Free Updates
Navigation
Search
Archives
| | Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | | 29 | 30 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Categories
| November, 2009 (1) |
| October, 2009 (4) |
| September, 2009 (4) |
| August, 2009 (5) |
| July, 2009 (4) |
| June, 2009 (5) |
| May, 2009 (4) |
| April, 2009 (4) |
| March, 2009 (5) |
| February, 2009 (4) |
| January, 2009 (4) |
| December, 2008 (4) |
| November, 2008 (4) |
| October, 2008 (4) |
| September, 2008 (5) |
| August, 2008 (4) |
| July, 2008 (4) |
| June, 2008 (5) |
| May, 2008 (4) |
| April, 2008 (4) |
| March, 2008 (5) |
| February, 2008 (4) |
| January, 2008 (4) |
| December, 2007 (4) |
| November, 2007 (4) |
| October, 2007 (5) |
| September, 2007 (4) |
| August, 2007 (4) |
| July, 2007 (2) |
Links
|
 Monday, October 29, 2007
Moving From Oils to Pastels
Posted by Richard
Q: I'm an oil painter who has purchased a set of pastels. What are the similarities between these two media and what tips can you give me to start me off in the right direction?  Pastel and oil share a strong kinship; they complement each other well. The skills gained from working in one greatly strengthen the other. My first paintings were oil and after a few years I was introduced to pastel by one of my mentors—an introduction for which I'm eternally grateful. Many observers comment that without close scrutiny, it's hard to tell my oils from my pastels. This is because I approach them both with the same attitude. Chamisa Storm (at top; oil, 16x24) and Toward the Rio (below; pastel, 10x14) illustrate this similarity. Both were started with a thin underpainting
followed with thicker applications of pigment. Many of my final
touches in oil are created with a palette knife loaded with heavy
paint; in pastel, this is duplicated with the side of a soft pastel stick.
 Working in oil has made me painterly (more in the fashion of paint). I hold and apply the pigment as if a brush is in my hand—instead of a drawing utensil. Pastel has made me more sensitive when working in oil to the tactile nature of applying pigment to surface. My application of both media is very similar: I tend to start with a thin underpainting that focuses on the big shapes and substructure of the scene (refer to my 2-part blog on underpainting). I then move to the lay-in of more pastel or oil, achieving just enough detail to explain what it is I'm painting. This method follows an old system used in traditional oil painting—working thin to thick. The mantra taught to these traditional oil painters applies well to pastel: thin to thick, soft to sharp, dark to light, and dull to bright. When working with an opaque medium it's best to try and follow this creed. Even though there are techniques of glazing in oil (the thin application of a darker transparent color over a lighter passage), it's basically an opaque medium, like pastel, and requires an incremental increase in paint volume to build up the upper passages, especially when working wet-into-wet. Pastel, of course, never dries (unless we spray it heavily with workable fixative), so it shares similarities to a layer of wet oil paint requiring the heavier application of pigment with each subsequent application. One of the ways pastel artists facilitate this is to work with their harder sticks in the early layers and graduate to the softer pastels for the final touches. Other media, like watercolor and acrylic, tend to dry quickly and require a different approach. Another similarity is that many oil painters work on a toned substrate, usually a warm tone for the landscape and a weak cool tone (like a gray green) for the figure and portrait. This is mirrored in the selections many pastel artists make when choosing a toned surface. Even though these two mediums share a lot of common qualities, there is a definite personality difference. Allow yourself time to become acquainted and experiment with each. You'll gain so much from the adventure.
