Tree Painting

16ga

Well-known member
Messages
406
First I just want to say that I'm not happy with this painting but moving on from it. Maybe after its dried for a few months it’ll look better to me.

Last year I started a series of tree paintings to improve my tree painting skills. I did 4 4.5”x6” and then intended to finish the serious with this painting at 9x12.
I’m really unhappy with how the tree turned out in the larger size and as such I'm going to extend the series and paint more trees using a different techniques.
The painting is 9”x12” on canvas board.

tree.jpg



Anyway. Even if I'm unhappy with it I figured I'd post. Looking for opinions, advice, tips and criticism. Anything that can help me on future paintings.
 
Add another tree to the right of it. It is too dead center on the canvas. That is what is bothering you. Look up the Golden Mean. :)
 
I agree with sno, but I also don't think there is anything wrong with the tree itself. You may want to put some lighter greens (maybe even yellow-whites) on some of the tips) to add some light? Other than that, you have the darker and mid greens there in the right spots. I like the painting overall.
 
I agree with sno that it needs to be off centre and it needs more definition. Don't know if it helps, I took this photo of a tree a week or so ago, it seems to have good light so may be worth painting.
20200614_204316_1597352667921.jpg
 
Thank you all.

The composition wasn't really important to me while planing out this piece. Originally the series was going to just be studies and left blank other then the trees. But moving forward with these I'll give more thought to how I crop the references.

The tree itself came out splotchier then I'd have liked. And I really dislike how the sky holes turned out. But I'll try adding some more highlights to it.

The forefront has a small hill. There is more of a change between it and the lower grassy areas but for some reason its not as noticeable in the picture.
I'll give that some touch ups and see what I can do there.

Don't know if it helps, I took this photo of a tree a week or so ago, it seems to have good light so may be worth painting.
Yeah. If you dont mind I'd love to try painting it? Right now I'm only working from copyright free pictures. I want to go out and get some more of my own but between health issues, weather, and a plague I've been unable to so far this year.
 
Thank you all.

The composition wasn't really important to me while planing out this piece. Originally the series was going to just be studies and left blank other then the trees. But moving forward with these I'll give more thought to how I crop the references.

The tree itself came out splotchier then I'd have liked. And I really dislike how the sky holes turned out. But I'll try adding some more highlights to it.

The forefront has a small hill. There is more of a change between it and the lower grassy areas but for some reason its not as noticeable in the picture.
I'll give that some touch ups and see what I can do there.


Yeah. If you dont mind I'd love to try painting it? Right now I'm only working from copyright free pictures. I want to go out and get some more of my own but between health issues, weather, and a plague I've been unable to so far this year.
You're welcome to paint whatever I post, even my paintings if you get desperate :)
 
I think determining solidly where the light is coming from would help a lot. You could add shadows and blue colors on the away side. I would also exploit aerial perspective more. I don't think there's anything wrong with putting the tree dead center; George Inness did it all the time.
 
Not to be controversial here Harold. Nevertheless, I can't think of many inness's works where a central tree was the focal point.
 
He's kind of known for it. I read a lot about him because he is my favorite landscape painter. He often divides his paintings into four quadrants, but it is surprising how often he puts a tree smack dab in the middle. Here are some examples:
California_1894.jpg
Early_Autumn_Montclair_1891.jpg
Hazy_Morning_Montclair_New_Jersey_1893.jpg
 
None of those have the tree as the only focal in the center, they are balanced by other trees and such.
 
Then the first painting is balanced by mountains, no? It's not only a tree in the center.

Inness was real particular about his composition and even had some weird theories about using certain numbers of elements, being very conscious of their repetition and their spacing, especially for trees. It was based on ideas he got from Swedenborg.

However, if you don't like the examples, it doesn't bother me.
 
I like the examples, they are beautiful paintings but they are balanced. The original painting can be easily balanced with the addition of another tree, just like your first two examples.
 
Thank you all.

The composition wasn't really important to me while planing out this piece. Originally the series was going to just be studies and left blank other then the trees. But moving forward with these I'll give more thought to how I crop the references.

The tree itself came out splotchier then I'd have liked. And I really dislike how the sky holes turned out. But I'll try adding some more highlights to it.

The forefront has a small hill. There is more of a change between it and the lower grassy areas but for some reason its not as noticeable in the picture.
I'll give that some touch ups and see what I can do there.


Yeah. If you dont mind I'd love to try painting it? Right now I'm only working from copyright free pictures. I want to go out and get some more of my own but between health issues, weather, and a plague I've been unable to so far this year.
The sky holes are the same value as the sky behind, however they appear to the eye to be lighter due to the contrast of the darker foliage. Skyholes need to be a slightly darker value than the sky behind in order to cancel the contrast effect and recede.
I think the composition will improve by defining the slight knoll in the right foreground and possibly adding a shrub to help define the small hill.
 
Thanks everyone.
Here it is after a little more work. I’ve added more highlights to the tree and worked on the grassy areas a little more.

tree2.jpg


This picture is brighter then it should be and the lighter weeds along the edge of the hill show up better in it but look whiter then they really are. I just cant seem to get a good picture of this one.
The trees looking better now but I still don't like it.

The sky holes I haven't touched up yet. I'll try to make them a little darker.
 
Back
Top