUYS DISPLAY YOUR PAINTINGS THERE | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Anne, I like your spirit and your sense of fairness! You should come over to the artcafe forum. You will find it more to your liking. Also, you don’t have to be a computer genius over there. | ||
ANONY Unregistered guest |
"A pox on this group. Good riddance." does she really mean this | ||
Garydoc Junior Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 24 Registered: 8-2006 |
I too am amazed at the direction this has taken...flabergasted! Yes we want to see pictures, that's also how we learn. No, we don't expect all to be computer nerds. Some will never figure out how to post. I am a computer nerd, had trouble posting with the new board and managed to wipe out a registry file yesterday on my laptop. So anyone can screw up, me included. I don't think anyone is flaming anyone when I read the posts here, but there are some who take any comment as harsh. This is why the internet will NEVER replace face time. Facial expression can soften even the toughest sounding words. If my words sound harsh, I probably mean them to be (but you'll never know if I meant that tongue-in-cheek!) So...Anne & George & RKA keep posting, cause I like to read what you say. Anne, George and RKA chill out and calm down, I don't think anyone hates you or thinks that you are less than wonderful folks. You will survive even the most intentional insults, but you can ignore them and move on. I was asked "why do you paint this subject" or something like that recently. I could have interpreted it as "why do you paint this garbage" or as "what do you find interesting in this subject." I chose to interpret it as the latter and gave a straight answer. What I choose to see in a post is my business, but how I respond to it is the public's business if I post that response. Keep it civil. Keep it light for cryin' out loud. Nuff said! Gary | ||
Terry Member Username: Terry Post Number: 30 Registered: 8-2006 |
I have been following this thread and see no reason why it has come to this. Although I must say I have followed this board for several years and many threads end up this way. Someone says something that seemingly offends someone else and that's the end of it. Robert used to say some things that got people's "dander" up but life would go on. Dictionary dot com says critisism is: 3. the act or art of analyzing and evaluating or judging the quality of a literary or artistic work, musical performance, art exhibit, dramatic production, etc. I guess therein lies the rub: judging A critique passes judgement based on certain criteria that has been thoroughly established and agreed upon. So the thread went from one person wanting some help to make his art more "arty" through the design (what is design, etc.) phase (yes there are principles of design) to people being offended in just under a week. Pretty amazing. Anyway...I hope you all see where I am going with this. It is time to grow up...forgive and forget...live and learn. PS: I am here to help anyone who needs it for posting pictures or other technical stuff. My e-mail address is: terry@cheapjoes.com Thanks for hanging in there. | ||
Maidensmith New member Username: Maidensmith Post Number: 2 Registered: 8-2006 |
Eugene, I love the fence and all of your paintings that I have seen, and offer no suggestions to make them "better". I feel that this thread/forum is for what I would call "tradtional" watercolor. Maybe it would be fun to start a thread for those of us who love the process of painting, but don't feel accomplished enough to post on a traditional watercolor site. I have never posted because I don't fit in with you all, even though I enjoy looking at your watercolors and reading your advice. Peace... | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
Well, Rekha, since you are the one who said "Do the paintings even exist," my rant was aimed directly at you and no one else. I am not a liar. But more importantly you seem to lack the self-awarenes s to understand that you have even called me one. I don't want a flame war so this will be my last post. That's my decision. | ||
Rekha Junior Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 21 Registered: 8-2006 |
Come on now Anne you said yourself you weren't sensitive to comments in the forum. To be honest I can't recall having read that you can't upload paintings to the forum. I do apologise. Please come back and rant some more; I like to read it | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
As I storm off dramatically I want to add one more thing---what about people too shy to post" Are you foing to try to intimidate them next? What about people who don't have degrees in art--will in the future their ideas be squelched? You can justify wishing to see people's art--it is a reasonable request. But to challenge their veracity when they do not or can not deliver makes one wonder why one is wasting one's effort being part of such a "community" (and i use the word ironically). Rant over. | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
I want to add that George has used two words that I agree with "Bullied" and Rude". I suppose some of you want to keep this message board small and limited to a few. It has worked. I explained that I cannot make my posts of paintings take. I keep getting a message that something is written twice though i wrote it once. I am not a computer person and unless I can point and click I am lost. But I repeatedly said i couldn't post. Now I am all but called a liar "Do the paintings even exist?" A pox on this group. Good riddance. | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
I give up. | ||
Rekha Junior Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 18 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, Anne, or anyone else what is your reason for not wanting to show your paintings? Do the paintings exist? Whilst family and friends can offer opinions about likes or dislikes about a piece their responses relate to their aesthetic senses, not artistic knowhow. The reason I present here is to get feedback on my technique and composition from people who have that keen eye. How else can I make progress; showing them in galleries may never come my way. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Eric, yes, curiosity is normal. But, when someone declines, it’s rude to press the issue. Maybe I’m just used to a more polite atmosphere. On the art forum that I normally visit the members always say “please” when they ask to see some of my work. I decline over there too, but they are nevertheless very polite about it. | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
When you meet somebody and during the discussion the fact that you're an artist comes up, isn't it normal for the person to ask to see some of your work? It's just normal human nature curiosity. | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
