View Full Version : POLL. What art style(s) do you aim for?

02-11-2006, 10:21 AM
I mean this to be different from Diane's questions ;-) I mean 'painterly' versus 'photorealist', etc. rather than the technical approach you use.

I would say my goals are to paint realistic but not photo- or hyper-realist subjects. In other words, I want them to look like paintings, not photographs, but at the same time I want them to be accurate in terms of proportion and volume. Basically this seems to mean getting things in place and getting the values right. The colors can go much wilder.

I tremendously admire photo/hyper realistic work-- but even if I could do it-- it's not the sort of thing that calls to me artistically. On the other hand, when a painting goes to far the other way-- (intentionally) disregarding volume and placement-- while often very interesting-- I don't feel drawn to that style either.

These are just personal choices-- am trying to put into words what I'm after in a portrait or whatever as my skills (I HOPE) increase. I know many people strive for totally different goals-- true photo-realism, super-expressionism, etc. so curious to hear thoughts. (And if you do it all, pick your favorite for the poll ;-)

02-11-2006, 10:29 AM
Brad, never ever change your style!! Your paintings are so good.
As for style, I am cursed with an illustrative style and long and dream for a realistic style. I fight with myself all the time because my natural style is so at odds with my wished for style.

02-11-2006, 10:42 AM
If I wanted photo-realistic - I have a really good camera. I really prefer a very painterly style and I think it suits me. I can still get likenesses across in pet portraits and my landscapes still give a really good impression of the scene. I'd rather be somewhat unique and painterly so when people look at it, they can say "That HAS to be a Cori Nicholls original!" lol. Not that they're saying it YET...but give them time.

02-11-2006, 10:50 AM

I went for painterly, which I interpreted as realistic.
But I also want to be abble to do photorealistic stuff and inter-act (sp?) with painterly. To create trompe l'oeils, for insteance.



02-11-2006, 10:52 AM
Cori, you are so funny. I just laugh. But, you are so good that your style is perfect for you. It's a lovely style

Brad, Just wanted to say "what a nice thing to have a companion thread to one. Great idea. something people can do with other threads. Like an offshoot to a lively discussion.

02-11-2006, 10:55 AM
I too have a Illustration style, but now I don't fight against it so much any more. Diane, have you ever seen the works of W.T. Benda, Henry Clive or Mabel Rollins Harris? You may find yourself in love with your illustration style again.

02-11-2006, 01:42 PM
Well now I really do have a problem with chosing just one! Sometimes I'm
Photorealist: A Treat for Tiger

Sometimes Impressionist: Serenity

Sometimes Expressionist: Seeing Red

Sometimes Abstract: Hawaiian Rain

But I'm never bored! :)

So how do I vote Brad... :D

02-11-2006, 02:01 PM
Vote early vote often! Seriously, hmmm, if they art gods restricted you to one style for the rest of time it would be...???

02-11-2006, 02:38 PM
Vote early vote often! Seriously, hmmm, if they art gods restricted you to one style for the rest of time it would be...???

Seriously? :eek: I'd shrivel up and die of boredom. About the only style I'll most likely never repeat is the photorealism. I did that painting just to prove to myself that I could, but I really didn't enjoy what I felt was restrictive. Guess that leaves only three identities. LOL


Paula Ford
02-11-2006, 03:38 PM
I went with Painterly (Realistic but still clearly a painting/drawing). That's just how my style turns out.


02-11-2006, 04:01 PM
Peggy, the art gods have accepted your response! Some day I'm going to try to torture myself with something photo-realistic as well just to see if I can carry it off. You obviously proved you could with flying colors.

02-11-2006, 05:35 PM
boredom is a dreaded condition!! lol It something that would indeed make me looney and not just the illlusion of it like now. haha.
I do dream of doing a realism thing but, I think if I succeed in beating away my illustration tendencies I will end up with a painterly style. Hey!!Won't that be perfect for plein air and isn't that sorta like the impressionist?? cool. be like renior, monet, manet, degas, ect. hmmmmmm

02-12-2006, 01:25 AM
I admire the photo realists greatly. It seems to take such talent, such a good eye for accurate values and proportions, but I will never achieve photo realty and find I'm working more towards a looser feel in my work. I guess I work more in an impresionistic representational style, or want to. I have seen some abstracts which I can truly admire, but can't get excited about working in that style. The remarks about a recent piece I've completed were along the lines of boy that's really a riot of color, are you in your Van Gough mood. I hadn't thought of it as at all Van Goughish, just loose and impressionistic but still very true to realty. I don't put too much thought into " what style do I want to achieve when I do this painting" I just respond to the subject and filter it's interpretation through my own emotional experience and hope to tell the story that resonated with me.

