Mountainman and Beaver Dam

[walt curlee]

MY IMAGE(S):



GENERAL INFORMATION:
Title: Mountainman and Beaver Dam
Year Created: 2006
Medium: Oil
Surface: Canvas
Dimension: 16
Allow digital alterations?: Yes!

MY COMMENTS:
My 5th painting since starting back painting again after a 6 year laps.

MY QUESTIONS FOR THE GROUP:
Just finished this and would like some feedback, good or bad, etc.

[nancy_ellen56]

Welcome to WC ....What a wonderful picture...I love it...only wish I had this much talent...thankyou for sharing it with us...

[La_]

Hi Walt,

It's beautiful - the colors are glorious and the beaver dam itself could be a stand alone piece. Things fade when they should, become crisp when they should, everything is totally picturesque.

The problem for me is that it's just too perfect ... even with the odd leafless tree in and among the perfect others it needs somethings crooked or broken or leaning.

Stellar job anyway,
La

[madster]

What stunning rendering skills you have!

The biggest problem with this piece is your proportions. That mountain man and his horse are HUGE, since they are standing on the other side of a body of water, and the viewer is at least a few feet in front of that waterfall. Unless the wood making up the natural dam is only the diameter of small twigs, the figures are totally out of place in this setting, as they are about 2 - 2 1/2 times larger than they should be.

There are also some proportional and color issues going on with the trees on the left hand side, as the abundance of all that red foliage is a bit contrived, and the height of the aspens (?) in comparison to the pines would belie the massive amounts of colored leaves in this composition.

The clumps of green along the far shoreline are too evenly spaced, with the bits of green amongst all that red appearing somewhat out of place, and the clouds, treeline, and waterfall all make this piece quite "heavy" on one side of the canvas, with only the mountains and the overly large mountain man to try and balance the composition out. The clouds, in particular, look "fake" in the way their outline mimics the silhouette of the mountain peaks and the angle of the RH treeline.

The rendering of the foothills, the water, and the accenting foliage on the sides is very well done, but overall, the effect is something like a "Magic of Oil Painting" work subjected to a distorting glass. Separately, the elements of this work are visually effective, but combined, they just don't visually "jive" to the eye.

~M

[nancy_ellen56]

I just received a message that reminded me that "SC" is not for Kudos and Thanks for sharing...Well let me apologize that When I saw the painting, It was so stunning, it took my breath away and I didn't realize where I was...I wasn't thinking about seeking out what was wrong and what could have been done better or how to correct what someone else might percieve as not quite right...I was instead thinking how beautiful, oh if only I had a tenth of this talent, a wall large enough to hang it on, and the money to purchase it...I will not apologize for that..I stand behind I love this painting...even in "SC" must there always be something wrong, something that could have been done better, an I would have done this or that, why can't ever so often an honest, heartfelt "I love it as it is" be allowed...so for breaking forum rules, I apologize, thank you...accepted, let's now move on- Larry moderator...

edited out- Larry moderator

[madster]

edited out by moderator- Larry

[nancy_ellen56]

this part has been edited out...irrelevant to the thread topic- Larry moderator
- - - -

Mr. Curlee
When I first saw your painting I was struck speechless, by the sheer beauty of it...I think it a fantastic choice of colors, there is wonderful movement in the picture for the eye to follow...I started with the lower middle of the picture and entered the water proceeding to the tiny waterfall, climbing it my eyes went to the horse and man, which by the way I think are in perfect porportion, I loved the use of the golds and reds in the foilage, reminding me of late autum's eve...my eyes then proceded to the pines and on up to the mountains and then the glorious sky above....You have done a marvelous job on the clouds which I might say so many people struggle with...The mountains cannot be improved upon...Overall I think you have managed to capture the sheer elegance and timeless beauty of nature in a way that only people that love nature and have a lust for those hidden hideaways untouched by modern progress can manage...Overall, the only room for improvement that I see is to keep painting and sharing your talent with the world...

this part edited out....Larry- modeartor

[LarrySeiler]

Originally Posted by nancy_ellen56

why can't ever so often an honest, heartfelt "I love it as it is" be allowed...

make such comment...but THEN...say why you love it. Qualify your feelings... as the artist is asking for comments GOOD or bad.