Anne and George, you've made your point and that's fine if you choose not to post. I appreciate the discussion anyway. I just think a picture helps to know where someone is coming from. After reading what somebody writes several times you get an impression of that person. A picture helps to round out your impression. With all that Robert wrote (I hope he's well) I was always curious as to where he was artistically. To my knowledge, he never posted (he said he didn't own a digital camera) but that was ok, since I appreciated how he kept the conversation going and had interesting things to say. | ||
Marie Junior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 17 Registered: 8-2006 |
I also feel that had we posted nothing but praise, this wouldn't be an issue. I can speak from experience that this is not the case with Eugene's request. (Please forgive me for speaking on your behalf, Eugene.) I recall posting a rather lengthy set of tips about figure drawing a long time ago. There was no criticism of anyone's work in the post. Eugene had the same reaction then that he does now: "Let's see some of your work." I thought it was a perfectly fair request and posted some of my work. | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
I propose you start a club. One can be a member by posting a painting and getting the other club members (those who have already posted) to agree to let you into the club. The motto could be "We only talk to fellow artists. The rest of you, piss off." I know it's a long motto, but it does express the club's mentality. | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
You know George, I see your point. This is a sort of bullying. Not germane to a discussion. I also feel that had we posted nothing but praise, this wouldn't be an issue. I will say, George, you shouldn't go away mad. | ||
Marie Junior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 16 Registered: 8-2006 |
I recall that several months ago George gave me some very useful and greatly appreciated advice about painting plein air trees. I am happy to get George's advice, even if I have never seen his paintings. At the same time, I can see Eugene's point. Seeing the paintings helps to put things into context. | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
Eugene-- Given your extremely high standards, I suggest in the future you avoid reading my posts. I choose to post here and I cannot get a picture to post and have given up. But I will not given up commenting on your work. If you don't think I have a valid point in saying you use far too much sap green and do not vary your greens enough, (especially in the distance they should be far cooler), ignore it. What non artist, BTW, could make such an observation? If, for instance, you want to disregard my comment that you have too many hard edges and should use lost and found edges more, please do so. I may not be an artist and so how can you trust this observation. If you wish to ignore the comment that figures in your landscapes look like cut outs pasted on (due in part to lack of lost and found edges) ignore what I have to say. I haven't posted pictures here so I may be a fraud. | ||
Eugene Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 40 Registered: 8-2006 |
George and Anne, I really wanted to see (and still do) some of your work, Not to criticize, but to see what kind of work and style you do. I ask for your ideas and accepted them. I was not offended. I agree, Anne, that evereyone has a right to his or her opinions, but surely I value the opinion of a trained artist over an untrained layman. I want ARTISTS to tell me how to correct a painting problem, not a critic, art historian, curator or someone who has never held a brush. Also, most national watercolor shows are juried by other artists. I personally shy away from the few that are judged by non-painters. I do not mean to offend anyone...just stating my way of thinking. I read all the posts with interest, but I don't have to agree with all of them. After all , this is a discussion group---- an exchange of opinions and ideas. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Ha!! So you say that you are going to stop regarding me as an artist. That's a term (artist) that I would never use to identify myself. There’s too much vanity in it. I've always thought of myself as a hobbyist. Therefore, please do stop regarding me as an artist. As for posting my paintings here, you have just talked me out of it. And, if my comments are not helpful and/or offend you, I’ll take them elsewhere. Why stay here and be bullied? Bye now! | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
Let's get a little real here. Suppose I am not an artist but simply an opinionated net surfer. Suppose I merely like art and don't produce it. Is my opinion invalid? Actually, most people are painting to sell and their intended clientelle reaches far beyond the community of fellow artists. If I were an artist (which I actually am buit as I say, that's beside the point) I would want to hear what any viewer liked to say about my art. If someone in the general public likes your or doesn't and could explain why, that might be even more valuable (if you are trying to sell, that is). Whether or not I choose to post, I can still have valid opinion about the art that is posted. If you want to limitthe discussion only to people who post, then that's a bad idea. If you want me to shut up and stop comment on art then you can shove it. The problem is the site is too difficult for non-teckies, pure and simple. | ||
Rekha Junior Member Username: Rekha Post Number: 15 Registered: 8-2006 |
Well, Eric I wasn't nervous about posting my 'painting' because I was looking for harsh criticism. And I agree with you, that is, if you are being critical then you must be able to illustrate/defend your opinion/comme nt. I tried to remove the space in defend but somehow the software is refusing to correct that. Sorry. | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
Hmmm...does anyone else find it interesting that George and Anne had a lot to say regarding Eugene's paintings and ever since they were urged to post have suddenly disappeared? I'm sure I'm wrong about this, but it reminds me just a little bit of "Linda". I went a long time without posting because of my computer-inep tness, but I did attempt it a while back and only recently figured it out. I always felt it wasn't quite right to comment on someone else's painting without exposing your own. I'm sure some who've posted their paintings were nervous about it and here's somebody criticizing it and nobody knows their level of competence. | ||
trent Unregistered guest |
Eugene asked something to anne and george, to post paintings of theirs and none of them have regarded this, come on guys you must post some of your paintings now. I certainly will stop regarding you guys as artists now, if you don't. | ||
