Home › Forums › Explore Subjects › Plein Air › What would you do?
- This topic has 16 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 1 month ago by it’sALLart.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 26, 2018 at 3:27 pm #461023
I’ve been wrestling with this work for about a month. I’ve been on site multiple times trying to capture key aspects, and some people.
Mostly I just enjoy going out …
But the large near trees to the right are beginning to frustrate. To distinguish their foliage from the smaller trees down the row has been a challenge.
As you can see, I’ve made a mess of it. I’ve tried different tones on the far trees…and the near tree…but always seem to end up with them looking too close in value.
Do I just need to go wild on the near leaves and make them bright so they stand out? (Standing there the value differences are minimal. I think that’s what is throwing me.)
Any other C&C welcome.
Thomas
August 26, 2018 at 3:35 pm #682155A couple of ideas:
1) try a slightly blue or purple glaze down the line, the farther away the more bluish – it worked on the distant tree to the right of your picture of the avenue
2) try having more contrast where each tree down the line fronts the one behind it, so that you see a subtle darker edge on one than the other – foliage will be more distinguishable between each treeAugust 26, 2018 at 3:53 pm #682160I’ve been adding blue…I think perhaps purple next as the blue isn’t enough.
Thanks,
t
August 26, 2018 at 6:28 pm #682168if you have the luxury (!) of returning to this place under the same weather conditions,
how about paper&pen? just black and white? in order to show detail, you still need value. this is a challenge with light&shadow.if it seems meaningless – there’s no contrast no new shadows born in the landscape regardless the medium used – just draw one sketch the way you always do. then do one without lifting the pen or looking at the paper! then do one tiny, tiny. then do one in 30 seconds. then do a couple more with the broadside of the pen with as few lines and turns as possible (5 – 10 -15)
repetition kickstarts creativity. black and white sharpens the eye to look for criteria for value change. speed makes your decisions for you. broad strokes clarify composition.
once you’ve finished drawing, sit down and feel in the result. do you like what’s there? if not, they’re just sketches so you can add and erase detail and shadow until you do. it’s quick, reversible and to my mind the best way toward inventing a concept.good luck, good painting, hope to see the finished work!
C&C welcome
August 26, 2018 at 7:03 pm #682161Intriguing. I will give that a go.
August 26, 2018 at 7:48 pm #682153You might take a look at making the distinction between the foreground, mid-ground and background tree foliage by adjusting temperature in the colors. Since the warm colors like yellow and orange tend to drop off in saturation rather quickly as you go into the distance, making the greens less intense (grayer) in the distance may help get the separation you are looking for.
Randy
August 27, 2018 at 8:45 am #682156As to my two suggestions, they’re both already there in your picture, just not employed the same throughout.
On the right side you see one green tree and red bush that employ the bluish hazy suggestion of distance. That combo clearly looks farther away from the foreground trees on the right. But if you look past the first two trees in the avenue on the right, you will note that all the rest are equally far or farther away than the hazier ones to the far right, yet you didn’t employ the same effect in the middle.
On the left side of the avenue you can see some places where both varying the color temperature of the leaves and some contrast where they eye sees one set of foliage into the other is more effective. Then you lose that as you go down the line.
So if you employ both methods equally throughout the picture you might see a big enough suggestion of distance to feel the picture is complete without seeming as though you overpainted and ended up with two different pix on the same canvas.
August 27, 2018 at 9:50 am #682162Thanks, both. Much to think about. I still paint too literally, if that makes sense. To my eye, the trees are various shades of green b/c they’re different kinds of trees. And the distant trees don’t appear so distant that they deserve the bluing. But for the painting, to provide the *appearance* of distance and depth, it’s necessary. It has been a steep learning curve since I took up painting two years ago.
August 27, 2018 at 10:39 pm #682157TM, no matter how literal you try to be, the reality is that you are NEVER painting “reality”. You are creating an illusion. And the tricks to creating that illusion may involve a bit of exaggeration. But the end result is that it looks more “real”.
FWIW, I paint in several mediums. Oddly enough, when I paint straight out of my imagination, a lot of folks think it looks more realistic than when I paint from life. And they are totally unaware that one was imaginary and one was copied from a scene. I suspect that it’s because when I paint out of my head I’m simplifying the scene to it’s primary components and modeling it correctly enough that it looks real. I have to work much harder plein air from life and I suspect that I overwork it and/or simply miss some of the knack. Only the shadow knows (and he is purple.)
August 28, 2018 at 6:22 am #682163Key lessons that I had to learn in doing. I knew the theories (I paid attention here and watched a few videos) but had to make the mistske before realization set in. Thanks.
August 28, 2018 at 3:55 pm #682164Here’s what I did today (in studio).
I deepened the background trees using glazes of purple, or blue, depending on distance. I touched up with a light glaze of various greens over that.
Basically I just played with different areas to see what I could do. I also let some sky peek through some of the three – that helped too.
I refined a few of the structures…like the steeple.
It’s better I think.
Thomas
August 28, 2018 at 7:10 pm #682158Much better for what you asked, TM.
Only thing is that I liked the higher contrast in the foreground red bush on the left as you had it in the original version. Not sure if you actually changed that or if it’s the result of how you scanned the painting. FWIW and just my opinion.
You do what you like and we’ll all be happy for you!
August 28, 2018 at 7:34 pm #682165Didn’t change it – the photo washed it out.
September 9, 2018 at 7:38 am #682159TM, please forgive me if this is already something you know well, but I thought of your query when I ran across this URL: http://ranartblog.com/blogarticle20.html
September 9, 2018 at 12:34 pm #682154After getting the trees figured out, keep in mind your light direction and the corresponding shadows..
~Joy~
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Register For This Site
A password will be e-mailed to you.
Search