| Author | Message | ||
  Raliegh Intermediate Member Username: Raliegh Post Number: 81 Registered: 8-2006 |
Wow, that would be the best fair for the entire family, my husband loves to pick Blue Grass. | ||
Marie Senior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 243 Registered: 8-2006 |
Speaking of getting together for lunch, I am assuming that CJAS will have another summer art fair in June. Anyone planning on attending? | ||
Valerie_norberry Junior Member Username: Valerie_norberry Post Number: 12 Registered: 10-2006 |
My last tiny painting was greeting card size of farmers'market in Three Rivers, MI with Ruby Hochstetler selling vegetables. Published it on postcard x 100 and gave out/sold. colorful. Sorry don't have scanner, cannot share on internet and Office Max won't share my scans on internet, their policy. Was watercolor. | ||
Grizrev Intermediate Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 81 Registered: 8-2006 |
Would that it were possible. I think our whole forum would enjoy doing that! | ||
Whitewatercolor Advanced Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 159 Registered: 10-2006 |
Grizrev: Want to meet there for lunch? We could do a little plein air. It sure beats this air inversion we've experienced here this winter--no sun, no rain, no snow--just dark days. Bonnie | ||
Grizrev Intermediate Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 79 Registered: 8-2006 |
Bonnie, I was re-reading my last post and don't want to be misunderstood. I much prefer French cuisine to McDonald's hamburgers personally! I fully appreciate your reaction to the barn painting and share it! Would enjoy sitting in the shade of that tree as well after working in the barn! | ||
Grizrev Intermediate Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 69 Registered: 8-2006 |
Thanks, George. Couldn't have said it better myself. Tastes vary, and some are not as "sophisticated" or educated as others, and may not be able to see what the painter wanted the viewer to see and treasure. People are free to value and like what they will, whether or not they share our taste or the painter's. Some people like McDonald hamburgers better than French cuisine! | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Bonnie, I read the painting the same way you do, but what Jack is suggesting is that some may not see it as others do. The painter, as you say, may have the ability to lead us where he wants us to go, but some who see the painting, like a horse on a lead, may choose not to go where the farmer leads. | ||
Whitewatercolor Advanced Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 158 Registered: 10-2006 |
I disagree wholeheartedly. The competence of the painting matters. The painter has the ability to lead us where he wants us to go and thus make the statement he wants to make. I feel that by the placement of the trees (both of them)and their dominance, we cannot ignore the statement they make. I read this painting something like "When the endeavors and ambitions of man coexist, either by design or neglect, with the beauty and balance of nature, it is a beautiful thing, worth documenting." I can imagine working hard in the barn and taking my lunch over to sit in the shade of that tree. | ||
Grizrev Intermediate Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 67 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, Indeed true. What the viewer values is often surprising, unique as are individuals, and independent of either the painter's competence or intent. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
I think your point is that a viewer sees what he values most. Is that right? I agree! | ||
Grizrev Intermediate Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 56 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, Another thought on the "barn" painting. You originally called it to our attention as "a watercolor painting of a barn." an "approach to painting a barn that is competition worthy." In light of your new "religion and art," perhaps it is not really a painting of a barn (the barn shape in itself is not remarkable), but a statement about the relationship of man and nature (contrasting the two), with philosophical if not religious implications. Or maybe it is just a good painting with no hidden intent. | ||
Landscaper Member Username: Landscaper Post Number: 27 Registered: 12-2006 |
I'm curious about the size of paintings. In the workshops I've taken, just three, the instructors demonstrated and most of the time painted on full sheets of paper. In England and Ireland, most artists prefer quarter and half sheets. I, myself, prefer the latter. Price may have something to do with it. What size paper do you prefer? | ||
Grizrev Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 42 Registered: 8-2006 |
Whitewater and George, Thanks for your insights (which actually point out the same thing!) I had not realized that the man-made shapes were intentionally boring (i.e., squares and rectangles)in order to serve another design principle -- contrast. I suppose the real subject (or at least center of interest) of the painting, therefore, is the tree. George -- terrific job of overlaying graphics to illustrate! Thanks for the effort! | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Sorry Jack, I can’t agree! The “boring shapes”, as you call them, have a design function. I'll illustrate it for you. At the center of the composition are predominantly man made rectangular, horizontal and vertical shapes comprised of buildings, the gate, and the fence posts (seen in white in my attachment). These visually stable linear forces are framed by the arch formed by the two trees (seen in orange in my attachment). Outside of this arch are multiple sets of oblique parallels (I'll show only a few in red in my attachment). It’s called contrast! The arch separates the visual stability of the man made world from the visual excitement of the natural world. In my mind this painting is an exceptional example of good design, right down to its smallest details. For example, note that the fence posts on the extreme left and the extreme right are aligned with the oblique parallels so as to maintain the integrity of the design intent.  | ||
Whitewatercolor Advanced Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 149 Registered: 10-2006 |
I agree, it is the tree that makes the painting, but it is usually the setting that makes the barn painting, in my opinion, ie, the sense of place or nostalgia. Bonnie | ||
Grizrev Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 31 Registered: 8-2006 |
George, With the possible exception of the tree, Luigi's painting contains boring shapes to my eye. Take the tree out mentally and see what you think. Am I wrong? | ||
George Unregistered guest |
I agree! As an example: here’s a watercolor painting of a barn by Luigi Lucioni Dated 1943. It shows one approach to painting a barn that is competition worthy. http://www.equinoxantiques.com/detail/TL135 | ||
Marie Senior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 205 Registered: 8-2006 |