Grizrev New member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 6 Registered: 8-2006 |
Back to the original fence painting -- what if the fence ran downhill toward the flower pot -- it is a great visual stop to keep our eyes from running out of the painting. | ||
Garydoc Junior Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 15 Registered: 8-2006 |
In Microsoft Photo Editor click on 'image' and 'resize...' then change the units to 'pixels' and set the number of pixels to be smaller than the numbers Terry gave. Make sure that there is no check mark in the 'allow distortion' and 'smooth' check off boxes. That is all you have to do! Gary | ||
Terry Junior Member Username: Terry Post Number: 22 Registered: 8-2006 |
The system requirements for posting are: JPEG 460 x 600 pixels in size @ any dpi In Iphoto you click on photo and go to file/export and type in size and name and export to somewhere you remember. In Photoshop, etc. open file and go to Image/Image size and scale there and save as a JPEG. In order to have the board software re-size automatically we need a differnt server software. I will check into the feasibility of this. However, for you newbees, the current upload senario is 200% better than it was before. I will keep you posted. | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
I've tried posting a few times and I don't know how to shrink my image down to the proper size. | ||
Lisa Unregistered guest |
I just tried to upload something--didn't work. It is still definately not user friendly. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. | ||
Terry Junior Member Username: Terry Post Number: 21 Registered: 8-2006 |
Just below the box where you type in your message is a button called upload attachment. Make it about 450 x 600 pixels and you shouldn't have a problem. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Hi Eugene, You’re kidding of course, no one who paints is insensitive! As I said; everyone’s brain works differently. There have been many times that I wished that my brain functioned more like what is thought to be “normal”. Unfortunatly there are big downsides to having a brain that is too different. | ||
Eugene Junior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 24 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, I think it’s wonderful that you would get that much enjoyment and inspiration from a painting. Although I enjoy looking at paintings, I’ve never experienced that much feeling, I suppose I’m insensitive/ Try posting again. I taught myself, and I’m no computer whiz! Or ask a computerwise friend to help you. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Eugene, I really wouldn’t call it thoughtful meditation, or perhaps that is a good way to describe how I view art – I don’t know. But to answer your question, that’s how my mind works. I guess everyone’s mind works differently. Please don’t assume that there isn’t any enjoyment in the way I view art. I remember when I went to an art museum for the first time, 36 years ago. It was the Metropolitan in N.Y. and I stood in front of a single Rembrandt for two hours straight (only the greatest art can hold anyone’s attention for two hours). When I got home all I could think about was when I’d be able to catch a bus back to N. Y. and spend more time with that painting. I don’t think anyone would be so much in love with something if enjoyment isn’t part of the deal. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Hi Eugene, I tried to post a painting on this site about a year ago and didn’t have any success. But, to answer your question, I do paint in watercolor and have used oil, gouache, and acrylic paints too. | ||
Eugene Junior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 23 Registered: 8-2006 |
Do you really go through all this thoughtful meditation when looking at paintings? Why not just look and enjoy? | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Hi Anne, With your “options” you seem to be asking; what is the correct way to approach a painting. Different people approach paintings in different ways. Our discussion isn’t really about how one should approach a painting. The real issue here is the role of the design principles in the evaluation of good art. As I said in an earlier post you seem to be using the term “checklist” as a list of rules of thumb instead of a list of the principles of design. If this is the case, then yes, throw out your rules of thumb. Rules of thumb are for beginners who need all the help they can get. When an artist gets to a point where the whole process of making art is no longer a confusing nightmare, then its time to move to a deeper understanding of the visual relationships (principles of design) working within the piece of art. You state that you are suspicious of any critique that justifies itself solely on the basis of criteria extrinsic to the work at hand. I agree!!! But, how is this related to our discussion? The principles of design are not extrinsic to any work of art. The principles of design are the very foundation for all good works of art. One more thought – you seem locked into a notion of preconceptions as you have used the term many times without fully defining what you mean by preconceptions. Personally, I don’t think any person should approach any work of art with any preconceptions at all. But, what do preconceptions have to do with the principles of design? Since you did ask, I’ll tell you how I personally approach a great painting. I walk up to the painting and drink it in for a few minutes without any thoughts in my mind. Then, gradually a thought will surface as if it wants to be heard by my consciousness. For example; “the balance is wonderful”, or “The movements are amazing”, or “the rhythms are pulsating.” On the other hand when, I approach a painting that is not so great, after I drink it in for a few minutes without any thoughts in my mind a thought will surface into my consciousness that is more like this; “the balance is off”, or “The movements are stiff and meaningless”, or “the rhythms are not in harmony.” I assume that these thoughts come into my mind because after 35 years of studying the principles of design, and spending thousands of hours in over fifty art museums, and countless hours of experimenting with brush in hand, my subconscious mind has somehow become a partner in my efforts. | ||
Eugene Junior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 22 Registered: 8-2006 |
Anne, George , and other participants in this discussion. Are you really painters or just critics with an easy way with words? I’m not angry about your criticism. In fact I agree with most of it and it has been most helpful.. But I wonder about your qualifications. I know the Suzy and Marie are wonderful painters---I’ve seen their work and value advice. Substantiate your qualifications by showing us some of your paintings. It’s easier to tell someone how to do it than to really do it. I’m not trying to be rude or mean, but I know so many art majors with degrees a mile long who couldn’t do a good watercolor if their life depended on it. Yet they pose as critics and/or curators. I am not implying that you are one of them. Please post a painting. | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