Does the composition work, if so...why? What are the strong points of compositional design that work for you...where is the work weaker and how could it be improved.

Does the color work for you..and if so...why? Do you note a specific color palette strategy..tonal, dual complementary...one based on color temperature, naturalistic...????

Is there a good sense of perspective balance...meaning does the foreground appear convincing against a background that appears as convincingly farther away...and if so, why?

Please do not attempt to redesign the Structured Critique forum or campaign for change. Its wonderful it touches you...aesthetically. Its just not the forum for kudos. Such is stated in the guidelines for this forum

You can work around that as I said by offering analysis and qualifying statements for your good points.

Now...I'll ask that if there are questions about etiquette, purpose of the forum, decorum and so forth...please feel free to ask.
I did receive a reported post about this forum, which is the proper way of dealing with what is perceived as a wrong committed, but this forum or a member's thread is not the place to confront other members. Actually...it is off topic to discuss anything here but the work. Such hijacks a member's thread.

I will use moderator muscle to edit the threads now...so that we can get back to the discussion at hand. Any questions feel free to contact me private message...

thanks...

Larry
moderator

[LarrySeiler]

Walt..

Its a wonderful work, very colorful..much going on...to please the eye of many, however...I think there is good work....and then there is masterful work by masterful painters and to that I'd like to make a few comments.

I am at this time typing with a head swimming with a weekend of reading thru my recent acquisition of Edgar Payne's "Composition of Outdoor Painting"...a seventh edition and well worth the $48 I paid for it. Truly not only was Payne a gifted skilled painter, but quite the teacher.

I think your work here is good Walt...but I think it is short of masterful work and I'll attempt to suggest why, both my thoughts and that of Payne's....

For one...as an artist that sets up and paints directly from life on location (voguely called "plein air" today)...I am aware that every amazing scene has the possibilities of a half-dozen (at least) possible paintings that could be done.

When one paints from nature often...over a decade or longer, one learns to tap into the intimate voicings of what is essential to paint to represent the moment. The novice or beginning painter paints everything...perhaps to impress others with how good and clever their eye is. Setting up...the novice is aware of their heavy compulsion to paint, to respond...but as they paint they see much more....(after all, painting leads to seeing a thing more deeply) and in seeing more, they believe it important to demonstrate this empowering of the eye and include each thing. By the time they are done and get the work home, they forget what it was that was absolutely essential and made them set up to begin with.

The mature artist learns to discriminate. To him/her...it is not so much what to paint that is critical, but determining WHAT NOT to paint.

There is a saying, "When everything is shouting, nothing gets heard"

Imagine this...a music director walks into a choral room with 40 individuals singing at the top of their lungs on the stantions. Such passion, such energy should delite any director, but imagine the horror to discover that each singer is singing a song that no other individual is singing. Forty singers....forty songs! What do you have? Major chaos...major noise!

Again...."where everything is shouting, nothing gets heard"

Payne often points out in writing the beauty of simplicity, the power and strength. Scott Christensen often makes the point of the power of reserve.

IMHO Walt...you have a very involved and lengthy narrative going on here.

It nearly appears much of the Briger Tetons exist behind this lone gentleman and horse. Details of the mountains...the clouds...distant trees....much much going on.

I think the challenge here would be to take a sketchbook and attempt to redesign this subject into about a dozen possible compositions, trying to simplify.

At times....you distant mountains are so interesting that they eye is content to stay back there and forget what the subject suggests to be. The details of the sticks and makeup of the falls tantilate the eyes to lose concern for other areas.

Another thing...where mountains are included, its especially important to lower the horizontal line...to get away from the center dividing line of the canvas, which then escalates this majesty. However, that would cut into your water's rapids. So..it becomes somewhat hard to determine just what you the artists are wanting to give critical voice to.

Is this a painting about a man and horse coming up to a body of water intimidating further travel? Is it about the ruggedness of the mountain passes he just came from?

It reminds me a bit of Terry Redlin's serendipitous works...(yes, proven name, proven work...well over done and always the same)....you know the type, a cabin with smoke coming up from the chimney...geese flying over a setting sun, deer off to the side watching the cabin and sun going down. An empty canoe sitting offshore waiting to be used, a campfire burning (though no apparent person in the scene to watch and care for the fire).