I like barn paintings, and many shows will probably have at least one barn painting. I don't think there is a bias against barns per se. Most good judges will try to accept a wide range of subjects and techniques. The problem with barns is that maybe 30 barns will be entered into a show, and the challenge is to make your perfectly good barn painting stand out from the 29 other perfectly good barn paintings. The thing about figurative pieces is that most of them are really bad, and so if you do a decent one then you have a reasonable chance of getting into a show. | ||
Eric Unregistered guest |
I don't like the fact that barns seem to be "discriminated" against in shows. I suppose critics think of them as a cliche. But now I'm noticing that some subjects that critics and/or jurors seem to love are now becoming so commonplace that in my opinion they are in danger of becoming cliches as well. But if you do them well, you've got a ticket into a show. One example would be a painting of a close-up view of a random object. It could be any object as long as it's something that isn't normally thought of as a subject and has some interesting shapes or texture. If the object shows a reflection then that's even better! Another example are the usual portraits of older men or women of African-American descent. They have to look wise and noble and like they've been through a lot in their lives. That'll get you into shows every time! | ||
Marie Senior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 204 Registered: 8-2006 |
I agree that you should paint what you know and love. The thing about shows, though, is that you have to do something that nobody else can do -- with strong emotional content or incredible technique or ... you name it. There has to be something that makes the judge say "wow, I have never looked at or thought about 'x' subject that way before." I don't think that the subject necessarily has to be edgy or confrontational. One other thing I have noticed about shows is that , especially as one moves to more competitive shows, is that the pieces tend to be at larger scale and a bit toward what I call 'noisy', with bright colors and/or extreme contrasts. I sometimes compare it to what it might be like with a classical music competition. Your favorite repertoire might be a quiet nocturne, but if you're competing you better be able to handle a late Beethoven sonata or some of the Liszt transcriptions. | ||
Landscaper Junior Member Username: Landscaper Post Number: 18 Registered: 12-2006 |
I believe it's true that we paint what we know. I also live in the country and paint what I see, barns, fieldscapes, etc. I can admire paintings of big cityscapes but I am never inclined to paint one. I suppose if I moved to the city and that's all I saw, then that's what I'd paint. I like to paint barns, too. I think it is because they have such great shapes and with wonderful dark areas, windows and missing boards. How often do you find large cylinders, triangles and boxes together in a field of skies and trees? Nice painting, Eugene. | ||
Whitewatercolor Advanced Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 143 Registered: 10-2006 |
Wow George, how about that, responding on the same minute from different time zones! | ||
George Unregistered guest |
I like the Amish scenes too! You do them really well Eugene. I paint landscapes because I like nature. My best paintings are done in plein air. I don’t think the subject matter has much to do with getting into, or not getting into, national shows. I think the main point Marie made, that “a painting should not look like anything else that a judge is likely to see”, is true for technique, style, composition, and emotional impact, more than it is true for subject matter. | ||
Whitewatercolor Advanced Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 142 Registered: 10-2006 |
Eugene: I'm with you about painting what you know. I live on the east slope of the Cascade Mountains along the Columbia River, in Washington, but right across the bridge from Oregon. I paint the Gorge and the mountains because that it what I see everyday. I paint trees and water because that is what I live with. I have lived on a small farm for the past 30 years where I grow fruit so I paint chickens, apples and pears. In the spring and summer I can't resist the blooming flowers and gardens that people all over the area share with the world, so I paint flowers. I love dogs and when I painted some of my own, my friends wanted me to paint their dogs, and then their horses (which I also have and interact with everyday) so I paint them also. It is hard to paint something with heart or give it life when you don't know it. As for shows, if the Judge is so shallow that he's looking for something different, instead of something moving, I guess I wouldn't want to be in the show. To me getting in the show isn't the prize. The prize is getting in a show that includes paintings that I can't forget. More than likely those are common items that are painted with such emotion that they hold my thoughts. There are artists out there whose work is so moving that I can remember the first time I saw it. Dean Mitchell comes to mind. I saw a painting of his years ago. The article mentioned that he was a new, young, emerging artist. His work had such soul I never forgot him or his work. In my opinion, he has the ability to paint anything and take me way beyond the painted surface. That is what I am looking for in art and I would be proud to have a painting chosen to show by a Judge who felt the same. | ||
Marie Advanced Member Username: Marie Post Number: 200 Registered: 8-2006 |
First off, I really like your barns and amish scenes. I hope you keep doing them for a long time. As for national shows, I think you have to do something that disguishes your work from the the other entries. It's interesting that you should ask the question today because I spent this afternoon looking at hundreds of slides that are getting ready to go off to a show. There were a lot of very fine paintings of similar subjects. Barns, rivers/lakes/waterfalls, european villas/vacation scenes, abstracts, and flowers were the most popular. After a while, I couldn't distinguish one good barn painting from another. I paint people, in part because it's what interests me and in part because I like the technical challenge. I don't adjust the subject matter for shows, but I am learning to adjust the scale --- working in larger formats --- for shows. Sometimes I am surprised at which of my pieces get into shows. When all the discussion was going on about black recently, I kept thinking about one of my pieces that breaks all the rules and yet has done reasonably well in shows. It has *unmixed* ivory black, along with drips and runs, everywhere. The composition and drawing are solid, however, and it's not like anything else that a judge is likely to see. | ||
Eugene Advanced Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 182 Registered: 8-2006 |
I paint a lot of barns, covered bridges, old farm buildings, and the like-- the things I know best. Many folks like them, but unfortunately, most critics and jurors think of them as trite and corny, no matter ow well they are painted. I wouldn’t try to enter one n a juried show. HOW DO YOU CHOOSE YOUR SUBJECTS? It seems the easiest way to get into a national show is to paint something really unusual or simply outrageous. Here’s one of my bridges. My friends like it, but I think the critics would giggle. What do you paint, and why?  |