George--I think after a day delay I can can say what I was fgetting at earlier because it didn;t seem to be clear then. When you look at a painting, do you apply the design "checklist" and then arrive at a conclusion as to whether or not the painting works, or do you simply respond to the painting intuitively and then use the design checklist to justify your response? My point is that only the second option allows you to experience the painting without preconceptions. Or put conversely, the first option causes a filter to be posed between you and the art. I pursue this becasue I am suspicious of any critique that justifies itself solely on the basis of criteria extrinsic to the work at hand when real works of genius create, to an extent, their own intrinsic parameters. Monet's waterlilies are an example 9as someone mentioned below). | ||
Eugene Junior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 21 Registered: 8-2006 |
I am overwhelmed by this discussion! Don't anyone feel that you are "picking my painting apart". That's why I posted it. I'm afraid that I can't be bothered with rules and checklists and theories anymore. I've been learning, practicing and painting for 50plus years and by now my sense of composition comes naturally. I mean, I seldom stop and conciously say " is this right or wrong "It has become a subconcious thing with me. Hopefully, sometimes it's right I'm glad I started this post. It's been helpful and a lot of fun. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Marie, I believe that many people at times will mistake a rush of emotion for artistic intuition. For example; I paint a large intense red brushstroke and think “WOW! That looks great”. So, I want to keep it in the painting and end up compromising the compositional unity in order to keep it. I’m not conscious that I have devalued the compositional unity, and the emotional power of the red brushstroke convinces me that it is the product of my hidden artistic intuition. This kind of thing is common among all artists. It’s not a conscious self-deception, but it can limit us as artists. | ||
Marie Junior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 11 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, I'm not sure that I understand what you're saying about intuition. Can you elaborate? | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Marie, I agree, the “suggestion of a story” is what I was going after with my advice about the possibility of weather beaten boards. | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
Eugene, I feel bad that we're really picking apart your painting Eugene. Oh well, it's an interesting discussion and we're learning... Instead of trying to point the board and the shadows in the opposite direction of the slope, maybe the painting would look better if there were no slope...if the fence and flower pot were on level ground. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
I’d like to make one more comment on the “intuitive” sense of design. The intuitive as it is used in design is a very powerful subconscious force that scientists know little about, although many theories abound. I believe the term “intuitive” is often misused. I believe that many people at times will mistake a rush of emotion for artistic intuition. In other words a person will say; “My intuition tells me that this work of art is great!” When in truth what they might really be saying is; “I’m having a strong emotional response to this work of art, therefore it must be my artistic intuition speaking.” This is a trap that I think a good many people fall into without knowing it. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Anne, The rule of thumb that a focal point should not be placed dead center is not a principle of design. Let me explain! The principles of design are visual organizational principles that explain the visual preferences that all humans exhibit, and are used to assist artists to organize visual data in a way that is pleasing to all humans. However, the principles of design are somewhat difficult to apply as a unified set of constraints because of the level of their abstraction caused by the huge number of interrelationships between the various pieces of visual data, so some teachers have developed what they call “rules of thumb” that reduce the design principles to easy to understand, but overly simplified, guidelines. The idea that a focal point should not be placed dead center is one such “rule of thumb.” I now see that what you are calling the “Checklist” is not a list of the principles of design at all, but rather a list of “rules of thumb.” I now agree with you that a checklist of rules of thumb is a dead end road. But, the principles of design should always be consulted when painting. Suzy, the famous "Water Lilies" that is so lovely yet has no focal point whatsoever works because the term “focal point” is not found anywhere in the principles of design. The term Focal point is always related to one or another of the “rules of thumb.” This painting “works” because it meets all the requirements of the principles of design even if it violates a rule of thumb. | ||
Marie New member Username: Marie Post Number: 8 Registered: 8-2006 |
Changing the direction of the shadows, I think, would help. There's something else bothering me, though, and I'm not sure how to describe it. It's as if the gate and fence separate you so completely from the background that my eye is trapped in the foreground. I wonder what would happen if you opened the gate ever so slightly. Perhaps I'm looking for something that is going to engage my imagination or sense of mystery a little more. What's behind the gate? Why is the gate closed, or why is the gate open? The flowers/foliage in front of the gate are more manicured than the foliage growing through the gate. Perhaps someone was trimming the flowers and was interrupted before getting a chance to trim to foliage growing through the gate. Maybe I'm looking for a subtle suggestion of a story. By the way, I love the shadows and I love the dark background. | ||
Suzy Junior Member Username: Suzy Post Number: 14 Registered: 8-2006 |
About the painting...What would happen if the light source came from the opposite side so that the shadows went against the visual downward slope of the gate??? | ||
Suzy Junior Member Username: Suzy Post Number: 13 Registered: 8-2006 |
Then there is the famous "Water Lillies" that is so lovely yet has no focal point whatsoever...Why does it work? | ||
