Fall colour daily

MurrayG

Well-known member
Messages
813
Hi folks, I'm not sure about this one. One of my dailys in gouache, 10x15cm on WC 300gm paper. From a photo, but was trying to "loose-ify" things. It got a bit pointallist but I'm ok with that. I feel it's more amateur, esp the trees, rather than simple/loose. Can't describe it, but any thoughts welcome.....

IMG_4922.jpg
 
I disagree. This is a terrific painting! Love the pointillist effect. The trees are masterful, not amateurish.

Be less hard on yourself.
 
Thanks Bart, it's a dilemma between what is "real" and what I'm chasing, if it doesn't gel I sometimes can't see what it is I'm missing or was going for......
 
I love this, and I think you achieved a loose style. I do see what you're saying about the trees, but really only the tilt of the ones on the right - the palette is superb overall. Beautiful work!
 
I think this is a great painting. The leaning trees on the right did catch my eye, but they are really well painted and I love the palette. I am really enjoying your gouache paintings. 🙂
 
Thanks Terri and triduana, appreciate the comments, Bart, thanks for the encouragement.
I think I see what's irritating me, the lack of shadows from the low sun. I may try again on a larger format..... Also, I tried cropping off the right side and it seems more balanced.
 
Thanks Terri and triduana, appreciate the comments, Bart, thanks for the encouragement.
I think I see what's irritating me, the lack of shadows from the low sun. I may try again on a larger format..... Also, I tried cropping off the right side and it seems more balanced.
Might help but I wouldn't overdo that.
 
Well, I think it looks pretty good. Even if it wasn’t in the direction you expected it to go. I think we’re talking about the length of the brushstrokes. It makes a big difference in whether it’s more impressionistic with almost points of lights or if it’s a different style. I often think it’s great that people try to work looser or different than what they’re used to. Some of us really tighten up. I’m one of them. I think what might be a big help is to find examples of artwork that is the direction you’re hoping to go. I would be interested seeing that. Often our paintings go in different directions and that’s not necessarily a bad thing at all. But if you’re trying to go in a specific direction, it’s good to keep examples in front of you. I like the painting. I have a hard time with my landscapes at times that it doesn’t quite look real in some places. I keep an album of artwork of artists works that are successful in different styles. I use it for inspiration and I study it. Doesn’t mean I always get there. Because sometimes we just have to do our own thing and we create something completely different. But still, having some examples in front of you can greatly help.
 
Well, I think it looks pretty good. Even if it wasn’t in the direction you expected it to go. I think we’re talking about the length of the brushstrokes. It makes a big difference in whether it’s more impressionistic with almost points of lights or if it’s a different style. I often think it’s great that people try to work looser or different than what they’re used to. Some of us really tighten up. I’m one of them. I think what might be a big help is to find examples of artwork that is the direction you’re hoping to go. I would be interested seeing that. Often our paintings go in different directions and that’s not necessarily a bad thing at all. But if you’re trying to go in a specific direction, it’s good to keep examples in front of you. I like the painting. I have a hard time with my landscapes at times that it doesn’t quite look real in some places. I keep an album of artwork of artists works that are successful in different styles. I use it for inspiration and I study it. Doesn’t mean I always get there. Because sometimes we just have to do our own thing and we create something completely different. But still, having some examples in front of you can greatly help.
Hi Paintboss, I spent some time over thinking, and didn't get far.....
I am not sure where i want to go, also, I don´t have a preconceived plan. The dailys are meant to force me to paint. As I run out of subjects, ideas etc, I have to experiment.... Influences, well, being Aussie, the Heidelberg School of Streeton, Roberts, John Russell, and many of the same.
I also find American and European artists of the same era also ring for me. Not that I want to paint like them, but more to "see" like them. I would like to see and depict "light" so that it resonates, there is a natural sense of rightness when a piece does that at least for me, its a "zenish thing", I believe style, does not necessarily alter that. I am acutely aware that my drawing skills limit me, along with a diminishing number of years to experiment.
"If" I have a hidden style, it will emerge. I never attended art school and am mostly self taught but have had the good luck to have some fine artist mentors. BUT, does it make sense that at great as Monet (the God) was, I find many other works superior in the way they portray the sense of a place and that moment of light ..... I "like" some Monets, but others, meh..... blasphemy I know.
So, I guess I am at heart an "imperfect impressionist" looking to be better.
I do not want to be photo realist, infact looseness to me, helps capture a momentary sense of place, time an light.
I do not want to begin with an abstraction and have something emerge, I would rather take a scene and explore, if that makes sense.
Abstraction is useful in my exercises as it is teaching me balance and composition, but at heart, I want to point at a place and express it.
So, Im sorry I cannot be more concise over what I am aiming at, but I think you will get the idea.
I wish I knew where I was going though.....
 
