View Full Version : at the Naam in Vancouver

09-21-2001, 06:27 PM
18X36 canvas diptych in acrylic
modified slightly after some discussion below

09-21-2001, 09:07 PM
two eighteens?

much more tightly defined than usual
masterful drawing ability on display
reminiscent of your pastels in many ways
great use of values throughout
the colours keep my eyes hopping
captivating gestures display confidence and grandure
it is thrilling with its business
even as the background shouts for part of the action
the defined shapes and edges do much to lead the eye
a coming of age of sorts

those who called my painting jerryish hadn't seen this one
masterful -- take a bow

09-21-2001, 11:42 PM
the Naam is a vegetarian restaurant in Vancouver
My daughter - myera - (20), on the right, took me during my recent flight from America when the planes were grounded and I was unable to get my LA to Toronto flight.
I used a Lomo with 100ASA film and no flash indoors that evening and a blurry result was my source.
If they weren't so excited I would have had a less smudged photo, but actually I like this type of action softened image.

09-22-2001, 12:14 AM
the figures have a nice undulating flow across the page
there is a nice flow of dark blue across the page

09-22-2001, 02:14 AM
you mean you were in Vancouver and did not even phone me? Bad, bad boy!!!!!
This painting is so good that I cannot stay mad at you.....for long.


09-22-2001, 02:43 AM
abstract photographic...I like :)

09-22-2001, 07:39 AM
Rita, we had dinner, sleep and breakfast,
never got to see my brother either, I would
have loved to see you and your stash!

thanks dornberg and Jan-M

09-22-2001, 10:34 AM
I like the image on the left a lot, a lot.

Nathan Reed
09-22-2001, 11:01 AM
Awesome, Jerry. I learn from looking.

09-22-2001, 11:01 AM
an interesting juxtaposition between the two halves of this painting. the darks and detail of the left image against the light infused looseness of the right. and you've managed to maintain the feeling of exhuberence throughout. i like it.

09-22-2001, 11:35 AM
thanks for your thoughts and comments,
I thought you might like to see the source

09-23-2001, 12:33 AM
i like the source

they obviously were wise to you
and didn't let lomo sneak up undetected

09-23-2001, 12:44 AM
Love how you stick with the focus -- no matter where it is..

Certainly picked the colours up! Jerry Colours.. Perfect!

09-23-2001, 05:04 AM
Ooh, yes, DEFINITELY 'Jerry Colours'! I just LOVE their expressions!!!
Whole thing looks like a wonderful fairground I'd love to explore!


09-23-2001, 08:32 AM
* ArtyHelen thanks, the expressions are the result of simplification, except in the photos where it is optics after human interactions. BTW having me there in vancouver was entirely unexpected - I had a total treat too!

* allanom, I reposted the original so it would be more perfect, ahemm betterly imperfectly perfect!

* Impulse, I warned them, and amused them.

* jerryW, thanks for posting the source

* ejfarrae, the operative word, exuberance - yes one blurry and joyously waving, and one managing to hold still for another second.

* Nathan Reed, ditto.

* Cindy, the person on the left, anne held still and focus was accidentally engaged.

some may have to press refresh to get the modified version, I brushed a bit more color and rephotographed it.

09-23-2001, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by jerryW

* jerryW, thanks for posting the source

you gotta stop doing that
it is freaky

09-24-2001, 03:18 AM
This work is only mediocer comparied to what we
see and expect from you.

I'll not pat you on the head for doing work benieth
your standards!


09-24-2001, 07:00 AM
* cleo, the patting is not required,
Could you elaborate on it being mediocre, or explain some part that is not good.
not that I expect to change it or influence you through argument, but I could learn something valuable.

09-24-2001, 10:05 AM
i too am curious

09-24-2001, 10:32 AM
I think that the wide gulf in the degree of "finish" between the two pieces causes an unproductive tension in the viewer.

09-24-2001, 11:26 AM
* CkA, there are roughly the same number of brush strokes in both halfs, and simmilar color densities though the right is honestly brighter, also the source images are not equal but they do connect - physically and thematically (room mates - heart to heart but night and day too).

anyway the search for intellectual clarity, i.e. resolution of objects may be what is causing difficulty in the viewer sub-system which could be more attuned to the totality of the diptych but if the setting is unreachable at least attune to the totality of each half as (which is more intellectual but a good start).