Marie New member Username: Marie Post Number: 7 Registered: 8-2006 |
>>... our intuition gets better from conscious practice. Well said, George. I may have to hang that quote on my wall. I rely largely on intuition when I am in the process of painting; I rely more on what *feels* right than what my logical mind says. But that doesn't mean that I don't think about design issues. I spend a lot of time figuring out design issues *before* I begin painting, and I *always* analyze the design after I finish a painting. I think that painting is too complex to work out everything rationally (or with a design checklist) as I am working. Having to keep the drawing, modelling of light, anatomy, perpective, value, color, and general painting technique all in my conscious mind is more than I can handle. For me, a fair amount of the work has to go on subliminally. One strategy that works for me is to do "practice" paintings and "performance" paintings. On some paintings, I will concentrate a single technique---value or color or whatever. I do this especially when I am not happy with something about the working conditions---either I don't like the model's pose, or the lighting conditions are wrong, or I'm in a hurry. I work on logically working out one issue. I think of practice paintings the same way a musician might practice scales or arpeggios. I think the same principles apply whether you're laying a wash or working out a design issue. It's best to practice enough so that your brush knows where to go without having to think through every stroke. Other times I do a "performance" painting, relying subliminally on what I have learned from the practice paintings. These are often my best works. | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
I saw a Vulliard painting not long ago that had the focal poaint dead center, bisecting the painting. A fundamental no no in design theory. It was, nevertheless , a masterpiece. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Anne, Yes, actually you’ve said it more clearly than I did. To add another thought, I personally believe that some people intuitively respond to a painting with greater intuitive insight as the direct result of many years spent in concentrated visual thought. In other words, I believe our intuition gets better from conscious practice. But then, doesn’t everything get better with practice. Anyway, this would explain why it’s a good idea to use the “checklist” as often as we can – to build bridges between the unconscious intuitive and the conscious “checklist”. What do you think? | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
George--Thanks for the clear explanation. I see your point: if I intuitively respond to a painting, neither I nor the artist may have even been aware of the design principles involved--but these principles are operating nevertheless. Good discussion. | ||
Suzy Junior Member Username: Suzy Post Number: 12 Registered: 8-2006 |
Interesting thread. I actually like my growing hyper awareness of design principles. As a novice I used to paint what I thought was a beautiful painting but it wouldn't sell. I'd paint another that would..I now look at photos of those long gone paintings and it is now obvious to me that one with better overall adhearance to design principles was the most most admires and sold first. Now as I critque others paintings at workshops, etc, Instead of looking at them and saying, "oh, thats pretty" I now look at them with an ever so slightly more educated eye and can tell you why they're pretty! I can also, instantly, tell you when and why they aren't working as well. I am but an infant in my knowledge of art yet that ever growing hyperawareness for me is a gift I hope will grow. Im off on a 14 day show tour...argh... Happy painting... | ||
Eugene Junior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 19 Registered: 8-2006 |
Anne-- I have no intentions of touching this painting. Just because it has created such a controversy means it must be interesting. However, I am going to paint it one more time. But second paintings, for me, often lose the spark of the original. We'll see what happens! Thanks for all the comments. | ||
Eugene Junior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 18 Registered: 8-2006 |
WOW - My fence has really started an intense and interesting discussion! The best thinking we've had in a long time. That's what this board is all about, isn't it? I want to tell you all, that I spent many, many years as a graphic designer, and with that training I compose intuitively. I folllow no set of rules, except the basics that I learned years ago in art school and they have become of me. I have no checklist, perhaps I should. But I beleive that breaking the rules sometimes make more exciting paintings. I think changing the direction of the diagonal in the gate is the best suggestion yet, Don't know how I missed it, it's so obvious. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Hi Anne, No! Neither one of us is stupid! I’ve never heard the term “checklist” used this way until now, but yes the principles of design are universally valid (all cultures have independently produced strikingly similar principles of design). The reason for differences in people’s opinions is often due to different people being attracted to different aspects of a work of art. For example; if I discuss a cow I saw this morning in the field down the street and was attracted to the color of the cow hide, and you saw the same cow and was attracted to the size of the cow, we might have different opinions of the cow based on different parts of the cow. | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
Eugene--The repetition of the vertical dark slat spacings creates a nice rhythm. The gate draws my attention because it is an entranceway. This is offset by the flowers, creating nice informal psychological balance. The rouning of the gate top repeats the rounding of the flower mass. The wall on the left balances the flowers on the tight. The hint of brick beyond the gate pulls the eye through. The genius of this composition lies in the tension between the motion of the eye along the fence and the pull of the barely glimpsed world through the fence. I like the painting and invented the above afterward. I feel it is a compelling compostion. Beware of checklists if the painting is criticized because it doesn't fit the checklist. This would be viewing it through preconceptions. Don't change a thing. Don't repaint it. George--interesting that if there is a universally valid checklist for design that people's opinions would so differ. Either one of us is stupid, or the checklist itself is a subjective measure. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Hi Anne, Ah! I now understand what you are saying. The idea that “intuition comes first both in creating and in viewing” is correct, but the assumption you draw from this statement seems to be that the intuition could in some way be unrelated to the design principles without affecting the quality of art. Your assumption is false. Let me explain! 