Pat Isaac
02-12-2006, 09:38 AM
I guess I am a realist with a painterly style. I did take an oil painting class this fall with a person who does sharp focus realism. I enjoyed the class, but there was not enough time to finish a piece, just time to learn the technique. I know I couldn't work like this, too time consuming and I take long enought to finish a painting as it is. So what about the 7 unfinished pieces? I'm going to finish them up with my OPs. lol


02-12-2006, 02:52 PM
Well yet another realist with a painterly style. One of these days though I swear I'm just going to literally throw some acrylic paint at a canvas and see what sticks!

02-12-2006, 03:26 PM
OK- so I am the only one AGAIN who voted for 'Anything Goes'.... what is it with these POLLS? I am beginning to think they are a set-up.... I am always the ONLY ONE voting for whatever I vote for!!!!! Perhaps that should tell me something..... pondering, whining, and everything else....

02-12-2006, 04:42 PM
That's because I'm the only one voting for the other oddball thing....
let's just face it. we march to a different drummer....uh oh!!!!! I did not vote for Anything Goes. I did Cartoons. I am definitely in the cartoon category...lol.

02-12-2006, 05:04 PM
I didn't see a cartoon catagory- me thinks you made that one up LOL

02-12-2006, 05:23 PM
uuuuhhhhh. I guess.....

02-13-2006, 06:59 AM
I voted painterly. My current goals are to do realistic looking pieces that still have a drawing/painting look to them.

02-13-2006, 09:40 AM
Well I voted for "painterly" though not sure I'm quite ready to call my pictures that. However they surely are not photo-realism. I certainly admire the technical skill it takes to do photo-realism, but it is not a style I am drawn to emulate. It would take far too long for one thing. I can't bear to spend hours and hours or days or weeks on one single picture. I prefer to do something I can do in a single sitting, and maybe coming back again the next day for some fresh-eye touchups.

Actually I think I would really love an impressionistic style. That's probably the style that appeals to me most. To be honest I don't care *all* that much about proportional perfection. Since I draw everything freehand I don't always find it easy to make objects perfectly symmetical, etc. And it doesn't really bother me a bit though I think it sometimes bothers other people. :)

But I do want to paint in a style where people can at least tell what it is I'm trying to paint!

Bill Foehringer
02-13-2006, 10:36 AM
I suppose the way I paint in a general sense is representational but not super realistic art. As for a particular style of painting within that category I'm not aiming for anything in particular just trying to put down what I see. Maybe someday when I'm more in control I may consciously aim toward emphasizing some aspect of how I paint. I'm too much involved in the basics at this time to think about 'style'. I have three to post later from the weekend and you can see what I do currently. BillF

02-13-2006, 01:34 PM
Linda I'd have joined in with you if the darn poll would let me vote twice! As I mentioned earlier, I have a "style of the moment", and it includes all of them! LOL


PS As far as I know, "Painterly" is not a style of painting. It is an appearance of being painted, not photographed or drawn. It can be realistic, impressionistic, expressionistic, cubistic, abstract, etc, but not photographic or drawn.

02-16-2006, 06:02 AM
Peggy, I'm with you -wish the poll would let us vote more than once! I aim to have both impressionistic and expressionistic styles depending on how the wind blows that day. Right now, I'm wishfully thinking I could squeeze my newbie paintings in under impressionistic (that's how I justify my accidents :D).

02-16-2006, 09:42 AM
I think of myself as having this illustrative style but, some have said I have a different style of my own:eek::eek::confused::confused:--whatever that means. So, I guess I really first need to identify what the heck it is aside from struggling:D:D

K Taylor-Green
02-16-2006, 11:22 AM
I voted for painterly. I want my subjects to look realistic, even down to veins in the horses faces and bodies, but not so much that you mistake it for a photograph.
Why? Because I think I'm hardwired for it. When I first started to paint, I wanted photorealistic. That is what I admired and wanted to emulate. As it turns out, I just don't have the patience to achieve it.

Tom Behnke
02-19-2006, 01:24 AM
I have to say realist with painterly. Although, my chief complaint against myself, is I don't think I have a recognizable, 'style'. I do know one thing though, I particularly like when someone asks me what medium the painting is in, and I say 'pastel' and they don't believe it! LOL. I only work in pastel, and it is all I want to work in, but I don't want my work to look like it is pastel.

