PDA

View Full Version : A Friend and Her Occupation


greensyster
12-26-2008, 02:10 AM
MY IMAGE(S):
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Dec-2008/135872-thetomatogrower_wc.jpg


GENERAL INFORMATION:
Title: A Friend and Her Occupation
Year Created:
Medium: Oil
Surface: Linen
Dimension: 16 x 12
Allow digital alterations?: Yes!

MY COMMENTS:
I have been doing this portrait as a 'singalong' with Tali's WIP thread but she is so slow I couldn't wait and have I finished mine today. Not comfortable posting the lady's photo here as I only asked for permission to post it on my web site so just trust me - this looks a lot like her (would I lie for goodness sake!)

MY QUESTIONS FOR THE GROUP:
Every constructive criticism aspect is most welcome. Thank you in advance.

tgsloth
12-26-2008, 08:06 AM
Excellent in terms of brushstrokes, likeness, palette and most everything. I'd suggest, though, that the rather hard edge between the hair and bg could be softened in places to gain an improvement.

MRSBB
12-26-2008, 12:04 PM
Hi Marie. Looks like you have been busy over the Holidays. I think your friend will be happy with the portrait. Nice job on capturing the likeness. My only nit would be the white/gray line on her neck. It doesn't seem to tie into anything and is a bit distracting. I went and checked out your web site and that is really neat, of course I am a big fan of your art. I also checked out the links and there is a lot of neat things there to explore. Keep having fun...........Lenore

Corby
12-26-2008, 12:08 PM
Hi Greensys. This is nice. During the 30's and 40's there were the most beautiful works of art on the end of crates of fruit here in this country, a great deal of it picturing product and pretty lady. This reminds me of that. The labels are now collectible.

Ronni
12-26-2008, 02:33 PM
I like a lot the eyes...I see probs. with the nose. it is not cymetric enough, and somehow doesn't conect so well to the cheeks; the nostrills look a bit "flying" to left, because the part under them looks so deep and dark.
the lines dividing cheeks from mouth are very uncymetric, and not young enough to this pretty lady. Plz. work a bit further, it can be fixed to better.

Busik12
12-26-2008, 03:03 PM
Greensyster,

This looks like a fully frontal portrait to me, but the angles of the features do not match up. The eyes and the lips (maybe some other parts that I am forgetting) are angled differently. As previously stated, the nose is "flying" to the left, but the rest of the features are frontal. Also, her mouth and teeth make her look somewhat disgusted, though I am fairly confident that you are going for a smiling look.

The bigger problems that I see with this painting are not with the actual head, but with the values and colors. The head and hair look like they were pretty much painted with one color, as are the leaves, the green apples, the red apples, and the background. I think that you would have been able to get away with this if had more value contrasts, but you do not. It is rare that a painting can work without either value contrasts or color contrasts, and I can only think of one prominent example (Ad Reinhardt). Your painting is too much in the middle in both the head and the foilage. You have to create visual interest within the painting, but as of right now, it is a woman paired with foilage and very little contrast in any sense. Maybe the apples can do something interesting in the left. Maybe the pairing of the lady and the foilage can be more significant and interesting. It's up to you.

greensyster
12-26-2008, 04:36 PM
Excellent in terms of brushstrokes, likeness, palette and most everything. I'd suggest, though, that the rather hard edge between the hair and bg could be softened in places to gain an improvement.

TG - Thanks - I see straightaway what you mean about the hair - howda miss dat!!! ggggrrrrr. Will fix this morning.

greensyster
12-26-2008, 04:51 PM
Lenore - :) I love it when you post dear thing! Yes - the sapphire blue streak just landed there and in a moment of abstraction I thought to leave it but can whip it off - will look at that this morning when fixing the hair. Glad you enjoyed my site.

Corby - I have seen those from the days them graphic art was done by artists - quite forgot about them though - this lady is an hydroponic farmer and grows THE BEST tomatoes.

Ronni - Thank you for your thoughts. I didn't see a hit on my server from your neck of the woods last night so I guess you didn't see an actual photograph of the lady. In truth this lady (who is of my age) has the normal non-symmetrical face but we all love it! :lol:

greensyster
12-26-2008, 05:35 PM
Sundu - I see you still haven't found time to fill in your profile on WC! so I guess I can only add agreement with your last comment. :)

Spyderbabe
12-26-2008, 08:43 PM
Marie - I love all the information you give us about the subject in your rendering.... you have a great approach to portraits. Your friend should be thrilled with this.
I really have no crits .... ;-) ok maybe one.. the very dark value and harsh line of her neck (on the viewers right) against the white shirt is demanding a lot of attention.

greensyster
12-26-2008, 11:27 PM
Spyderbabe - Kathleen, I see wht you mean there; I think the inside collar should be darker coming out. I have done the fixes Bob & Lenore recommended and the result is improvement (but dont go telling them! :) ) Will try valuing down the collar. Thanks for that input, appreciated.