Hi Paintboss, I spent some time over thinking, and didn't get far.....
I am not sure where i want to go, also, I don´t have a preconceived plan. The dailys are meant to force me to paint. As I run out of subjects, ideas etc, I have to experiment.... Influences, well, being Aussie, the Heidelberg School of Streeton, Roberts, John Russell, and many of the same.
I also find American and European artists of the same era also ring for me. Not that I want to paint like them, but more to "see" like them. I would like to see and depict "light" so that it resonates, there is a natural sense of rightness when a piece does that at least for me, its a "zenish thing", I believe style, does not necessarily alter that. I am acutely aware that my drawing skills limit me, along with a diminishing number of years to experiment.
"If" I have a hidden style, it will emerge. I never attended art school and am mostly self taught but have had the good luck to have some fine artist mentors. BUT, does it make sense that at great as Monet (the God) was, I find many other works superior in the way they portray the sense of a place and that moment of light ..... I "like" some Monets, but others, meh..... blasphemy I know.
So, I guess I am at heart an "imperfect impressionist" looking to be better.
I do not want to be photo realist, infact looseness to me, helps capture a momentary sense of place, time an light.
I do not want to begin with an abstraction and have something emerge, I would rather take a scene and explore, if that makes sense.
Abstraction is useful in my exercises as it is teaching me balance and composition, but at heart, I want to point at a place and express it.
So, Im sorry I cannot be more concise over what I am aiming at, but I think you will get the idea.
I wish I knew where I was going though.....
You have no need to explain in words. Art is a creative process, not necessarily a descriptive one.

BTW, listen to interviews with many famous musicians and without their "axe" speaking, they sound dull, repetitive and just plain inarticulate. Same for many star athletes. My point is not to denigrate their skills at all; rather it is to illustrate that verbal description does not equate with artistic process necessarily.

You have done something here that rings for many others. Take that to the karma bank!

BTW, there is a great deal of skill in this piece. The implied lines leading toward the main point of focus, for example. The sense of depth done deftly. The feeling of light.
 
You have no need to explain in words. Art is a creative process, not necessarily a descriptive one.

BTW, listen to interviews with many famous musicians and without their "axe" speaking, they sound dull, repetitive and just plain inarticulate. Same for many star athletes. My point is not to denigrate their skills at all; rather it is to illustrate that verbal description does not equate with artistic process necessarily.

You have done something here that rings for many others. Take that to the karma bank!

BTW, there is a great deal of skill in this piece. The implied lines leading toward the main point of focus, for example. The sense of depth done deftly. The feeling of light.
Bart, as usual, great advice and encouragement.
 
Hi folks, I'm not sure about this one. One of my dailys in gouache, 10x15cm on WC 300gm paper. From a photo, but was trying to "loose-ify" things. It got a bit pointallist but I'm ok with that. I feel it's more amateur, esp the trees, rather than simple/loose. Can't describe it, but any thoughts welcome.....

View attachment 46730
That's very well done! quit being too hard on yourself.
 
You have no need to explain in words. Art is a creative process, not necessarily a descriptive one.

BTW, listen to interviews with many famous musicians and without their "axe" speaking, they sound dull, repetitive and just plain inarticulate. Same for many star athletes. My point is not to denigrate their skills at all; rather it is to illustrate that verbal description does not equate with artistic process necessarily.

You have done something here that rings for many others. Take that to the karma bank!