So is that a style, or a treatable psychiatric condition?

02-19-2006, 02:10 PM
You are not crazy, Tom. I think we all want our paintings to look like something more intense than pastel. Like it was done with acrylic or oil...

02-19-2006, 05:10 PM
You are not crazy, Tom. I think we all want our paintings to look like something more intense than pastel. Like it was done with acrylic or oil...

Not quite everyone Diane:D If I want a painting to look like an oil or acrylic, that's what I'll paint it in. I'm also not sure what you mean by "more intense than pastel"

only work in pastel, and it is all I want to work in, but I don't want my work to look like it is pastel. So is that a style, or a treatable psychiatric condition?
What do you want it to look like then? :D

Don't mind me :evil: I just got finished reading the Male vs Female thread and it seems like we are all guilty of perpetuating the myths/perceptions noted in the last few posts there :mad:

02-19-2006, 08:56 PM
I do know one thing though, I particularly like when someone asks me what medium the painting is in, and I say 'pastel' and they don't believe it! LOL.

Well Tom, as far as I remember if I don't say what medium it is, and I usually show a 4 by 6 inches photo of my works to coleagues and people who are in someway connected to arts, they will say it's acrylics or something else, but not pastel:D



02-19-2006, 10:46 PM
I may have misspoke. or miswrote. What I meant was the preconception of pastels being a sort of washed out look. We want it to look intense enough to show that pastels are not weak or insipid looking. Or even the chalk that people who don't know pastels think they are. That it's pigment and can be beefy and like an acrylic painting...

08-28-2006, 10:14 AM
I think I have a realistic style. I would like to be able to paint in photorealism. I just want to know that I can. I think it takes a lot of patience and focus, and that would definitely be a challenge for me. I also want to successfully pull off an abstract. You know, just turn on some music and start painting. I could never be an impressionist. Every time I try, I keep adding more and more details.

08-28-2006, 01:44 PM
Well, DrBrad, you really got me thinking on this poll. I've always used the word "painterly" somewhat differently than you seemed to define it here. :confused: So, since you got my curiosity going, I've taken a bit of time to explore what is meant by the word. Turns out, we're both right...

Here's how the American Heritage Dictionary defines the term:
paint·er·ly (pān'tər-lē) pronunciation
1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a painter; artistic.
1. Having qualities unique to the art of painting.
2. Of, relating to, or being a style of painting marked by openness of form, with shapes distinguished by variations of color rather than by outline or contour.

painterliness paint'er·li·ness n.
"painterly." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. Answers.com 28 Aug. 2006. http://www.answers.com/topic/painterly

But here's a different definition from wiki:

Painterly is a literal translation of German Mälerisch, hence malerisch, one of the opposed categories popularized by the art historian Heinrich Wolfflin (1864 - 1945) in order to help focus, enrich and standardize the terms being used by art historians of his time to characterize works of art. The opposite character is linear, plastic or formal linear design.[1]

An oil painting is "painterly" when it is obvious that it has been painted with oil paints: when there are visible brush strokes, and a rough impasto surface. Painterly characterizes the work of Pierre Bonnard, Francis Bacon (painter), Gauguin, Vincent Van Gogh, Rembrandt or Renoir. Linear characterizes the work of Vermeer or Ingres...

"Painterly" art makes strong coloristic use of the many visual effects produced by paint on canvas such as chromatic progression, warm and cool tones, complementary and contrasting colors, broken tones, broad brushstrokes, impressionism, impasto and also of the artist's experience in painting. Jackson Pollack's "action paintings" are more "painterly" than Frank Stella's super-graphics.

"painterly." Wikipedia. Wikipedia, 2005. Answers.com 28 Aug. 2006. http://www.answers.com/topic/painterly

So, as you can see there, the term is defined quite broadly by the dictionary, whereas the wiki definition gets into far more specifics that contradict the dictionary definition. Many works that would be "painterly" in terms of the first definition wouldn't be considered so in terms of the second. Confused yet? :lol:

(It's also important to note that none of this has anything to do whatsoever with the quality of the work, as Leonardo da Vinci is not considered painterly by the second definition! And I might also add, that most of the definitions I've read for painterly seem to leave out pastel artists like us...they are focused on the oil painters. :mad: )

Since it's your poll, DrBrad, I used your definition to answer - I chose the second option. But I really should add that I'm new enough at all of this to still be experimenting with a lot of different things - styles, media. I guess I don't really know who I want to be when I grow up yet! :)

08-30-2006, 07:10 AM
My own:D

08-30-2006, 01:11 PM
The style I aim for is FINISHED. I am a seasoned beginner. But honestly I feel like I am in the technician stage, trying to learn how to steer so to speak. I am learning to do respectable shadows, realistic skin, leafy trees, distant hills. I cannot wait until I begin to see what my actual style is. How long do experienced pastellers generally work before their style emerges ??

