I went out and painted with Plein Air Austin yesterday in the morning. The place was very beautiful. The meadow was full of wild flowers of different colors. Lots of trees. But I immediately realized I could not make a good painting out of this beautiful scene, because I could not identify any 3D forms. If there is no form, there is no painting. Period. So I painted the painters.
I don't know if you have noticed that there are two kinds of artists. The first kind artists paint only landscapes. They don't paint still life, figurative, and portraits. However, the second kind artists painting still life, and figure mainly, but they hardly paint any natural landscapes. Even they paint out doors, they prefer painting cityscapes, building and cars. I am belong to the second kind for sure. Of course, both kinds can produce great artists, but I just don't know why. Very very few artists can do both landscape and figurative well. Richard Schmid is one of them.
5 comments:
I think a famous painter compared painting a scene like that to painting spinach. Very nice vignette.
Yes, I agree on the landscape vs. still life painters. I see it all the time. When still life painters paint outside they tend to make the painting 'blocky'. I think they are looking at the landscape like a still life - but that won't work. The light is moving and it's real not artificial. Anyway, I'm a landscape painter learning still life. Your workshop in putney was a good start! Thanks! What do you mean by no 3D forms? Everything is 3D everywhere! Right?
thanks,
Mike
I love the way you painted the figures; so small and yet the gestures are spot on. I would like some advice on how to learn this please.
This is smashing! Especially the large plant on the left which gives proportion. Those little spots of color and your greens wrote a little story....my favorite kind of art.
I totally agree and struggle with figures placed in landscapes. The landscapes always look flat to me too when I try to paint them. I'm with you on the 2nd group.
Post a Comment