A Closer Look

Here's a closer look at the water tower and the residence at the ranch. This shot was taken right after the light wash was laid in. You can see the top edges of the dark shapes are disintegrating due to the turp running down the canvas surface.





Yesterday, I said that I started with the lit area of the focal area, but I was wrong. This clearly shows that a few cool gray notes went into the shadow side before the lit side. I guess that just shows you that I don't have a set method. I can't really tell you why I put the gray shadow in first here. May be I was bothered by the warmth of the brown wash? I don't know.




That was just a few notes, though, and here we have the lights blocked in, as well as some of the green on the ground. And the cool gray of the sky. As you can see, I'm blocking everything in, but I'm only applying paint thinly. No thick paint just yet.



Pulling some of the atmosphere into the structures. Unity and mood is created. Notice too, that now my sunlit areas are getting much thicker application of paint. Basically, I don't use impasto unless I know it's exactly the right color and value. Otherwise, I'll end up having to fix it over and over again, and you know it's a lot easier to paint over thin paint than thick.




With the details in and the edges orchestrated. I hope you can feel the warmth of the sun light. The warm light - cool shadow relationship is a subtle thing. No need to use screaming color to communicate that, don't you agree?

Demo, Anyone?

A Sloughhouse Spring, 24 x 36 inches, oil on linen

Not that I haven't been busy these few weeks, but I don't have anything to show for it. The paintings I am working on are kind of stalling so I'm letting them stew a bit.

In the meantime, I found these sequence shots of this painting I did last...February? Something like that. It was a commission and I wanted to record my progress. I thought it might be fun to make a little book but couldn't get my act together.

Anyway, here are some shots along the way. 'Hope you find them interesting~

This is the original pencil sketch. After discussing with my client what they were envisioning, I drew up this sketch on location, and showed them this, and a few of the plein air paintings I had done of a similar view. The paintings represented different seasons / lights, so they could get a good idea of what was possible and I could make sure we were on the same page.






After I got the go-ahead, I stretched a 24 x 36 piece of linen and went to work. I used a general grid to transfer and enlarge the drawing onto canvas. Nothing too tight, because 1)I wanted to keep things as fresh as possible, and 2) the subject matter didn't require a tight transfer.



Using a warm brownish wash, I drew in the major shapes and proceeded to block in the dark areas.





Then using the same wash but more turp, I fill in the light areas. You might ask, why don't I just tone the canvas lightly first, and then wash in the darks - wouldn't that be easier and tidier? Yes, I suppose it would be. But that's just it. I don't want it to be too tidy because I have a tendency to get too tight. This way, the washes interact with each other and become more abstracted, forcing me to keep my focus on drawing with my brush as I develop the painting.

Also, by doing the light wash after the dark, I'm forced to think about the role of the light areas in terms of design and how they relate to the dark areas. If I toned the canvas first and then blocked in the dark areas, I've kind of settled for a default. Oh, I know many artists would disagree with me, so let me make it clear that I'm just talking about my habits and tendencies. Not anyone else's.




Here I am starting to paint opaquely. Starting with the lit areas. This is a lower-key painting, where the focal area (that is to say, the good stuff) will be in sunlight, so I want to establish something tangible in that area early on.



Filling in the foreground grass. I used short choppy strokes so that I may build texture. I don't always work this way. Sometimes I would use big broad strokes to fill a similar area with flat colors. Just a different look and it all depends on what you're trying to accomplish with your strokes.




Purplish gray for the sky. The color scheme is lifted off form an earlier plein air sketch. Knowing exactly what colors I'll be using allows me to put the notes down with more confidence. No timid strokes here.





The sky is filled in, and some of the trees are starting to be integrated into the atmosphere.


The ground plane is built up, details go in, and I'm moving around everywhere to pull everything together. Orchestrating the visual elements - making sure the colors work together, Some edges are softened, some sharpened, increasing contrast here, losing detail there...




I decided to put more grass in the foreground. I was actually very happy with how the extreme foreground turned out; how the edges are very soft, and the strokes are almost completely abstract if you get up close to it. Yet as you pull back, it maintains a good degree of believability. This is something I strive for in every painting, but only achieve it once in a while. So I was really proud of myself with this one.

I'll have something new to show soon~

The Three-Value Composition

Beverly's Barn, 12 x 9 inches, oil on linen

I guess I could ditch the "painting tonally" part of my posts, as it has become redundant, and a lot of the things I'm talking about is not limited to the practice of painting tonally.

In a previous post, I talked a little bit about composing with three values. Many a great painters have preached along the same lines, including the great Howard Pyle. It's all about simplifying what we see out there, and organizing the information to just a few distinctive components; light, medium dark. It's just so much easier to break things down to three values than to say, ten. Sure, there are times when you need four or five values, but I don't think you need more than that. Five would be light, medium light, medium, medium dark, and dark.

I am talking about the initial BIG value organizations, the structure of a composition. There are of course lots of smaller value variations within each of the value spaces, but I don't worry about that at the initial stage. As I develop the painting, I introduce value shifts, but always careful to keep these shifts subtle enough that I don't deviate from my original "game plan", unless I have a very good reason to do so.

The above painting was done this week up at my friend Beverly's house. This is her barn. The weather was perfect, and there were any number of views we could have painted, but I couldn't resist the cute little barn.

Anyway, my three-value game plan looked something like this.