Caroline P
12-27-2008, 04:38 AM
I like the the fact that her features are a bit "off", I think that the wonderfull brush work and painterly feel to it, makes it acceptable for features to be slightly out!!

billmahler
12-27-2008, 12:44 PM
There's a lot of expression and feeling here and that's why we do portraits.
Nicely done.

Becky Foster
12-27-2008, 01:20 PM
This looks like a fully frontal portrait to me, but the angles of the features do not match up. The eyes and the lips (maybe some other parts that I am forgetting) are angled differently. As previously stated, the nose is "flying" to the left, but the rest of the features are frontal.

I agree with Sundu. I checked out the photo on your site and she's got her head tipped back pretty far. I think in adjusting her face to a more frontal position some of the features could have used a bit more tweaking - like her chin wouldn't look so long if her head wasn't tipped back and the lines of her nose and the shape of her eyes would have to be adjusted, too.

I love the colors and sculpted look of her skin - you did a great job with that. And her eyes are very expressive. I think the overall composition is creative but I think the balance is off because of the greenish background above - I'd like to see something busier or warmer or darker maybe up there.

I think you've done a great job of capturing her essence! Take care,
Becky

gaensanger
12-27-2008, 06:58 PM
Greensyster, these colours have a touch of watercolour, they are that light! It's beautiful, especially her green eyes!

Maybe the nose needs some work. One of the nostrils and the darker area on the left side of the nose ...

Greetings and happy new year from very cold Austria!

greensyster
12-27-2008, 07:45 PM
Caroline - Thank you. I am with you on this - She has, like almost all of us, assymetric features and I took them the step, I as the painter, wanted to go to present her under the glare of the bright sunshine thru the hydroponics net roof. I think if folk want a photo replication let them buy a camera ! :lol: :lol:

Bill - Hopefully I am getting better? I think this is my 6th. By no means 'there' yet but I give it my best shot and your comment makes me feel great cos that is much of what I am after. And she loves it -wants to rip it off the wall before it's dry! :)

Becky - Thanks for all the comment - appreciated. And especially the last as that is my holy grail in portraiture - capturing the 'essence'.

Alfred - Thank you for taking the time to look and post your comment - her nose is worrying but as well as sketches I took about 26 photos all angles and it's really a good presenting. Anyway - just looking at the image should warm you up - it was about 34C in the hydro tents that day! :lol:

Gemini IX
12-28-2008, 05:33 AM
Hello, Another job well done! well, to be honest EXCELLENT!!! She is very pretty! I love the expression on her face, very becoming and friendly. The tomatoes are awesome!!!:thumbsup:

laudesan
12-28-2008, 05:35 AM
Greensyster,

This looks like a fully frontal portrait to me, but the angles of the features do not match up. The eyes and the lips (maybe some other parts that I am forgetting) are angled differently. As previously stated, the nose is "flying" to the left, but the rest of the features are frontal. Also, her mouth and teeth make her look somewhat disgusted, though I am fairly confident that you are going for a smiling look.

The bigger problems that I see with this painting are not with the actual head, but with the values and colors. The head and hair look like they were pretty much painted with one color, as are the leaves, the green apples, the red apples, and the background. I think that you would have been able to get away with this if had more value contrasts, but you do not. It is rare that a painting can work without either value contrasts or color contrasts, and I can only think of one prominent example (Ad Reinhardt). Your painting is too much in the middle in both the head and the foilage. You have to create visual interest within the painting, but as of right now, it is a woman paired with foilage and very little contrast in any sense. Maybe the apples can do something interesting in the left. Maybe the pairing of the lady and the foilage can be more significant and interesting. It's up to you.

Excellent critique, I agree wholeheartedly.

I also went to your website, greensyster, and put my mouse over the portrait to see the photo underneath. Your painting looks nothing like the model. You have painted a picture, not a portrait. I looked at the other portraits you have posted there, and see the same problem there too. None of them look like a portrait of the photo you are trying to depict. You should go to drawing classes, life drawing classes would be a good start, to learn how to draw a portrait before attempting to paint it. One can not pass off bad drawing skills as artistic licence in portraiture.