Mary Brigid
10-24-2006, 04:30 AM
I voted painterly. But as i am new to painting I wish there was another category for me to choose from......" ACCIDENTAL". I never know which way a painting is going to turn out.... I either have happy accidents or disastrous ones :lol:

11-06-2006, 07:38 PM
I don't know i have a special place in my heart for impressionistic work; capturing that one single moment, I also like vibrant fauvre- like colour, though some of my work always winds up looking painterly

11-09-2006, 07:07 AM
I like the naturalism of the late nineteenth century American artists. But that wasn't a choice, so I choose painterly. :)
I'd probably choose Impressionist, if I knew enough about it but it feels like a foreign language to me at this point in my studies.

11-13-2006, 06:33 PM
I aim for anything anyone can recognize!!! Even me.....

11-20-2006, 05:24 PM
I don't aim for a specific style. It just always turns out realistic, can't help it. Even my quick sketches are very detailed...That's the kind of artist I am.

I did try to be more loose, to skip the details and be more non-realistic, but it just doesn't come through, I guess it's just my style.

I've accepted that, in fact I myself am more drawn to realistic/photorealistic work than non-realistic paintings/drawings.

But that's whats charming about art. It all lies in the eyes of the specific beholder...:)

Jo Castillo
11-24-2006, 09:47 PM
My style falls in the painterly. I usually get more detail than I plan on in the first place. Must be 'my style'. Hmmmm.

I do like it all though.


05-01-2007, 10:05 AM
I'm with Mary, I'm Painterly Accidental too. I aim for what ever looks good to me at the time (very scientific):lol: . I work from photos only to reference phyisical details of what I'm painting as far as composition , color and values, they are useally my own. haven't ever tried plein air...after I did it I'd probably bring it home and fix it though:o

05-07-2007, 09:20 PM
I blend painterly and impressionistic styles. I really follow the flow of the painting. While I have an idea of where I want it to go, I believe the process of making art has to be open. I like to leave an impressionistic quality somewhere in my work -- an abstraction that keeps a bit of mystery to the painting.

05-14-2007, 06:55 PM
Abstract all the way, so much fun.

05-16-2007, 01:49 PM
painterly definitely :)

never photorealist but sometimes maybe a bit impressionist and sometimes more expressionist - it depends on the subject and how I want to paint it.

expressionist??? this is about 3ft square

observational but impressionist use of colour and mark

observational, impressionist?

I think my style is 'me' and hard to categorise and the labels don't totally fit

05-16-2007, 03:42 PM
I have a Illustration style,and I hate it,I would love to be photo realists,and would be very happy with painterly style,anything but Illustration style:D

Andi Rebirth
10-10-2007, 06:35 AM
I am still learning this medium, before I did illustrative work. When I wanted t do landscapes. I wanted to catch the mood, color, feelings associated with the scene. Since I do some plein air I love capturing light and shadow so I do love the impressionists, no where near capturing that tho.
I voted painterly. I chose soft pastels because of the color vibrancy I could see others achieved in this medium.
I am still in the learning stages but every once and a while I will do something where I catch the moment and I feel a rush of joy.
If I am in a slump I just take color and go with form on small paper. It frees my soul if I am having a block. I love pastels, I can paint for hours and the time flies, my spirit is calmed, my pains are forgotten. Isn't it wonderful to have that in our lives. It is healing.

10-20-2007, 03:29 AM
Don't know why this is interesting, but it cought my attention. I voted photo-realistic. Never thought I'd say that now, but I did. Painting hyper-realism is not the same as taking a photo, btw....:D. I aim for hyper realism....but of course I never achieve it....doesn't hurt to aim highly though :D D:
I would love to paint more loose and painterly. But I cannot. I think I have to go through this 'phase' of aiming for realism before I know where I can 'leave things out' and make things more 'abstract' and loose.