I am attaching the image again below since my website is going down for a brief period as we switch to a new combination of economy and service.

09-24-2001, 02:16 PM
translation please?

i think what you folks mean is that
the left side is out of focus and the
right side is in focus
but both parties are equi-distant
to the observer

ok - fair enough

i assume that the reason is that
they are two separate photos
and jerry paints what he sees

it is a dyptich and it is art

'sall good by me

09-24-2001, 02:52 PM
Originally posted by Impulse

translation please?

it is a dyptich and it is art

There is no doubt of this! :)

A dyptich should work with the pieces together and each piece should work alone.

The pose & the colors are related in the two pieces but not enough to overcome the difference in what you call "focus" and I call "finish".

Finish has nothing to do with the number of brushstrokes but rather the resolution of the image.

I feel that the piece on the right does not work alone because the figure and the background are not resolved (again) to the same degree; in fact, the background is the best part of this piece (interesting & lively detail; varied tones) & does fit in with the piece on the left hand side. (again) You might reply that she is out of focus and the background is in focus and I would say

so what?

I am talking about the painting as a whole there is a disconnect that is not working for me.

In the painting on the left figure and background are equally resolved in detail & tone and make for a pleasing whole.

Now perhaps you might say you have some point with this - to create a feeling of discontent in the viewer or some sort of visual interest which is unexpected. Rather than being interested and surprised by this combination of in-and-out-of-focusness, I simply find it unappealing; distracting to the interest & beauty of the rest of the piece and the piece on the left hand side.

09-24-2001, 03:13 PM
I know that you know I am a "Jerry Fan"...
but, I would never say that I like something that I do not...
I love these...
they are truely smashing!
right through the sound barrior...

and I really love seeing the pictures you work from...
shows where you were coming from
and which direction you took from there...

the spirit of life that comes from these
is moving...I can feel it...
and it is just what I needed these days...

Thanks ever so much!

09-24-2001, 03:18 PM
* cKA, you have a point this melange of focii can be unsettling,
and can lead to displeasure in some psyches.
perhaps it is in keeping with the overall disruption
that this period is having on us when we must
forge on against unresolved forces etc.
Issues are clear and blurred at the same time.
i.e. is it the terrain or is it the terrorist?
I must forgive you your discomfort.
i share it.

* gin, thanks for visiting and reminding me that some viewers are unphased by phase shifts.

09-25-2001, 01:19 PM
I look at it this way for artists...
probably because I do not think linearly...
(and because I express my creativity
through different artistic endevours...)

You are not
the way you do your work...
but rather...
how it is,
that you come through
the work you do...

and Jerry...you shine...


09-25-2001, 07:07 PM
Jerry! why can't I see it?
I feel left out of something good<<<<<<<sulking

09-25-2001, 08:09 PM
cap, look up a few posts, my site is down and I posted it (slightly smaller) using the upload button.

it's just above cindy and impulse here in this thread.

I hope my site is back in a day or two.

09-25-2001, 09:24 PM
Oh! thank you Jerry!
Well worth the wait! outstanding as usual!
Going back for another look, there is always so much to take in.
I love it!

09-29-2001, 09:43 AM
a detail
also I found that the image was flash burned on the right side, and may have been painted over unnecessarily.
next time I do a sideways diptych I will photograph from an above or below angle not a side to side one. before rectifying (layer distor in photoshop for twisted rectangles)

09-29-2001, 09:58 AM

09-29-2001, 10:15 AM
I cannot find the differences between A & B, a bit like reading the Sunday paper puzzle: "Find the hidden changes..." but I LOVE THESE TOTALLY!!! Then, to see the minimal information you had to go on from the blurred photos - I am blown away! There was a recent discussion in Artists' Magazine discussing heated disputes over using photos as a resource... Honestly, Jerry, it looks like you had your canvas and paints on location for these... I think you proved that photos are ok as long as you are a creative genius!!!:clap:

Mud Mixer Linda
09-29-2001, 02:51 PM
Greener, and greener, I'll be a Martian soon.