Sundu - I see you still haven't found time to fill in your profile on WC! so I guess I can only add agreement with your last comment. :) What difference does it make, if one fills in their profile or not, to ones critique?

JJ

Busik12
12-28-2008, 12:22 PM
Thank you, Laudesan.

I was also interested to see how Greensyster would react to my critique, and I am disappointed that it was taken in such a negative way. The fact that my WC! profile was, for whatever irrational reason, brought into the discussion with no mention of what I said shows just that. I'd like to remind everyone, and this is a problem that I've always seen here, that this is a critique forum. To be quite honest, it would benefit everyone if "good job" comments were not allowed on here. Why bring a work for critique if you would react in such a way to honest criticism? I'd also like to ask why everyone is in the habit of giving such soft critiques of everyone's work? To be honest, we are all (mostly) rather mediocre artists. The work on this thread is nothing above mediocre. My work is rather mediocre as well. We do not paint like Rembrandt, and probably never will. If we do not realize this, we do not see our work for what it is. How can you strive for improvement if you are blind to what you actually make? I hope that this is taken for what it is, which is honest criticism of the work and this site.

Dana Design
12-28-2008, 12:46 PM
I like this very much! Shows a happy disposition within her workplace. Very well painted. Hope she loves it as well.

I recognized what you're saying when you want to depict an essence rather than a photographic likeness. I agree and try to do the same with my work. I just completed a commission that was a royal bear! I'd finished it some weeks ago and was pleased but when the commissioner saw it (the husband), he wanted an almost photographic likeness and sat for 2 hrs in front of the painting changing things, all sorts of things from the color of the dress to the hair, head tilt, eye colors, lips, on and on. I wanted to tear my hair out. Like you, I wanted to say...you have the photo so keep it, blow it up and frame it. Plus the fact that the photo was a glam shot with most of it black!

So, I'd much rather paint that essence that I saw on your website, greensyster. You have, indeed, captured it in each one of your portraits. No, they're not identical photocopies, they're portraits! Painted portraits.

Spyderbabe
12-28-2008, 01:25 PM
The difference in approach is academic. Are you striving for a photographic image or are you trying to create a image that captures the essence of the subject? Within each we follow the basic rules.

I would side with Robert Henri... "Rather paint the flying spirit of the bird than its feathers."

It would be beneficial for everyone to re-read the sticky at the top of the OCF on HOW to give a critique.

ejtupi
12-28-2008, 03:23 PM
I have to agree with Sundu here to some extent (except the part about mediocre painters....): What's the point of posting something if you plan to argue that any areas of suggested improvement are irrelevant and are covered under "artistic license"?

Maybe the Gallery would be the better place to post a piece if only one of the C's in C&C is desired? (This is a general observation, not a specific reference to greensyster.)

LynnDigby
12-28-2008, 05:18 PM
I think when we post our work here, we are in a way, baring our souls. While we will always like to hear that people like it, sometimes the most in depth critiques might involve more blunt and brutal sounding suggestions or observations.

This is difficult to hear, but it's also a fabulous (and free!) way to get feedback from strangers who have looked and taken the time to give you their honest opinions.

You don't have to agree.

But if they seem to have 'missed your point' I think it's a good time to ask why. How could you have made your piece more effective?

As far as everyone who posts here being mediocre, well, that too is a subjective opinion. Everyone who paints is always learning with each piece they make. Every painter I know of has 'dogs' that are not good for much except learning what not to do next time! But we keep making these dratted things, not because we think we are geniuses, but because we have to keep at it. The payoff is in both the making and the occasional 'winner.'

Anyway, it's good that there are 3 choices here for people who would like to show their work to others. Structured Critique(when it allows posts!) for an in depth critique, Open Critique for a more moderate one, and the Galleria where people can post their works and NOT get suggestions back.

Something for everyone.

In the case of this portrait, I find the overall feeling to be light and loose. I like the mid values, but agree that a more vivid impact would be possible with a wider range.

I also agree this is not a close likeness, having seen the mouseover ref on your website. This may or may not be relevant. I have painted MANY portraits of people that aren't even close to their real appearance, but these are for my personal body of work, not for a commission. I have turned black haired girls blonde, made plump people thin as a rail, and changed features on a whim, and I think this IS license you don't need to justify.