10-25-2007, 12:46 PM
There's a certain point where if you were to glance at the painting you'd think at first it was a photograph, but if you look at it for more than a moment it's obvious that it's painted. That's what I'm going for.

I admire the technical skill it takes to do photorealism, but in the end, why not just hang the photo on the wall if they look identical? Just my opinion of the result, like I said, I admire the patience and skill of artists who can do that.

12-27-2007, 12:49 PM
I didn't vote because I actually hate being labeled as a "photorealist" I just paint how I see things and that's how they turn out. Like others here I don't try to do this... it just happens. I also have tried loosening up and painting abstract and I "can't" do it... at least not yet. My painterly attempts end up looking like photorealism no mater how hard I try. I love the realist style and gravitate towards those kind of paintings first, but I also love the looser style like Karin Jurick. Boy I'd love to paint like her. But I don't think its going to really happen. Lately I've been feeling drawn to mixed media, phototransfers in art and more of a wild "anything goes" style... but I'm struggling with doing my first one as I am finding Im' not good at spontenaiety... I am a planner. lol.

12-28-2007, 12:51 PM
I voted for Impressionist, but my work falls somewhere inbetween
Painterly Style, realist and Impressionist, not the extremes of either.
You definitely know what it is I'm painting, but I'm very fascinated with the play of light, color and value. Also, I play fast and free with my references, often combining several photos, or experiences in a final piece. As I paint, I'm definitely thinking in terms of shapes of color.:wave:

01-08-2008, 04:08 PM
I voted photo or should I say hyper realistic, that is what I hope to be some day but I am more painterly right now.

01-09-2008, 03:42 AM
I don't know. I never really thought about it. but anything goes except for photo realisim. I love the work, It amazes me that someone can do such a work of art that looks so real you almost have to touch it and sometimes want to or have to if permitted , just to make sure it's not a photo or real. I saw and read in the artist mag. once that and artist did a bullintin board hung it in the gallery with all the great paintings, everyone just looked at it then walked by confused as to why it would be there, then one patren asked why they had a bulletin board hanging with all these wonderful works of art. The curator told them it was a work of art. They had to go back and check it and to there amazement it was a drawing so real you had to touch it to be sure.

WC Lee
04-01-2008, 09:42 AM
I voted painterly but my style is more toward illustrative realism. Though I am amazed at some of the photo-realism artwork, not only the end results, but also the number of hours that is put into them.

04-01-2008, 05:31 PM
Painterly. Realistic yes, but you can tell it's a piece of artwork. I have done a few photorealistic drawings. It was a fun exercise and quite time consuming, but I also found it to be a bit cold...sterile. It's a matter of personal taste, I know, and it certainly is impressive to see a great example of photorealism, but 'impressive' doesn't necessarily spark an emotional response. Classical Realism is my favorite genre of art and that is really what I aim for.

05-03-2008, 10:32 AM
i voted "expressionist" because that means for me the greatest individual developement.
However I am not sure if I really can be labelled there...

06-05-2008, 11:48 PM
I voted painterly....
I entered my avatar into a local show, and they hung, and judged it in the photography section. No one caught it until I stopped by to see the winners and asked why my pastel was hanging over in the photography area. It was clearly labeled PASTEL.


06-09-2008, 01:36 PM
I have a passion for detail. I don't care for the term "photo-realist" as I believe there is no comparison between an exquisitely rendered painting and a photograph.

08-10-2008, 05:53 AM
I voted for painterly, but I think the word "soft-realism" (after Ann Kullberg CP-book) fits much better for what I want to achieve.

Of course I want to paint the correct proportions, values etc... but I don't want to achieve a photo-realism.
When I look at photos I (mostly) can't dream - but if I look at a nice painting I can let me fall into the scene and dream and let my thoughts flow.

Adele O
08-14-2008, 09:17 AM
I believe that there are as many styles of art as there are artists. If I had to aim for one of the above styles, it would be hyper-realism, although my results don't always turn out as such.
I am obsessive-compulsive, and paying attention to small details in my paintings is very therapeutic for me. The harder I try to loosen my style, the more I get dragged back into the perfectionest ring.
This is why it bothers me a little when people say, "the more expressionistic or abstract the style, the more personality and character the artist is pouring into their work."
I feel that paying attention to small details and being exacting is my personality (as boring as it may seem) and yeah...it's bleeding through my work just as your personalities are bleeding through yours.
I have an appreciation for all art. I think us artists are pretty brave for communicating what is in our hearts and minds the way we do, and I don't think that we should be confined to catagories.
Just my opinion.