This image was actually done after-the-fact in Photoshop, but I typically do this in my sketchbook before I start painting (of course my thumbnails never look this tidy) I don't have the original sketch because I did it in Beverly's sketchbook. Not mine. But no matter, the point I want to make is the same. See how the painting relates to the three value image? Basically, everything lit is "light", and "medium" is the shadows which are receiving ample reflected and/or ambient light, and "dark" are shadow with very little reflected and/or ambient light. See how the 3v image "reads" well, even without any detail or color. Nor does it have a ton of in-between values.

After I know what I'm shooting for, I can go in with colors and paint to my heart's content, but always keeping in mind what the main values are, and not deviating from them. Toward the end, I started to break up the big foreground shape, and some details and accents were added here and there. I just do enough of these things to make my painting look like it has more complexities than it actually does. Color shifts will do that. Edge manipulation will do that too. But the core structure remains the same.

Painting is difficult as it is. I'm all for logical, organized way of looking at the process. You simplify the problem, and you've simplified the solution. You want to go simpler? Try a two-value composition.

New Figure Painting Class

OK! so it's official. I will be teaching a weekly figure painting class starting January 13th, at The School of Light and Color in Fair Oaks, Ca. I've been away from teaching studio classes for a couple of years, so I'm itchin' to go. The facility is nice, professional, and best of all (for me), it's about a mile away from where I live. I can practically walk there! (but I won't haha)

It's going to be a lot of fun cracking the whip....er... I mean, working with other artists and helping them to get to the next level(s).

Following is the official announcement. 'Hope to see you in class!


Figure Painting

Wednesdays, 1 to 4pm, (Starts January 13)
Tuition; $34 (+$6 model fee) / session or $120 (+$24 model fee) / 4 sessions

Starting January 13, I will be teaching a weekly figure painting class at The School of Light and Color in Fair Oaks, Ca. This class will be very similar to the classes I used to conduct at my old studio, with one important difference. I'm a better painter and instructor now than I was two years ago! If you liked my classes before, you'll love this one.

In this on-going class we will paint the figure, both clothed and nude, with emphasis on design, drawing, value-structure, and depiction of form. We will discuss all aspects of representational figure painting, with demos, critiques and individual instruction. This is an oil painting class. Some experience highly recommended.

If you would like to attend, please contact School of Light and Color to register. A list of materials will be posted in the next few weeks.

This class will fill up fast, so don't wait too long!



The School of Light and Color
10030 Fair Oaks Blvd Fair Oaks, Ca 95628 (916) 966-7517
email: sarback@lightandcolor.com

We Take A Short Break

Artist Eric Cator just featured my work on a recent post on his blog, Paintblog and said some nice things about me. It always feels great to get positive feedback, especially in these times of uncertainty. His blog is a great resource of many artists whose work I was not familiar with, but nevertheless very impressive. I'm reminded that my little slice of the art-world is indeed, just that; a little slice. There's a whole big world of art out there, and if I don't put the effort to seek out what's new and exciting, I'll remain a little fish in a little pond. Which leads me to this question; is it better to be a little fish in a little pond, or a little fish in an ocean?

Speaking of oceans, I'd like to introduce you to a brand new book, Sargent and the Sea.

This is an exhibition catalogue for a fascinating exhibition now showing at the Corcoran Gallery. The show features Sargent's masterpiece En Route Pour La Peche, and works related to it, including Fishing for Oysters at Cancale, studies made specifically for this painting, and many other maritime themed works which I have never seen before. It is a fantastic collection of works. It's too bad I can't go to Washington DC to see the exhibit in person. The show is up till January 3, 2010, so if you're anywhere near DC, go see it. And if you can't, this catalogue is a must have for any student of representational art.

Painting Tonally; More Figure

Alexis, 14 x 11 inches, oil on linen

These were done this weekend. I was trying to think of what else I could tell you on this series of posts, and it occurred to me that breaking things down and offering small bits of wisdom (not my wisdom because I haven't any, but pieces of collective painting knowledge) like my last post, might be easier to digest than to go on and on about a broad and elusive topic like tonalism.

So when my friend Don Hatfield called me up this weekend and told me that he was teaching a workshop in my neck of the woods and would I bring my easel and spend a couple of days painting with him, I said hell yeah, and crashed his workshop. I tried to stay out of everyone's way and set up in the back and did my own thing. It was great fun to watch him do his thing (he's very entertaining) and I picked up a few things along the way, too.

But I digress. As I was painting, I kept thinking about what piece of painting wisdom might I offer and how can I make a good example with the sketches I was doing at the time. Here it is; compose with three values; dark, medium, light. Keeping the three values sufficiently separated gives us simplicity and impact.

Alexis, detail Click on image to enlarge

Once the composition is established, you can go in and have as many value shifts as you want, as long as you keep those shifts very close. A quick check of whether you're on track would be to squint at your painting and see if the original three-value composition still holds true. If the big shapes starts falling apart, you've drifted away from your original plan; go back and tame the jumpy notes.

Alexis Day Two, 9 x 12, oil on linen

Making simple statements gives us impact, but I think the real benefit to the beginning and intermediate painter is that it forces you to stay organized. It forces you to make value decisions logically, as opposed to confused indecisions. And confused guesswork will produce nothing but confused paintings. Organizing your big value structure and sticking to its simplicity seems to me like a good way to not get confused. Don't you think it's hell of a lot easier to worry about three values than, say, ten? Can you tell me with absolute confidence whether a particular value is a five or a six? If you can, you're a better painter than I am and you may disregard everything I said on this blog :-) If you can't, then can you tell me if a particular value is a dark, medium or light? You bet.