1) When you state that; “I can like a painting intuitively even if it defies conforming to any principles of a design checklist,” you are correct! However the simple act of an individual liking a painting intuitively does not automatically make the painting a great work of art. 2) You also state that; “the principles of design allow for such infinitely varied combinations of elements that a criticism based upon them is almost certainly indicative of too rigid a reading of the checklist.” Think about this - If the principles of design allow for infinitely varied combinations of elements, and the mental checklist is a list of the principles of design, then the checklist allows for an infinitely varied combination of elements too. The point is that a criticism based on the principles of design can be as rich, complex and complete as the art being evaluated. This is the opposite of rigid. | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
George, good point on the diagonal board. The shadows are also running in the same direction as the board and the slope. Eugene, it'll be interesting to see what the "painting by committee" looks like. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Eugene, I really admire you!! Painting it again to see how it can be improved and what you can learn is a great idea. Because starting over will allow for bigger improvements I’ll give you more specific advice. Use what you like, and toss any advice you don’t like in the trash bin. First, the issue of Balance - The line along the top of the fence exerts a very powerful visual attraction because of the strong value contrast. Also, the intense color in the flowers in the upper right hand corner, and in the flower pot on the right hand side, are also areas of very powerful visual attraction. There is nothing in the lower left hand side with enough visual attraction to balance the composition. Movement – the red/orange color along the bottom of the fence runs right into the bottom left corner of the composition pulling the eye, as Eric said, right out of the picture. The diagonal board on the gate points to the same general area (the bottom left corner of the composition) thus increasing the power and speed of the unwanted eye movement. One solution is to change the direction of the diagonal board so it runs upper left toward lower right on the gate. This change would also create a triangular composition with the line at the top of the fence and the oblique shadow running across the fence behind the flower pot allowing for more eye movement around the interior of the composition. Transitions – someone already suggested darker shadows on the fence. | ||
Rekha New member Username: Rekha Post Number: 8 Registered: 8-2006 |
Eugene, what do you think about painting the gate opening a weebit towards the background so there is something to look for in the background? | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
Eugene's painting strikes me as intense and pleasing. I could use design jargon to explain my reaction (strong value contrast, for instance) but that explanation comes after my initial intuitive reaction. What I am saying is that intuition comes first both in creating and in viewing and we reach into our bag of verbage to explain what we intuit. That is not to say that deisgn principles are not valid but that they are often used as a checklist--to wit, if the painting doesn't match the checklist it is automatically a failed painting. That clearly denies 2 realities: 1) I can like a painting intuitively even if it defies conforming to any principles of design checklist, and 2) the principles of design allow for such infinitely varied combinations of elements that a criticism based upon them is almost certainly indicative of too rigid a reading of the checklist. | ||
Rekha New member Username: Rekha Post Number: 7 Registered: 8-2006 |
Eugene, could you paint the gate so it is open a wee bit so that there is something to look for in the background? | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Hi Anne, What you have said about the design principles is in error. Please understand that I am not making a point about this to be insulting. My only concern is for others who may read this thread and may become confused about the role of good design. You ask, “If I look at a painting through the prism of a lot of design theory and the painting doesn't conform, is it the painting, or is it me?” The answer is; if the painting doesn’t conform then it is the painting! You also ask, “how does a hyper awareness of value, contrast, repetition etc effect my ability to "see' what is in front of me as a painter and create art from it? I’m not sure what you mean by a hyper awareness but the answer to your question is; Knowledge of good design allows a painter to better judge the strength of the painting as it progresses, allowing for corrections that result in a better end product. You also say: “Principles of design have their place, obviously, as long as the tail (theory) doesn't wag the proverbial dog (act of creation).” I feel a bit foolish stating the obvious here but, If good design theory isn’t the foundation for art then the art produced, like anything without a good foundation, will fail. | ||
Eugene Junior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 15 Registered: 8-2006 |
I really appreciate all your comments! Although I don’t think the original is too bad, I going to paint it again an try to incorporate some of your suggestions. If the second turns out better I’ll post them again for comparison. Rekha; This is a 14x20 painting. reduction might make it look like a photo, but the original i quite “watercolory.” I’ll try to make the flowers more important. Raleigh;Dead leaves and water puddle sound interesting. John Pike used a lot of puddles. Marie; Thanks for the kind words. I value your opinion. Anonymous Painter; I intend to lighten the top just a tad. Not much because I think it needs it to make the fence white. Eric; I’ll strengthen the dappled shadows on the fence. As for composition. I agree that there should be something in the lower left corner to “stop the flow”. Not another flower pot. (I don’t want to frame the gate). I’ll have to think about this. Garydoc; I think you’re right about keeping the dark top, but I think I’’ll suggest a little more of trees in the dark at the top. A.N.; Strange, most people like my landscapes best. I DO like sap green, and usually make it warmer by mixing with raw or burnt sienna. IMHO pthalo green and hookers are unnatural colors and are often overused in landscapes. However’ I know some who do use them successfully. Please explain “academic parameters” George; The striking thing to me about this scene was the old whitewashed fence. I might add a little more texture but it will remain white. I find it interesting that some think it’s a strong composition while others find many flaws. Well I’ll try again---this may turn out to be a painting created by a committee!* | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