So much narrative...that is not essential.

You have proven as Madster has pointed out....very good rendering skills, ability to use color...but I would really suggest you might consider search engine surfing of the works of Edgar Payne, Emile Gruppe...Scott Christensen and so forth. See how they give such loud voice to one or two essential things and how everything else becomes supportive to that essential thing. Like the director giving one voice to a soloist and the rest instructions to do harmonies, supportive ooo's and aahhhh's...in the background.

Just some thoughts anyway...

Larry

[Ladyred]

Walt,
Wonderful painting. Love the colors and the realism of the whole thing. I think it shows movement and wonderful lighting. I do want to point out the rider and horse seem to "pale" in comparison to the rest of the painting. I would like to see just a bit more color for them. Also the mountians seem very pointed to me. I would like to see some of them more real maybe even fewer.
Your are very talented, don't quit again.
See ya

[LynnDigby]

I agree that all elements seem equally painstakingly detailed. I think you can be confident in your ability to see and render detail. Now, my advice would be to relax. use this ability only to emphasize the focus.

[walt curlee]

Thank you so much for your critiques. I have thought about what ya'll have said and appreciate your insight and will be conscious of too much perfection and a little more random in my work. The "Joy of Painting" was a little off as it took 3 weeks to finish this painting. As for the detail, the different planes recede as they should. I get lost in my painting and enjoy the different places I visit in my mind when I paint. It seems like I'm actually experiencing the place and time that I'm painting, kinda like a good novel. I like the detail; it's all part of the novel. It also separates me from the rest of the crowd so to speak. Well enough rambling.

Thanks, Walt

[Russellupsome]

I agree whole heartedly with Madster's unedited comments here. Additionally, I would add that the shape of background mountains and middleground trees is too regular to be natural. Besides the incorrect scale of the mountain man figure, the fact that he is rendered in basically monochrome also belies the realism intended. Regarding the composition, the placement of foliage at both the left and right lower framing edges, along with a strong horizontal barrier of sorts (in the form of the water), constricts the flow of one's eye into the pictorial space.

You would do well to study the Hudson River school of American landscape painting. They are often also tight and somewhat illustrational in their handling, but there is far more 'perfection' in their treatment of subject: making for truely successful art work. I think that is the stylistic direction in which you are headed at this point and that it would be a disservice to you, to refer you to Barbizon or Impressionist methods for instance (although those are my personal preference).

Regards,
Russell
www.russellerwin.com

[OzonaLori]

Where your colors and skilled technique make for a BEAUTIFUL view, my eye doesn't know where to look or rest. I agree with much of what Larry has mentioned, and will try to make my points illustrate some ways you can achieve an even more effective painting, by making a decision on point of view and focus, to help the viewer know where to look.

In your current painting, the water rushing over the dam is the most powerful place in your painting. Not only does it show action, it also contains a very good contrast of value in that spot.

The contrast between the dark trees and light mountains also tries for this attention, and my eye keeps going back there because of the detail.

I would either try to lessen the focus in the background by lessening detail and lightening the contrast, which is how you would view the scene in real life, or lessen the foreground focus and make the viewer look at the beautiful mountains and sky. As you know, unless shadow is hiding the brighter colors of the foreground, color and detail lessen in the distance in real life.

As the moderator mentioned, there can be a million different places you can focus as the key element of the scene, and by making choices yourself on what is important. you can help direct the flow of the painting, guiding the viewers eye to wander around the canvas.

Currently, your figure and his horse nearly disappear for me. The colors really blend into the background and are less brilliiant, so they seem inconsequential to the scene in its current state. If you want to make them look more important and stand out, I would lessen focus elsewhere in the painting, and try to make the viewer look there by subtley manipulating light and shadow, and I would probably get rid of the orangey grasses. As madster mentioned, there is almost too much color in the scene, and it diminishes its impact in a way, since there is so much.

If you are not going to make the figure and horse the focal point, I would consider taking them out of the scene and really make the landscape keep its star status, altering focus as suggested above.