10/29/2007 2:11:12 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)
|
|
 Monday, October 22, 2007
Giving and Receiving Critiques
Posted by Richard
 Criticism is a valuable part of our process as painters. Getting the opinion of others opens us up to possibilities we may have overlooked or not been capable of finding on our own. Being able to capably receive these opinions as well as dispense them is a skill we all need to acquire.  We work hard on our paintings and do our best with the knowledge and skills we have. At times this makes it difficult to hear what others might have to say. Many of us are seeking validation and approval instead of constructive criticism. Before opening yourself up to scrutiny, make the decision to learn something from the feedback. You will be better able to accept what you are told. Get a wide variety of criticism whenever possible and scrutinize the source before accepting the feedback. Comparing the diverse comments and looking for repeated observations may help us to address ongoing issues in our paintings. Make sure that the critic is able to explain objectively the reasoning behind his or her opinion. Simply stating that he or she likes or dislikes something is a matter of personal taste and serves only to flatter or tear down the individual receiving the comment. An explanation of the “why” behind the criticism will enable an artist to learn from it. Seek feedback from those you hold in high esteem—it is hard to ignore. But keep in mind that there's something to be gained from everyone. Many a good point has been made from someone that knows very little about painting. When critiquing others, try to be objective. Create a dialogue with the artist and get a feeling for what it was they were trying to communicate; put yourself in the artist's shoes and speak at his or her ability level. That way, you'll be better able to explain constructively your comments and, with your criticism, encourage the artist to move ahead to the next level. Your purpose is not to make the artist more like you, but to help strengthen ability. In the photo at top, the painters in my advanced plein air workshop on location in Bend, Oregon, meet for a group critique at the end of a long day of painting. Having feedback before approaching another painting day is useful; it helps solidify what's going well and what needs work, and can help expedite the learning experience. (Photo by Elloe Jeter)
The second photo was taken during an in-depth classroom critique that I arrange every five weeks as part of an ongoing class I teach in Medford, Oregon. Much may be learned from critiques of other students' work, and a dialogue is encouraged with the artist being critiqued. Critiques are a useful artistic tool, helping us to better communicate
and offering a reality check for what's successful and what needs
attention in our paintings. Always listen to your internal voice before handing your final decisions over to another. Remember, “It is but one person’s opinion." For tips on organizing (and operating) a local art critique group in your area, see the Professional Practices column, "The Art of the Critique Group," by Schelly Keefer and Edward McKeown, in the December issue of The Pastel Journal.
10/22/2007 3:11:29 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)
|
|
 Monday, October 15, 2007
What Is Aerial Perspective?
Posted by richard
 There are two types of perspective that artists use when painting and drawing. Aerial perspective is one and is described as the use of gradations in color and definition to suggest distance. The other, linear perspective, is what we call the use of parallel lines converging on the horizon to convey depth. Learning to handle these useful tools will heighten the appearance of distance in our paintings. Simply put, aerial perspective means the atmospheric distance between objects in a painting. Depending on our relationship to the objects, and the relative distance involved, this can be quite apparent. The heavier the atmosphere, the more pronounced the effect. Lower elevations that commonly have higher amounts of moisture in the air are the easiest to witness the effect. The drier the atmosphere, and the higher the elevation, the less apparent it becomes. If we were suspended above our scene (say, in the sky), we would understand the spacing of individual objects and would want to relate that distance in our paintings conceived from ground level. When observing the natural world, we confront two sources of light: the warm sun—the basis of all light—and the cool canopy of atmosphere that surrounds the earth. Think of the sun as a light bulb and the atmosphere as the lampshade. The sun strikes objects much the way a light bulb would in an indoor situation with the atmosphere as a lampshade diffusing the sunlight and casting a flat even light over a broad expanse. If we relate this analogy to the landscape, we understand that as things recede in the distance, they receive more and more atmospheric light, making them lighter and cooler. Artists have manipulated this tendency for a heightened effect of distance in their landscapes for centuries. I follow a simple recipe when applying aerial perspective to my paintings: make things cooler (bluer), lighter in value, and a little softer as they recede. I embrace the attitude that when we paint we manipulate the viewer into believing something is real that is not really there—a form of magic. It's but a flat surface with pigment applied. By utilizing the effect of aerial perspective, artists can do just that. In my painting, Long Shadows (above), I purposely made the large cast shadow in the foreground warmer and darker near the bottom, though in reality it looked pretty mucht he same. The effect is that you feel a heightened sense of distance as you journey through the painting back to the old stone structure.
10/15/2007 9:44:23 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)
|
|
 Monday, October 08, 2007
How do you frame your work?
