View Full Version : Redlands

01-27-2000, 02:28 PM
I want to try this painting again. Any ideas out there that would make it better will be appreciated. Thanks, Phy llis

01-27-2000, 02:30 PM
woops...I forgot the painting.


The computer color is not as vibrant as my original and it seems to have faded out some what, but the general idea is there. My main question is about the space of the foreground traveling so high in the painting. I really did want that foreground to be the eye catcher, but I don't want you to stay there. What do you think?

[This message has been edited by llis (edited January 27, 2000).]

01-27-2000, 03:39 PM
lot's o concern on these boards about eye movement. where it moves, where it stops, etc. what's funny is,,,,,,,everyone still has a different opinion. don't worry about it. my eye doesn't do anything but look at the painting. when you say you want to emphasizes the background, what part of the image do you mean. the trees or behind the trees. there are two interpretations. lots of foreground,,,,yours. lots of middle and background, which you get when you crop the front. the later style starts you out with the flowers and leads you back. the first,,,,,you're already there......your choice.....milt

"he who thinks he know all and knows nothing is king in a kingdom of one,,,,,or a critic" - the kobe

01-27-2000, 04:18 PM
Thanks Bruin, It is the foreground that I like. I wanted the red grasses to be the focal point and the reason for the painting. I wanted the trees in the background to be support only. My concern was that I may have placed to much emphasis on the red grasses, but after looking at it again...I see what you mean about the middle ground. I guess I took care of that with adding in the yellow under the trees. Am I right, is the yellow under the trees my middle ground? Sorry for such stupid questions...it is like learning the parts of an automobile...if you don't know what a gear shift is, then you best not drive with one until you find out. http://www.wetcanvas.com/ubb/smile.gif

irene clark
01-27-2000, 07:06 PM
This is a very pretty painting and I can well imagine it with the colours enhanced.
I personally would add a critter or 2, but that's just my preference. I can't help myself. Whenever I start out to paint a landscape I inevitably stick in some kind of wildlife, even if its just a sillohette(don't think thats spelled right).
Anyways, good art, and I like Sandi's ideas as well.
Irene Clark with a heart for art.

01-27-2000, 07:09 PM
I like this piece a LOT. Tho colors are very inviting. I'd like to plop myself down in the middle of all that and gaze at the leaves and clouds. Mmmmmmmm, relaxing!


01-27-2000, 07:28 PM
Thanks Sandi, Irene and Gisela for all your kind words. I wish that my camera had picked up the wonderful reds but maybe I can talk Rod into fixing it for me on the computer. http://www.wetcanvas.com/ubb/smile.gif I don't do many landscapes but this one I did enjoy.

01-28-2000, 09:34 AM
llis, very nice painting. I love the colors, wish I could see them in all their brilliance. I too am having trouble photographing my work. No matter which settings I use as far as lighting on my digital camera the colors are very muted. It looks like you are getting a little glare there as well. Wish someone would tell me how to take a better picture. Anyway, looks great.


01-28-2000, 02:37 PM
normally there would be the flowers, the trees, and the distant scape behind the trees. the three planes are very distinct and unequivocal. but there is so little distant scape here, that it is inconsequential,,,so i see TWO planes,,,,the flowers and the rest,,foreground,background or foreground,middle ground...whichever you chose.
adding emphasis, like the yellow you mentioned doesn't create a plane here. it is already there. there is always a middle(something behind the fore).
still lifes or portraits can sometimes have only two planes or even one because there's little or no depth-of-field. in a still life there MAY be lots o front table,,,then the setup. two planes. a third plane would be the wall. it's tricky and , like the landscape, it depends on how much emphasis is given to the wall.
in portraiture, there's usually only one plane because the sitter is next to a wall. you might ask,"yeah but milt, wouldn't the wall be considered a background plane?" after grinding my teeth and wishing i'd never heard of you, i'd say it depends. but that's for another day....
the background , in general, is always there in a painting, but can be de-emphasized to a point where you have a two plane composition.
many would say that you have three planes in your piece in spite of the lack of emphasis of the background,,,and i have no problem with that. it IS there, afterall. i personally choose to see two. let's stop before it gets complicated.....milt

"he who thinks he know all and knows nothing is king in a kingdom of one,,,,,or a critic" - the kobe

[This message has been edited by bruin70 (edited January 28, 2000).]

01-28-2000, 02:53 PM
Thanks Milt. I know I can always count on you to help me understand. I do understand. You know, what I am really getting from all of this is that one needs to go with his spirit. I think maybe you are right, just keep it simple and just let your eyes enjoy the painting. Don't worry so much about "does it have this ....or does it have that.... or does it make your eyes move around the painting." LOL Thank you so much. Sometimes all this technical stuff makes me crazy anyway.

Phyllis Rennie
01-28-2000, 08:21 PM
Good job. I can't tell from the computer colors if this would help it or not, but if you're going to do it over, I'd suggest "greying" the sky a bit. I find the brilliant blue distracting. Maybe it isn't a problem in the real thing though.

01-29-2000, 12:38 AM
Pat, on taking pictures of your work...

You can't do much about glare except to make sure that it is not there in the first place by arranging your ligtning. There is a lot you can do with dull colors, or if the entire spectrum has shifted - look under Gamma corection, or color adjustment in you editing software. Even a low cost package like Paint Shop Pro gives you 5-6 different ways to adjust colors and lightning. I usually do Gamma adjustment and stretch the value range.

02-08-2000, 03:26 PM
Phyllis, wish I could do that redo stuff that bruin is so good at! a pic is worth a thousand words..
I agree with bruin on the two planes..but that can work. I like the big field in the foreground..invites one to lie down and look at the sky. The thing that bothers me is the way all the tree trunks tend to lean toward the left side of the painting and no sky shows thru the branches. And the spot at the top where the tree branches form an arch would look better as all sky. Let the light shine in! Well you can tell I'm no critiquist! I'd leave out the barn too.
but I do love you! chc