But if a likeness is your aim, then I would suggest a few tweaks to help get you there. Her eyes are more closely spaced, and her nose is larger, particularly the bottom. I think some attention to the chin width might help, too. She has a lovely smile - open and kind. I think you can catch that, and still not prettify her face. It is a face full of sunny character.

Someone suggested that the angle has changed from the ref to the painting. She IS tilted back in the photo, which throws the features into a different dynamic. Your best bet is to take measurements related to a feature width..say, the nose is 'X' eye-widths long, for example. Then everything will relate? If a close likeness is needed, you just can't change the basic shapes of features. Even a slight nuance of difference will get you a different person! It's hard at first to get this, but depending on your needs, it's a valuable tool to have IF you need a close likeness. I have even told students to draw the preliminary sketch from a photo UPSIDE DOWN to get these very subtle shape and value relationships down pat before painting.

I think this piece has some really nice things going for it, overall.

greensyster
12-28-2008, 05:58 PM
Hello, Another job well done! well, to be honest EXCELLENT!!! She is very pretty! I love the expression on her face, very becoming and friendly. The tomatoes are awesome!!!:thumbsup:


Ian - thank goodness you posted before the onslaught! :) Thank you - you have as they say 'girded my loins!'

greensyster
12-28-2008, 06:08 PM
Excellent critique, I agree wholeheartedly.

I also went to your website, greensyster, and put my mouse over the portrait to see the photo underneath. Your painting looks nothing like the model. You have painted a picture, not a portrait. I looked at the other portraits you have posted there, and see the same problem there too. None of them look like a portrait of the photo you are trying to depict. You should go to drawing classes, life drawing classes would be a good start, to learn how to draw a portrait before attempting to paint it. One can not pass off bad drawing skills as artistic licence in portraiture.

What difference does it make, if one fills in their profile or not, to ones critique?

JJ

First to answer the easy question - The difference of a completed profile or not is multifold to me

A. It means the person asking for a critique is prepared to take the time to provide some information about themselves against the image they are posting - a courtesy you might say.

B. As with Ronni's critique above, I saw she had made it without looking at the photo because there was no hit on my site from her region. I couldn't tell with Sundu as didn't know where he came from maybe Brisbane maybe Petra.

C. When no profile is supplied it is possible altho highly unlikely in the case of Sundu I am sure, that the poster has multiple logins as multiple email addressees are free and easy to come by, and that can lead to some annoying threads.

An now to the more complex - your critique of my body of work in portraiture. I know you are offering these views with a good and open mind to assist me in my quest to became a great painter and I thank you.

greensyster
12-28-2008, 06:10 PM
Thank you, Laudesan.

The fact that my WC! profile was, for whatever irrational reason, brought into the discussion with no mention of what I said shows just that.

Please see the rational reasons in the above post to JJ.

greensyster
12-28-2008, 06:16 PM
I like this very much! Shows a happy disposition within her workplace. Very well painted. Hope she loves it as well.

I recognized what you're saying when you want to depict an essence rather than a photographic likeness. I agree and try to do the same with my work. I just completed a commission that was a royal bear! I'd finished it some weeks ago and was pleased but when the commissioner saw it (the husband), he wanted an almost photographic likeness and sat for 2 hrs in front of the painting changing things, all sorts of things from the color of the dress to the hair, head tilt, eye colors, lips, on and on. I wanted to tear my hair out. Like you, I wanted to say...you have the photo so keep it, blow it up and frame it. Plus the fact that the photo was a glam shot with most of it black!

So, I'd much rather paint that essence that I saw on your website, greensyster. You have, indeed, captured it in each one of your portraits. No, they're not identical photocopies, they're portraits! Painted portraits.

Dana - thank you for your observations - I never seem to be able to express what I am trying to achieve but you have far better than I. I haven't to date actually painted a photograph just used as a guide.

Probably I should take the easy route and not put a photo with my painting I see that is the more normal route. But I am confident that as I get better at this painting lark through the constructive crits received on WC! I will improve.

greensyster
12-28-2008, 06:22 PM
The difference in approach is academic. Are you striving for a photographic image or are you trying to create a image that captures the essence of the subject? Within each we follow the basic rules.

I would side with Robert Henri... "Rather paint the flying spirit of the bird than its feathers."

It would be beneficial for everyone to re-read the sticky at the top of the OCF on HOW to give a critique.