BTW, there is a great deal of skill in this piece. The implied lines leading toward the main point of focus, for example. The sense of depth done deftly. The feeling of light
“You have no need to explain in words. Art is a creative process, not necessarily a descriptive one.”. This! It is very hard to put into words, even if we are descriptive people, there’s just things that are hard to describe. But when you see it, you know it. It’s a wonderful challenge to try to describe aspects of life in visual form. That was such a good point to make Bart.
Thank you Murray. We can use other people’s work as inspiration. Yes we can learn a lot by trying to slavishly copy and they often do that in art school. You can gain new skills pretty quickly. Of course we all want to try to do our own thing, not just copy what others have done before. Find our own style. So sometimes straying off in different directions can be a bit of a gift waiting to happen. I certainly know over time you can certainly change your mind over a piece of work. Something that you were not impressed with, later on you see value in. So live with it for quite a while.🙂 It’s amazing that after a year or two you take a look at it and all of a sudden you say oh! And you know what was bothering you. And you know your way out of it!
Just keep working away and see what happens. But my tip is always look at other artists right now that you are gravitating to and try to learn from them. It is so much faster than trying to figure it out yourself which can take years. It’s not a straight path. but this way, if you gain the knowledge of what and how they do their art, you can use those skills to apply it to whatever you want to do.
 
“You have no need to explain in words. Art is a creative process, not necessarily a descriptive one.”. This! It is very hard to put into words, even if we are descriptive people, there’s just things that are hard to describe. But when you see it, you know it. It’s a wonderful challenge to try to describe aspects of life in visual form. That was such a good point to make Bart.
Thank you Murray. We can use other people’s work as inspiration. Yes we can learn a lot by trying to slavishly copy and they often do that in art school. You can gain new skills pretty quickly. Of course we all want to try to do our own thing, not just copy what others have done before. Find our own style. So sometimes straying off in different directions can be a bit of a gift waiting to happen. I certainly know over time you can certainly change your mind over a piece of work. Something that you were not impressed with, later on you see value in. So live with it for quite a while.🙂 It’s amazing that after a year or two you take a look at it and all of a sudden you say oh! And you know what was bothering you. And you know your way out of it!
Just keep working away and see what happens. But my tip is always look at other artists right now that you are gravitating to and try to learn from them. It is so much faster than trying to figure it out yourself which can take years. It’s not a straight path. but this way, if you gain the knowledge of what and how they do their art, you can use those skills to apply it to whatever you want to do.
Thank you so much for the really thoughtful support, it's very appreciated.
 
This is a wonderful painting- but one observation- you mentioned that you cropped off the right side of the painting and were happier with it. I think what might be happening compositionally, is the trunks of the two right trees start at the same place at the base of the tree, and both trunks are the same thickness and lean the same direction. Repetition in a painting is a good thing, but we have to consciously work to have all the elements in the right place. I think because those two trunks are so much the same, it makes our eye compete for which one is more important. This is a very good thing to learn in painting. Don't fix this one, it has a lovely affect, but for the next time, make sure to pay attention to how trees are aligned and make one trunk more dominant than all the others, and placed a little differently. Even if those two trees were like that IRL, we are the artist and can make a more pleasing arrangement! The beauty of painting!

I once did a painting of some reeds at a lakeside- and something was off- my teacher pointed out that although I had painted the reeds different heights, they were all pointed in exactly the same direction and that was too static- once I added a few reeds leaning more, the painting came together! Another repetition thing to think about!
 
This is a wonderful painting- but one observation- you mentioned that you cropped off the right side of the painting and were happier with it. I think what might be happening compositionally, is the trunks of the two right trees start at the same place at the base of the tree, and both trunks are the same thickness and lean the same direction. Repetition in a painting is a good thing, but we have to consciously work to have all the elements in the right place. I think because those two trunks are so much the same, it makes our eye compete for which one is more important. This is a very good thing to learn in painting. Don't fix this one, it has a lovely affect, but for the next time, make sure to pay attention to how trees are aligned and make one trunk more dominant than all the others, and placed a little differently. Even if those two trees were like that IRL, we are the artist and can make a more pleasing arrangement! The beauty of painting!

I once did a painting of some reeds at a lakeside- and something was off- my teacher pointed out that although I had painted the reeds different heights, they were all pointed in exactly the same direction and that was too static- once I added a few reeds leaning more, the painting came together! Another repetition thing to think about!
Hi BArtsy, actually I agree. IRL thevtwo trees were similar, slightly offset, cropping them out was a bit radical but removed that conflict. That painting was great to show up things I need to be aware of. Thanks for the input, really useful.
 
Back
Top