re. Academic principles--we both know what they are. I am speaking philosphically, here. If I look at a painting through the prism of a lot of design theory and the painting doesn't conform it, is it the painting, or is it me? Also, how does a hyper awareness of value, contrast, repetition etc effect my ability to "see' what is in front of me as a painter and create art from it? Principles of design have their place, obviously, as long as the tail (theory) doesn't wag the proverbial dog (act of creation). | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Hi Anne, Forgive me, I got very little sleep last night and it may be interfering with my comprehension. I’m still having trouble understanding what you mean by “preconceived principles”. Can you list some examples. | ||
Anne Unregistered guest |
If I look at a painting and recognize that it departs from one of the academic principles of design, then the painting is thus rejected. However, great art is by definition unique. It may or may not conform to preconceived principles. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
A.N., You’ve got my curiosity going. When you say that you believe academic parameters are very constraining, what academic parameters are you referring to? It sounds like you believe that good design isn’t needed in art, but I know I must be misreading what you mean, so I thought the simple thing to do is ask. | ||
Eugene Junior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 14 Registered: 8-2006 |
The background is not quite as "black" as it appears. There's a lot of deep green in it with some suggestion of tree trunks. | ||
Eugene Junior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 13 Registered: 8-2006 |
I accept all these critiques with interest. I agree with some but not all. In defense of the white fence and the contrast. For me, that's what attracted me in the first place. The pristine whitewashed old fence with beautiful shadows. Criticism is stimulating, even if we disagree--it makes us rethink a painting and hopefully learn something. After looking at ones own work for so long, it's refreshing to here what others see in it. | ||
A.N. Unregistered guest |
I think academic parameters are very constraining. | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
Regarding the composition, my eye is going right down that slope and out of the picture on the left hand side. If the flower pot were on the left side it would stop the downward flow. Eugene, I disagree with A.N. I really like your landscape paintings. | ||
A.N. Unregistered guest |
I disagree with George. The painting is perfectly balanced and old boards would be a different painting. Balance is unique to each painting and if one follows a formula, it will appear so. If I wanted to you to repainat according to my aesthetics, I would suggest soft edges and a more wet in wet look with more brushstrokes. But, hey, I'm not into photorealism. But this painting works marvelously as a composition.. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Eugene, its strength is the strong value contrast. The problem is the lack of composition. Its design is off balance, the rhythms are too overly simplified, the transitions are too harsh and the visual movement is static rather than dynamic. As for advice on how to fix it, I’ll offer this – the shape of the tops and bottoms of the fence boards look old and broken, but the surface of the boards look new and spotless – why not make the fence boards look old thus adding visual interest and in doing so you might be able to fix some of the compositional errors. | ||
A.N. Unregistered guest |
Much better than your lanscapes IMHO. The landscapes have noticable weaknesses--namely, the exclusive reliance on sap green which gives a too warm cast in places. Also, figures seem pasted on at times and aerial perspective is not convincing. Here, however, the picture is striking and engaging. I wouldn't change a thing. Beautiful. | ||
Garydoc Junior Member Username: Garydoc Post Number: 13 Registered: 8-2006 |
Don't change the dark of the top...its a perfect counterpoint to the high key fence. Darken the fence shadows slightly (if you dare!). I think its a great pic but I don't know what juries think. Gary | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
Eugene, to make it more dramatic, I would darken the shadows on the fence. It's a nice painting, and as Marie said, they'll probably see a lot of flower paintings. | ||
Anonymous Painter Unregistered guest |
It does look a bit like a photo. Specifically, I think the shadow is much too dark (particularly as it's located at the [i]top [/i]of the picture!). I certainly do like your 'dappled things,' though (shades of G. M. Hopkins ;) ). | ||
Marie New member Username: Marie Post Number: 2 Registered: 8-2006 |
Eugene, I love the composition and value structure, and I think it holds up well on an abstract level. Whether it gets into a national show depends on the juror. He or she will probably see a lot of floral/landscape paintings---especially if it's a watercolor show---and that could hurt your chances of getting in. | ||
Raliegh New member Username: Raliegh Post Number: 4 Registered: 8-2006 |
The yard is too immaculate though I don't what you could include to make it more 'real'. Dead leaves or rust on the barrel or water puddle? | ||
Eugene Junior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 11 Registered: 8-2006 |
this shot is a little better color  | ||
Rekha New member Username: Rekha Post Number: 6 Registered: 8-2006 |
Eugene, it looks like a photo or cutesy as you put it but not unique looking as your lady cows were. If the pot is the focal point your eyes don't stay there long enough. Please note that this is my amateurish opinion. | ||
Eugene New member Username: Eugene Post Number: 10 Registered: 8-2006 |
I usually paint 1/4 sheets but for competitions I need larger formats. So I’m trying some half sheets (14x20). I’ve just completed this one. I think it’s salable but I’m afraid it’s too “pretty and cutesey” to get accepted in a national juried show. What do you think? It’s still stapled to the gator board so I can stilll make minor corrections. Comments, please.  | ||
Rekha New member Username: Rekha Post Number: 5 Registered: 8-2006 |
Monkeys in peanuts out! "As you can see this image is still a tiny bit blurry, and some of the solid colors and text have started to pixelate. This is because I used a web image that started out optimized and therefore at low quality. Given these circumstances the final result is pretty amazing. Higher quality photos will turn out much more superbly of course, as the example of the water skier below shows." http://www.photoshopsupport.com/tools/plugins/genuine-fractals.html | ||
