View Full Version : "Blake Lane"
05-13-2015, 09:19 AM
16×11" Mount Vision pastel on Mi-Teintes Touchpad paper. I pass this house everytime I walk down my street. It is a plantation type of house.
05-13-2015, 06:19 PM
I am going to crop some of the tree. I also wonder if I used too many dark colors in trying the alcohol wash.
05-13-2015, 06:35 PM
George, Did you use a wash as underpainting? I'm not quit seeing what you are questioning.
05-13-2015, 07:33 PM
Yes. I used alcohol with the pastel. I meant to just get the darks with the wash, but ended up convering much of the surface.
05-14-2015, 11:29 AM
That's a lovely scene, with the play of light and shadows and that gorgeous old tree framing it. However, you do need to check proportions of the rocking chair, the central table and the oddly shaped plant stand/table to the right of the column. Both seem much larger than they should be. When you sketch in plein air, do you remember to measure by holding your pencil (or another straight edge tool) out in front of you, arm straight and standing in the same position, to compare proportions of the various objects? That's an invaluable method of ensuring you get things the correct size. Our eyes fool us, and we need to constantly check or proportions will not be accurate. The other day I was attempting to sketch a little bridge that I know to be about two feet wide and six feet long. From the location I was viewing it, however, my pencil measuring showed that I must draw it square in order to be accurate!
05-14-2015, 01:30 PM
This was done from a photo. Thanks for the tip on checking measurements. Here is what the painting will look like cropped, and I have also put in the photo I used.
05-14-2015, 02:00 PM
You're welcome. I guess I should have said our brains, not our eyes, fool us. In my example of the bridge, my brain had the knowledge that the bridge was rectangular so it deceived my eyes, and I would have painted it rectangular had I not measured. I think, in your painting, your brain knows the rocking chair is wider than the column (which it is) and is ignoring the fact of the column being much closer. Working from a photo, you could actually just measure with a ruler. Your crop looks fine, I think. I seem to recall Jackie having said in another thread that one shouldn't "frame" a scene with an object each side of the painting (your trees), but I can't recall what she said. Maybe she will chime in.
05-17-2015, 11:14 AM
George, it's not the crop on the tree. The first thing I noticed on the first version was "Love that fat old tree, it shows the age of the place." It's the angle of the little short hedge. On te right the perspective's accurate. On the left it's suddenly straightened to nearly horizontal, when if you put a line where the post is, it should angle back about the same on both sides.
I drew it on this copy of your painting as I eyeballed it, along with what I liked about the big tree. That dapple shadow on it in the reference and in your painting somewhat leads in toward the porch - it would if it's shaped right, and the line of the side of the tree is a bit more gnarly than what you had in the first go. Accentuating the gnarliness on the tree trunk would probably help whether you expand it again or not.
Anyway, hope this helps, ignore if you disagree since it's just a suggestion especially on the tree thing. It's very easy though to see a problem and mistake something right next to it that was good for what the problem is. I've done that a lot of times.
Perspective is something that can get complicated till you know it, once you do get it then it starts to be second nature and you can see it looking at things. It's possible to derive it from just looking at things. Took me years and years to figure out how to decide where the vanishing points were, until I realized that to some extent you derive those from looking at the real thing (or photo) and just extend the line. They're almost arbitrary. They vary per object and help place it but a singl object like a house will all go to the same vanishing point.
06-09-2015, 01:28 AM
Robert, thank you for taking a look at this. So ... if I understand correctly, if I add more curvature to the tree trunk, top to bottom, that will help to push the porch scene further back?
06-09-2015, 09:31 AM
what you must always try to remember about two point perspective is this.
ALL LINEs BELOW THE EYE LEVEL WILL RISE TO MEET AT A COMMON VANISHING POINT ON THE EYE LEVEL (in this instance there are two vp's - one to the left and one to the right) and
ALL LINES ABOVE THE EYE LEVEL WILL DESCEND TO MEET AT THE VP ON THE EYE LEVEL.
The eye level is the horizon line in all cases. If you put a sketchbook on the bridge of your nose and look out at a scene across the the book, which must be parallel with the ground, THAT is the horizon even if there is a house in the way! If you sit to draw, the horizon is lower.
So....with two point perspective, which is what you have here, this is what the lines should be doing. the hedge is ever so slightly BELOW your eye level so top line and bottom line cannot be parallel with each other. They will meet at the vp on the horizon line.....which means the hedge HAS to be wider at the nearest point to you, the near corner of the house, than at the far end to the left. Take a ruler and measure on the photo, you will quickly see this for yourself.
for measuring, you need to compare one measurement with another. So, check the WIDTH of the chair against the height. Take the width measurement of the chair, for example, and see how many times it "goes" into the height.
vBulletin® v3.5.8, Copyright ©2000-2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.