Skip to main content

Five Minutes. Go!

Composition #12, working on value masses.
Today I challenged myself to create my value composition in five minutes. The goal was to construct a landscape, loosely based on a photo I took at Arches National Park, with a focus on distinct value masses. I set my timer and got to work. When it buzzed, I took a few more minutes to see if I had a "papa, mama, baby" distribution of lights, darks, and mid-values. I didn't, so I reworked the composition a bit until I did. Success. Papa: mid-tones. Mama: white. Baby: black.

My finished landscape. 
I then worked out a color palette for my small (5"x7") test painting, choosing a triadic color scheme of yellow ochre, naphthol red, and both phthalocyanine blue and ultramarine blue. I added in titanium white and that crazy baby blue I'm using up (see it in the sky), and started painting. My goal: staying true to my value plan.

Overall, I'm pleased with my little painting. I think it holds true to my value plan, the color is attractive and holds true to the triadic scheme, and it's a pleasant scene. My only issue is that it doesn't express what I was feeling the day I took the photo, so I'm back to the studio to try a few different versions. I'll keep you posted on my progress.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Back on Track with My Value Studies

Value studies #14, #15, #16. I thought I was getting better, but then I realized they really don't look like anything. Oh no.  Took a little break there. Not a good one. Prescription drug-related side effects. But I've got the issues worked out (I hope) and I'm back to work on my year of value studies. (I'm also rereading " Coaching the Artist Within ," by Eric Maisel, which is a GREAT book to use to tame the inner critic so that you/I can get back to making art.) A few days ago I watched a great promo teaching video from the Tucson Art Academy Online on value. Afterwards, I created three value studies from vacation photos. Studies #14 and #15 are from the same photo, but they don't read as masses that make up an interesting scene. Study #16 reads as three distinct value masses, but you really don't know what it is (a canyon in Zion). I'll need to think about these some more. Barn near Holdener Park, Livermore, CA Meanwhile, I reread ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Value Epiphany!

For the new year, I've decided that before I start a painting, I'll note the goals for that painting session and/or the finished product if I'm not painting alla prima (in one session). I've sort of informally been doing this for the last couple of months, but now I want to consciously follow these steps: 1) write down my goals, 2) paint, 3) acknowledge that the painting is crap ( see previous post ), 4) note how I did or did not meet my goals, and finally, 5) create a next steps list. Of course, these steps won't be executed until I've done the all-important value studies! Last October I painted a lesson from Dreama Tolle Perry's Flow class , a cute carafe of cream with a white ceramic basket of strawberries. The basket didn't read "white" in my painting, which I didn't like, and I wanted to figure out why...but I wanted to use my own still life to do it.  So I set up a scene informed by Dreama but all my own. My scene used my own props to...
Post a Comment
Read more

Finishing My Acrylic Complementary Study

I'm rereading Carlson's Guide to Landscape Painting, as I've decided that I really miss painting landscapes, especially in plein air, but the reason I stopped doing it was because I wasn't happy with my results and I wasn't making progress (ugh, watercolors!). Carlson's book is  DENSE. I gave up highlighting it because almost every paragraph would need a highlight, but I am typing up notes as I read, with the hopes of eventually creating a cheat sheet for myself.  One of the first lessons he writes about is his "theory of angles," where, for an average landscape, the sky, ground, trees, and mountains have certain relative values. Thinking about the six studies I just completed , I realized that I had arbitrarily assigned the sky a mid value, to make the house more the focal point, but according to Carlson, the sky should be the lightest value of the natural objects. Oops. So I redid the value study, using his theory. I kind of like it. Looks more ...
Post a Comment
Read more