View Full Version : North Sea dunes

12-10-2003, 02:21 PM

Title: North Sea dunes
Year Created: 2003
Medium: Oil
Surface: Board
Dimension: 40 x 60 cms
Allow digital alterations?: Yes!

Almost a year now getting more familiar with tempera and oil after so many years of watercolors ...

I still often forget white can be used in these media ... except for white clouds of course.

I would appreciate comment and critique ...

pero lane
12-10-2003, 04:10 PM
Lovely sky!:)

12-10-2003, 06:33 PM
what is your focal point in this picture?

12-10-2003, 07:06 PM
Expansive, isolated feeling. The dunes roll and the waves come in!
I like this one...the colors are marvelous.:)

Matt Sammekull
12-10-2003, 07:20 PM
Having rain outside my window, and cold winds, I long for such a place right now.

You clearly have three levels/planes in this painting, foreground, middle and background. These are three very different areas of your landscape, yet in your painting they hold almost the same values and saturation, intensity or call it what you will. I hope you understand me. You should focus on one of these planes and let the other two step back a bit.


12-10-2003, 08:43 PM
i feel something else should be there in picture.. and too yellow- is that sand? too yellow, lighten whiten and make grasses different lengths and maybe sea oats?? not too much disant because back and front same tonal quality..Hope this helps..Bridges

Andrew Rance
12-10-2003, 08:53 PM
Perhaps "no focal point" IS the point ...?? Sense of wide open space, nothingness and no distractions from the beauty of the elements.

12-11-2003, 12:07 AM
Your sky and water are not bad! I think, however, that the yellow on the beach is too intense, too pure. Also, it is VERY difficult, from my experience, to make a an effective landscape if the horizon line cuts the picture in half.

12-11-2003, 04:09 AM
OK at the risk of killing the thread (people seem to prefer not to answer my posts!) I will explain why I asked about a focal point.

Yes, the idea of a huge expanse of nothingness is a nice idea - peace, quiet, tranquility, all those things come into play - but for me, a picture needs somewhere for the eye to rest, or it becomes difficult to focus on. This doesn't mean it HAS to be anything obvious like a big tree, or a buouy on the ocean (tho in some cases it may be just that)... it could be as simple as a slightly darker patch in the sky. the placement of the focal point, or area, is worth some consideration, because even in a completely abstract image, a focal area will attract the viewer's eye, and offer some visual stimulation.

Where everything is emphasised, in the end, nothing is emphasised, and for the viewer, the painting becomes monotonous.

The reason for asking the question, is that I wanted to know where Gilberte wants us to look. At the sky? At the beach? At the moment, we bounce between sea and sky, because compositionally, there is 50% of each.

In painting terms, equal balance of shapes is monotonous, and somewhat disturbing. This may sound strange, but it is true. An unequal balance helps the viewer enormously. Wth much more sky, we would know that the pic is about a wide, expansive sky. With more foreground beach, we would understand that the picture is about a wide expanse of beach. It would be visually much more stimulating, if the shapes were adjusted in this way.

There are three simple shapes in both of the following rectangles. Which one has the more satisfying pictorial balance? :



The painting we are looking at is, in fact, the top image here, in its basic form.

12-11-2003, 06:05 AM

in a workshop I learned to be more conscious about the move of eye when looking at a painting.

I am attracted by 2 areas:

1. I like to swing in the bow with the clouds, starting in the upper left

2. The dark grass in the left lower corner is pulling my view down. Then I jump back to the sky before the eye falls out of the picture in that corner

I reckognized that I was not much
looking at the lower right side of the work.

best regards

12-11-2003, 06:05 AM
very comforting
earth is flesh

Wayne Gaudon
12-11-2003, 06:59 AM
Gilberte ..
Like the colors but find them seperate issues and I don't see any depth in the yellow field. Putting some lighter values of those yellows and reds into your clouds would help unite the bottom to the top and perhaps if it were tied togeather more the issue of 3 horizontal bars wouldn't come into question.

12-11-2003, 12:40 PM
Greetings..my Belgian friend,

Yes, going back-and-forth between watercolors and oils is interesting, isn't it?

The openness of the scene here and brilliant cerelaun sky capture me.

Have a good day,-S

12-11-2003, 05:29 PM
Hey Gilberte!

I've been racking my brain on this...
it is pleasant
and nothing is necessarily wrong...
and jackie may have hit on something
but, not exactly what I feel about this piece
and how I think you want it to "feel' to the viewer...

so, rather than separations...
maybe better a singular view
of expance.

the sand goes well into the water...
how about the water easing
(loosing some edges)
into the sky...
just a thought...

nice and restful...

12-12-2003, 04:48 AM
So sorry I didn't respond earlier but I forgot to click on the "receive updates". I'd already been thinking is it sooooo bad that nobody bothers to comment :D

Thanks giniaad, Scott, Wayne, Jerry, Diyart, Wolvenp, Andrew, Bridges, Matt V, Shirley, Pero lane and Jackie

I asked for comment and critique and I received very very interesting feedback, so interesting to read and note down. I realise the dunes are too strong in yellows, the focal point should have been the sky, but I realise I'll have to work on this. The horizon indeed cuts the painting into two parts and why did I paint that FRONTAL view, I miss a diagonal action ?......:rolleyes:

Lots to learn still and NO WAY watercolors are more difficult to paint thant OILS, on the contrary.
Can anyone suggest a good mix of colors for sandy dunes ?

THANKS AGAIN for bothering.