WetCanvas
Home Member Services Content Areas Tools Info Center WC Partners Shop Help
Channels:
Search for:
in:

Welcome to the WetCanvas forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit our help center.

Go Back   WetCanvas > Explore Subjects > Portraiture
User Name
Password
Register Mark Forums Read

Salute to our Partners
WC! Sponsors

Our Sponsors
Reply  
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Bad Post  
Old 02-29-2000, 09:50 AM
sandyartist sandyartist is offline
Senior Member
Southern Shores, NC
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 409
 
Hails from United States
Thumbs up Hagan Tutorial

Scott..thanks for the hagan demo..what fun!! The painting is loose and exciting, great color..while I could not work this way, white canvas, then laying on the heavy paint, I do appreciate his insight and the time he spent to share with us...learned about color though...looking forward to the next lesson! Keep 'em comin'!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #2   Report Bad Post  
Old 02-29-2000, 07:02 PM
Drew Davis Drew Davis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Posts: 265
 
Post


It's a good article. I think my favorite
point was the child-level view. Good example of what you can do with a limited palette, too.

I've been wondering, why "Impressionist", though? Perhaps my conception attached to the term is just too narrow. As I've said before, I'm not that good with Isms. But it's been coming up a lot recently, what with the Cafe project, this new article, and the critiques. Hagan's example doesn't have the broken brushwork I associate with Impressionism. He mixes paints on the palette, according to the text, rather than relying on optical mixing. It seems to have relatively finished surface and detail. It's got the right sort of immediacy, but then so does a lot of modern painting. Same with light; most paintings involve light, one way or another. So what makes this style Impressionist?
Reply With Quote
  #3   Report Bad Post  
Old 03-19-2000, 08:47 AM
sasha sasha is offline
Member
Massachusetts
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 97
 
Post

I can't be really historically accurate on this but impressionist paintings don't always have to involve optical mixing to the extent that the early french impressionists did. Many of the paintings of the american and britist impressionists were relatively dark and did include blacks as well as more flattened local color areas. The main idea was a piece which is done from life that gives an "impression" of the values and color rather than the meticulously finished renderings that were done pre 1870's.
The modern idea of working from photos is a little bit of a shift and is impressionistic style rather than true impressionism which was to capture the light and color from the real. The photo distorts the true play of color and we have to always rely on memory for the warm/cool/prismatic play that exists in life. I'm not able to get out and work from life either, so I rely on photos, though I find when I can work from life my sense of color is always much better.

Great lesson, wonderful sense of light.
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:33 AM.


© 2014 F+W All rights reserved.