Spyderbabe - Good advise - both the giving of and the receiving. For myself I think one can read and objectively assess all constructive critisism but that doesn't mean one has to adopt it slavishly. For example, TG who is one of the best and most even handed critics gave me some advice about a nymphae I had painted. Technically he was right BUT it wasn't what I, as the painter, wanted to convey so I didn't carry out his suggestion. As Sundu rightly said - It is up to me.

greensyster
12-28-2008, 06:31 PM
Lynn - you never give a critique that isn't absolutely worthwhile and I thank you for this one also.

tdog49
12-29-2008, 02:24 AM
btw,


nice tomatoes

greensyster
12-29-2008, 02:47 AM
'Bout time the tomatoes got a look in! LOL Thank you for that, tdog49

tdog49
12-29-2008, 03:04 AM
Yeah,

well....

I prefer peaches. ;)

Spyderbabe
12-29-2008, 09:44 AM
NOTE - I have removed a few posts as they do not forward the discussion of the art.
Please focus your attention on the image that has been posted for critique.
We will not tolerate sniping or back and forth arguments and attacks.
Kathleen

Dana Design
12-29-2008, 12:01 PM
NOTE - I have removed a few posts as they do not forward the discussion of the art.
Please focus your attention on the image that has been posted for critique.
We will not tolerate sniping or back and forth arguments and attacks.
Kathleen


I second that!


Anyway, it's good that there are 3 choices here for people who would like to show their work to others. Structured Critique(when it allows posts!) for an in depth critique, Open Critique for a more moderate one, and the Galleria where people can post their works and NOT get suggestions back.

To further elucidate this statement from Lynn...
Structured Critique Forum: No kudos are allowed. Critiques only.
Open Critique Forum: Critiques and kudos allowed.
Gallery Forum: No critiques allowed at all. It's mainly show and tell.

Busik12
12-29-2008, 02:45 PM
Sundu (you can click on my name and select "See all threads...")
Brooklyn, NY
21
Fine arts student

First and foremost, I'd like to make clear that when I use the term "mediocre," I am comparing us all to the greatest painters who ever lived, the painters whose level of artistry we are all (hopefully) striving for. This is not a term that is meant to offend anyone, but to make us understand that harsh critiques are bound to come our way, since there is always something greater to struggle for, as we all have a long way to go. Secondly, this label that I apply to most painters on this site, and to most artists in the world (poets, musicians, sculptors, painters, etc.), is not at all a subjective one. There are certain aspects to art that are subjective, but if it is my "opinion" that I am a better painter than Rembrandt, Delacroix, or Kandinsky, that enters the realm of artistic delusion. Thus, when I judge other artists as mediocre, I am looking at them in the context of all great art, the only true context by which to judge oneself so that one does not delude him/herself into believing that one is better than he/she really is (and to have a standard to try to live up to). Please note that I did not start my critique calling anyone "mediocre." I simply gave a harsh but honest critique of a posted work, but when it was dismissed by the recipient, I felt that an explanation of its harshness was due.

Greensyster, this is not at all an attack on you, though I understand that these strong opinions may be perceived as such. A great painting must be creative. It is not a repetition of the past, nor is it a mundane depiction, with mundane colors, values, and imagery. Imagine a contemporary poem, for example (in my opinion, the highest form of writing and the closest form of writing to painting), that uses phrases, etc. found in Shakespeare's poems, not as an interesting reference to the past master, but to simply use them because they are "good phases." "He wears his heart on his sleeve," "speak daggers," "crocodile's tears" -- pretty good and creative for the time, but if you use them now, just as they are in their original form, they are clichés of the highest sort. I see your painting in the same way. I see no attempt to depict something new or interesting, just a portrait of a woman with some leaves and apples on the left. If you wanted to depict a woman and her occupation, what an easy way out to put her in a frontal pose with some foliage to the left! And then throw in a light green background just for the sake of a background! Isn't there a more interesting, subtle, and artistic way of doing this? You need to look for creative solutions to visual problems, not mere depictions. This painting is just fine if you simply wish to illustrate your friend as a gardener, etc., -- it does the job -- but it stays in that realm with no hopes of leaving it. If this is your only aim, do not hope that it is good art in the context of good, creative, and interesting art. But if you wish to create work that is truly moving and memorable, you must go beyond the mundane.