Posted by richard
 Framing your work is like choosing clothing. Dependingon the task, you need to dress appropriately. I have two different presentation methods for my finished pastels: One is to use a traditional mat and frame; the other is to frame in the fashion of an oil painting. Depending on the piece, one of these options usually works well. The most important purpose of framing pastels is to protect them from damage. Unlike paintings that dry and are able to be handled with little concern of damage, pastels are fragile and are better protected when framed properly. Glass is almost always used to protect the pastel surface from touch and moisture. Some artists are experimenting using applied varnishes and mediums over their pastels to preserve them. Since this alters the appearance and requires advanced planning, I haven't experimented with it—yet, that is. Modern advances have given us the ability to use low-reflection (AR) glass and ultraviolet protected (museum) glass, which greatly enhances the appearance of the painting. Once prohibitively expensive, the prices for these have come down, and many pastel artists are spending the funds for these framing products. Personally, I think it has made a difference with my galleries in terms of where they are able to display my work, and consequently, in sales.  To mat or not to mat, that is the second question. Since most pastel artists believe it's best to separate the glass from the pastel surface, the easiest and most traditional method has been to use paper matting between the finished painting and the frame and glass. If you choose to use a mat, make sure it is ph neutral or 100 percent rag. Old pulp paper mats were highly acidic and over time could damage the painting. I usually use a cloth-covered matting either of a raw or bleached linen variety (see photo at top). Instead of double matting, I opt for a wood fillet that accents the outer frame; this adds an accent as well as added depth between the glass and painting. The general rule on width of mat is wider on small paintings and narrower on large ones. Traditionally, a little extra width is placed at the bottom to weight the piece. Many pastel artists have decided to go without mats in order to frame in a traditional oil motif. The recent popularity of the plein air or American Impressionist frame has made a good selection of ready-made, elegant frames available. Small plastic spacers (purchased from an art supply or framing store) are easily attached between the painting and glass on the inside of the frame. Tucked out of sight under the lip of the frame, all the viewer sees is the outer frame and the finished painting (see photo above). One difficulty of using this system is that it works best if the pastel surface is rigid or the paper has been mounted to a rigid substrate since lightweight pastel papers are prone to slipping and wrinkling. When it comes to choosing the color or value of the frame or matting, I rely on my understanding of simultaneous contrast. If I want to accentuate the darks in a painting, I'll choose a slightly lighter frame and visa versa. The same holds true for color: a warm frame will make a painting appear cooler and a cool frame, warmer. The more neutral the frame, the more the painting will shine. Since we rarely know where our work will end up, it's best to frame simply and to showcase the painting. Leave the decorative framing for the interior decorator that understands the environment where the painting will reside.   
10/8/2007 1:31:49 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)
|
|
 Monday, October 01, 2007
Do you have any tips for working from photographs?
Posted by richard
 Although I've been concentrating on plein air tips for the most part on this blog, I do often use photographic material as a reference when painting in my studio or in a classroom. It's a useful tool and has allowed me to record details of many places and things. There are three basic ways a photograph differs from our perception. Understanding them will allow us to better work from photographic reference.  [left] photo reference for Opal Evening [below] Opal Evening (pastel on pumice grit board, 16x20) by Ricahrd McKinleyFirst, value ranges will be exaggerated. Film—and now digital formats—have limitations on their ability to record the full range of light and dark visible to the human eye. Digital is getting better and future advances will make it more accurate, but for the time being, it's still limited. Most photographs are exposed for the light, allowing for more detail to be recorded in those areas. This leaves the shadows underexposed and lacking reportable texture. If we exposed for the darker areas, the lights would blow out and show too little detail. For this reason, it's often wisest to shoot one exposure for the shadows and another for the lights. By using both photos as reference, it becomes easier to relate natural variations within the darks and lights, and comes closer to what we see. Second, color is easily misrepresented. Films are made for certain lighting conditions and, used outside those close parameters, can shift toward a warm or cool bias. With digital, the white balance (or color bias) is the key to accurate color representation. Don’t forget, the camera doesn’t know what you're taking a picture of. It just averages everything unless you manually override it to respond to the situation. A little reading of your owner’s manual section on white balance can help you adjust your digital camera for more accurate images. Third, focal-plane manipulation, referred to as the "depth of field," can alter the focus by allowing only one upright plane to be in sharp focus. Everything in front, as well as behind, that plane will be blurred. Depth of field may also be manipulated to produce sharp focus from the tip of your toes to the horizon. The human eye sees in a focused cone, and everything around our area of focused attention will become softer. So, don’t be fooled by the manipulated depth of field of the photograph. It's important to remember that nothing comes close to working directly from the source, one on one. Processing the visual information gathered through the eye, analyzed by the brain, and felt by the heart is an integral part of being a representational painter. The photograph is an artificial representation, easily manipulated and limited by its physical restraints. Don’t let it use you; learn to use it, and never accept it as fact.
10/1/2007 2:15:20 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)
|
|
|