Terry Junior Member Username: Terry Post Number: 16 Registered: 8-2006 |
Genuine Fractals Print Pro About $129 bucks I used it to blow up pictures of a famous golf course for a book I did and everyone was favorably impressed. | ||
Suzy New member Username: Suzy Post Number: 4 Registered: 8-2006 |
OK Terry. So I want to know what your program in Photoshop is that can add pixels and maintain the clarity. Does that work for enlarging work too. I have the need at times to enlarge my work, by say triple and other than just a going to Image and Size (Alt+Cntl+i)and altering there I dont know any tricks. Im running Photoshop CS2 | ||
Terry Junior Member Username: Terry Post Number: 15 Registered: 8-2006 |
I just asked my web programmer and he says that we can turn off copy and paste (right click) but can't protect against a screen shot. At 72 dpi, a screen shot would be just as good for me if I wanted to "Steal" stuff. I have a program in Photoshop that adds pixels and will increase the DPI of an image with little or no degradation of image quality. So....there is always a way around if someone wants to to something with your pictures. | ||
Rekha New member Username: Rekha Post Number: 4 Registered: 8-2006 |
Terry, that is not strictly true. I wrote to Elisabeth (www.lapp-elisa.com) from whom I buy fabric and she does it this way: "I have a button that I can turn on and off in my database system (developed by www.keyweb.com ) When people ask me for dowloading possibilities I turn the button off till they have downloaded the images they like - especially for people using ElectriQuilt systems or something like it. But otherwise the button is always turned on so that I can control what people download:-)) But - there are ways around it so I do not think you can be absolutely certain that people do not "borrow" your images - I know this is a big issue." | ||
Terry Junior Member Username: Terry Post Number: 14 Registered: 8-2006 |
Watching the thread: I don't know of any software that is capable of keeping someone from dragging a picture to their desktop....especially since this is all internet stuff we are talking about. Places that sell illustrations and pictures such as IStock Photo have all of their downloadable stuff watermarked since most of the use is for mockups and if you are wanting a high rez image you pay for it and you get a link to download the non-watermarked picture. As for people ripping you off and making greating cards or something....well. | ||
Anonymous Unregistered guest |
Eugene--if I wanted friends to see your paintings, I would give them links to your posts here. Bad idea to e-mail them. | ||
Rekha New member Username: Rekha Post Number: 3 Registered: 8-2006 |
Maybe this forum should be for members only so any reproduction is traceable. Further, there are softwares that specifically protect the 'pictures' so that you can't download them at all even with screen dump. | ||
Eugene New member Username: Eugene Post Number: 6 Registered: 8-2006 |
Rekha, I don't know how to answer. This brings up a question. Is there danger of posted paintings being reproduced by outside parties without permission of the artist? If so, is there any way of deleting paintings the have been posted in the past? | ||
Rekha New member Username: Rekha Post Number: 1 Registered: 8-2006 |
Eugene, may I please email your painting to some of my friends | ||
maidensmith |
I forgot to add that I love your cows!! I just know a few women who are in the Red Hat Society, and I think that they would love them, too, | ||
Eugene |
I got a lot of comments from the red hat society-- but all in fun. | ||
marie |
Euguene, I love the cows! | ||
Rekha |
I remember when we used to go to my grandparents in the village, the neighbours had buffaloes in the yard. When I flashed my red cardigan to them to see what they would do, they went berserk; luckily I was on the terrace. Don't know whether they behave like the other bovine species in bull fighting | ||
John Preston |
Eugene, how about Amish buggies with NASCAR graphics? | ||
maidensmith |
Is that the Red Hat Society of cows? | ||
Rekha |
Now we know you have a sense of humour too, Eugene. | ||
Raliegh |
Now that makes me LOL! You could do a whole series of these Eugene. cows in summer bonnets, Amish bonnets, a bull smoking a pipe. | ||
Grace |
First thing I did when seeing this was to grin. Who would not take something home that envokes joy? Touching the right person is what it is all about. | ||
marie |
My experience with art fairs is extremely limited. I tried it once about a month ago and didn't sell very much; I don't think it's the right venue for me. Other folks on this group, however, have been very successful with it, and I hope they chime in with some good suggestions. My lesson was that any genre could probably sell. There are some other factors that might make more difference than genre: 1) The product needs to be inexpensive. Prints, notecards, and such seem to do a lot better than originals. Items under $20 do well. Items over $50 don't sell at all. 2) Produce things in colors to match a variety decors. Most folks want something to match the drapes or the sofa. It's great if you can have the same product in a variety of colors. 3) Your product needs to be something that folks can relate to. If you are doing a neighborhood festival, prints/paintings of scenes in the neighborhood do well. If you are doing a beach festival, marine themes do well. If you paint pictures of people dressed as golfers, rock climbers, swimmers, or whatever -- and your customers are interested in the subject, then your chances of a sale are good. The last item -- that folks need to relate to your art -- is probably the most important ... for any kind of sale. My experience has been that very few people buy paintings for purely aesthetic reasons. (I don't mean this to sound cynical.) I see people buy art for several reasons: 1) They relate to the subject/painting. Golfers like to buy art about golf. Travelers like pictures of places they have visited. I sell a fair number of pieces because people watched me do the painting or (for some unfathomable reason) want to paint the way I do. 2) It's an investment/ego trip/"keeping up with the Jones". This is what happens with more expensive art. Think of people who spend millions of dollars on Picassos, for example. A corollary to this rule is that some people buy art because their neighbors or friends buy art. The rationale usually goes: "all my friends have a painting by Lisa, and so I need one of Lisa's paintings, too." | ||
Lisa |
I am wondering about various experiences in the art fair marketplace. What seems to attract the eye and the checkbook best? Still lifes? Figures? Landscapes? Abstracts? Stylized cutesy characters? |