Maggie P
08-14-2008, 01:05 PM
I'm another painterly/realistic. My goal is to be realistic enough you never question what it is, but to be painterly enough it's not mistaken for a photograph.

I admire many other styles but this is how I like to paint.

09-10-2008, 05:39 AM
I wouldn't say there are as many styles as there are painters/artists, but I do believe there might be as many interpretations of any particular style as there are artists - probably! I think I voted for the wrong one in fact, the penalties of old eyes!

I like the 'Can see what it is, but it's obviously a painting'... :)

Happy stylizing folks :thumbsup:

John :wave:

09-10-2008, 05:43 AM
I'm another painterly/realistic. My goal is to be realistic enough you never question what it is, but to be painterly enough it's not mistaken for a photograph.

I admire many other styles but this is how I like to paint.


I peeked at your site. I don't think you have anything to worry about at all. I like your style, and that's for sure!

Lovely work.
Carry on enjoying your art.


John :thumbsup:

11-17-2008, 09:30 PM
I have not yet found my "style", I am so busy learning technique and applying everything that I am learning to each painting, I have found that each work of art is totally different. BUT, I have an appreciation for Impressionist and Expressionist. There is talent in every style and the one common denominator is a good balance in "Elements of Art"
(basic visual symbols found in the work such as lines, shape, form, space, point, light, motion, direction, scale, dimension, texture and color).

11-19-2008, 04:02 AM
I went with Painterly before reading down to how popular that is! I've done hyper-realistic, mostly in colored pencils but sometimes in watercolor or oils. I've done Impressionism occasionally and two or three times done a bunch of Abstracts for a challenge.

What I'm drifting toward more and more is Painterly though. I'm getting more economical in my rendering. A couple of years of studying Asian painting styles broke me out of the hyperdetail mold and showed me I could convey the essentials of a scene with less detail. Now I'm building up to richness again in a different way, especially with oil pastels and pastels.

Peggy, I love your hyper-realistic cat, the Treat for Tiger is a wonderful painting. Get me right in the heart, why don't you? Tiger's a sweetie and that is a cool painting. They take a lot of work but it's great when they come out that well.

I'll probably never abandon hyper-realism completely. There are some things I want to do that I can't do yet and won't be able to do until I've gotten a lot farther -- and that would be to succeed in hyper-realism with completely imaginary subjects, so that you can't tell I did not have a photo reference for my gryphon. I'll need a lot more lion and eagle paintings to get that just right, but I've seen it from some artists I admire.

I swing back and forth between wanting to work fast and loose or slow and careful, and every time I get better at the other from practicing its opposite. I do not think I could settle down to just one style unless you call "representational art" that. Personal taste, I do prefer that to nonrepresentational art. I grew up on illustrators I admired and a big root of my drawing and painting is to someday be able to paint the beings and creatures and alien planets I create in my stories and novels.

Not anyone else's. I don't want to become an illustrator. I can enjoy fine art and I'm seeing fine art very differently now. It's more fun than it ever was. But there's an internal boundary about illustrating someone else's story -- a last trace of envy. It could easily vanish when I get my novels pro-published and it's no threat to my writer-identity to dash off a cover or illo for a friend.

03-10-2009, 08:39 PM
I strive for realism but have a ways to go before it's mastered like photo-realistic.
But I have fun trying ;)

03-10-2009, 09:48 PM
There are many paintings that appear very realistic from a distance but upon truly examining them....there is just enough...a certain economy to them. Get up close it's about values, design, composition, colour theory. Everything is placed just so, treated just so. Not loose, not painterly, not about brushwork. What style is this because that is the style I would vote for.

03-11-2009, 02:28 PM
There are many paintings that appear very realistic from a distance but upon truly examining them....there is just enough...a certain economy to them. Get up close it's about values, design, composition, colour theory. Everything is placed just so, treated just so. Not loose, not painterly, not about brushwork. What style is this because that is the style I would vote for.
Sounds impressionist to me.

03-13-2009, 08:33 PM
Impressionism. Ok, I did a search to see what would pop up and found, by Wikipedia's definition, my idea of impressionism being very loose was incorrect.

Before looking it up I would have described the painting below as realistic but painterly. This impressionistic work is entitled "Paysage au bord du Lez", 1870, oil on canvas by the artist Frederic Bazille.

Now I know how to cast my vote. Thanks Barry.