Gemini IX
12-30-2008, 04:44 PM
This is a very fine painting!By a very fine Artist and very much a very fine Lady! I rest my case!:)

greensyster
12-31-2008, 01:14 AM
Ian - Shucks kiddo - I bet you are only saying that cos it's true! :lol: :lol: Thank you.

greensyster
12-31-2008, 01:19 AM
Sundu - Thanks for your post. I have been painting now for 13 months and am most prepared to be doing my 'homework' (crawling before I walk then walking before I run and maybe fly) and accepting constructive c&c on them without expectation of masterpieces - yet! But hang about kid, you never know what the old lady might pull out of the bag! :) So let's be generous and let this graciously rest. Happy New Year in New York to you.

janemoth
12-31-2008, 01:49 AM
Sundu - Thanks for your post. I have been painting now for 13 months and am most prepared to be doing my 'homework' (crawling before I walk then walking before I run and maybe fly) and accepting constructive c&c on them without expectation of masterpieces - yet! But hang about kid, you never know what the old lady might pull out of the bag! :) So let's be generous and let this graciously rest. Happy New Year in New York to you.

I saw so many older people in art school (older than me @20) paint and paint and never get any better, and I see people on here take one washed-out, boring ass pic of their new kid and break out the portrait pink, making one hard-edged full frontal value anemic amateur mess. That you are learning about drawing, that things can be proportional without being a slave to the photograph, that you have an innate sense of what to edit, that you consider the whole space, means that you have missed your calling in life if you are just getting started--to be a brilliant artist. And so what, she grows tomatos and you painted her with tomatos. Manet was a painter and he painted himself with a paintbrush. Actually I see from your website you had a career in science so that was your calling and you had something far more important to do than go to art school (which frankly would accept someone in a coma) but I predict many sales, shows, and awards in your future.

greensyster
12-31-2008, 01:58 AM
Lauren - you darling thing - can I immediately adopt you :lol: :lol: I love what you see in my future and believe me, as always, I have the greatest expectations of myself too! Your post has made me extraordinarily happy cos the gulf of 4 decades+ is swept away by your perception. :clap:

Busik12
12-31-2008, 02:20 AM
Happy New Year to you as well!

Busik12
12-31-2008, 02:32 AM
And so what, she grows tomatos and you painted her with tomatos. Manet was a painter and he painted himself with a paintbrush.

If you show me this painting, we can gladly discuss the specific merits of this work and how it relates to Greensyster's portrait.

kevinwueste
12-31-2008, 02:12 PM
A thought - I do think it's reasonable that someone who is providing a critique should readily and easily share their work, (e.g., their level of skill and ability) so the person being critiqued can determine - sort-of: 'ok, this person has knowledge that will push me forward. I have not posted anything yet for review on WC but hope to soon - even just to share my work but I am sure to always include a link to my hideous blog so people can make such a determination as I mention above... I have done several critiques - but only when I thought it would be useful to the artist/student and could show them what I have learned in my Academic, directed art program. I have only been painting 8 months so the time thing is useful but the quality of learning is also important..

to add one notion about when it's apropos to critique: anytime I see, regardless of post/thread location, "C and C's" welcome - I feel it's fine to dive in and share!

- a mediocre art student - kevin

Dana Design
12-31-2008, 02:47 PM
Kevin, you've given me some good and much needed advice. Your work is very accomplished for only having painted for 8 months! Eight months!

Your critiques are welcomed.

Spyderbabe
12-31-2008, 08:18 PM
Kevin - I visited your blog and you are anything but mediocre. Please post here- I look forward to it.
Kathleen

greensyster
12-31-2008, 09:45 PM
Nah - make him use his own thread, I say! There has been enough hi-jacking! :lol: :lol: :lol:

atelier_m
01-02-2009, 09:51 PM
Well, Marie ... I always take the time to look at any of your threads because I enjoy your paintings. They have freshness and personality. There is always something luscious about the paint quality. There has been a lot of talk in this thread about drawing. I am a big fan of drawing and take every opportunity to improve my own. The better an artist can draw the easier it is to accomplish their vision. But, there is nothing sacred about drawing something exactly the way it looks. What is sacred is accomplishing the task you set for yourself. The essence is indeed the goal.

All of your paintings have a style and genuiness unusual to find in someone who has painted the short time that you have. That tells me that you have bright future in front of you. You're a natural.

Mary :thumbsup:

greensyster
01-02-2009, 10:35 PM
Ah Mary - what a generous soul you are! For me it is real joy to read your comments, not from a vanity aspect, but because it tells me I may be getting closer to the elements in my personal painting goal. Thank you. :)