Perseverance, A Most Important Factor in Painting

Today’s Image

"Pennsylvania Avenue"

Watercolor on Paper

Copyright 2010

Well, I posted my latest watercolor as Today’s Image. It’s not quite finished, but I decided it’s finished enough to post on the blog. I’m blogging about it not for any praise or to promote it (honestly).

I’m blogging about it as a lesson in perseverance and stick-to-it-ive-ness on my part, and I hope this will help other artists.

I’m neither organized nor forward-thinking enough to plan my motifs ahead of time. That is, I do not “set up” any motifs, such as a still life, to paint, either from a live view or as a reference photo.

No, I just take pictures of views I think are interesting when I’m traveling or just out shooting photos. It’s only later when I’m looking at my photos that I select ones that, in my humble opinion, will make a good painting.

That was the case for "Pennsylvania Avenue." The reference photo was from October, 2009, on a visit to Washington, D.C. There were a couple of shots from this viewpoint; I chose this one because it provided the look and feel I wanted for the painting.

The photo, as well as the painting, reminded me of an Impressionist-type painting of a Paris street scene from that era, so I decided to paint it. Please, don’t take this to mean I am comparing my painting to any of the masterpieces of the Impressionists.

I like to paint architecture, not all the time, but it interests me. However, as I began to render the image and to paint, I began to think that maybe I had gotten in over my head.

First, the angle is somewhat unusual. I was on a fifth- or sixth-floor balcony looking out and down on the street. The camera caught the building across the street (the main building in the painting) as tapering down to a vanishing point somewhere below street level in addition to having a vanishing point high above the top of the building. It was distortion from the camera lens, and it didn’t make it any easier to paint, that’s for sure. This aspect was so troublesome that I actually had to start completely over. In my first attempt, the angle of the building just did not look right and never would, so I began again with a new sheet of watercolor paper.

Second, it’s just an odd building architecturally. I haven’t researched what building this is, but it appears to have been built in the early 20th century—at least the bottom part. You will notice that the top part looks as if it were added on with obviously much more modern architecture, maybe sometime in the 1980s (I’m guessing).

Then there’s also the sharp angle of the street, which is Pennsylvania Avenue, as you look down on it.

Other difficulties for me were capturing the proper light and light source on a very overcast day. Oh, and did I mention it was raining? I had to paint the pavement to reflect that.

Finally, it was suggested that I use a color palette similar to the Old Masters. I had never painted with that palette, but I will tell you I liked it very much and will use it again. The palette is: Indigo (the blue). Brown Madder (the red), Raw Sienna (the yellow), Green Gold, and I had to add Hooker’s green to get the darker green of some tree leaves.

I tell you this, not to complain, but to let you know there are always obstacles to overcome in a painting. Do not get discouraged. Think of the obstacles as opportunities to learn and to create a painting of which you’ll be proud.

Cheers!

Stay Active & Keep In Touch - Attend an Art Gallery Opening

Today’s Image

Attending an Art Gallery Opening

I have been a busy artist since the month began. I have painted every day for four to five hours straight in the afternoon when the light is the best plus a few additional brushstrokes added at other times during the day as well. As I mentioned in a previous blog, I’m working to finish a painting I began more than a month ago.

Anyway, I’m telling you this as a segue into the topic of today’s blog--artists don’t get out much.

We’re usually holed up in the studio doing our artwork; that is, we’re drawing or painting or whatever your particular artistic bent is. We need to get out more. That said, I did my part this past weekend. Of course, I was out with other artists, but that counts, too, right?

What was I doing? I attended an opening of an art gallery exhibit (similar to Today's Image).

Actually it was the reception “to view recent works” by two artists I know whose paintings are being exhibited during the month of January. These artists are known for their realistic paintings of landscapes and still life.

I had heard the artists talk about this showing a couple of months back and when they would be busy hanging their show. The invitation arrived before New Year’s, so I was looking forward to it.

The venue for the show was right in the middle of the Museum District here, next door to the Contemporary Arts Museum and across the street from the Museum of Fine Arts. I would say it’s in pretty good company. If you’re an artist, it’s the part of (your) town you should be familiar with so that you are comfortable visiting and attending the art openings and events that take place there.

The reception was a huge success. The place was packed with all kinds of artists and collectors along with family, friends, acquaintances, well-wishers, and students of the artists. The walls were lined with more than 35 of their watercolors and acrylics. All are beautiful.

The point of this blog is to encourage you, me, and all of us artists to get up and out, to stay active, and to keep in touch within our chosen artistic interest. It does us good to get out there and mingle with other artists as well as collectors and those who simply like to view artwork.

Otherwise, we can become inner-focused, not that that’s all bad, but it can stifle your creative interest and talent. It’s one thing to have and express your artistic style; it’s another to be self-absorbed and paralyzed from branching out and exploring new possibilities.

Take every chance you can to learn, view, and discuss art. Accept every invitation to a class, a party, an opening, an exhibit. Artists are naturally reticent and tend to be introverted, well many of us anyway. So, do not let yourself become isolated and stale.

New Art Possibilities—keep that in mind.

(To end the blog where I began, I’m estimating my current watercolor painting is about 90+ percent complete, so check back, it might be posted on my next blog.)

Cheers!

Artist of 'Mystery' Painting - Solved!

Today’s Image

Thom Belle Eastwood Harris' Rendition of The Blue Boy

They say you only need to look in your own backyard, if you have one, to find what you’re looking for.

That was certainly the case in my attempt to learn about the artist of a “mystery” painting that has been in the family for more than 50 years and about which I recently blogged.

It was not long after I clicked the Publish button on my blog entry, A ‘Mystery’ Painting – Finding the Origin of an Unknown Painting & Artist, when a family member emailed me with some news.

It turns out I was incorrect in thinking the mystery painting had been a gift to my grandmother from her neighbor, “Mrs. Downey.” I remember Mrs. Downey as a proper elderly lady who liked to drink tea, but she was not the benevolent friend for which I had given her credit all those years. Sorry, Mrs. Downey, wherever you are.

The credit for the gift of the mystery painting actually goes to a distant relative in the family. T Harris, which is how the painting was signed in the lower left corner, was a cousin of my grandmother’s. T Harris is actually Thom Belle Eastwood. She was a first cousin of my grandmother; she was born in 1887 and died in 1962. She married Giles Edward Harris and took the artist name of T Harris.

Not that you care, and without getting too geneological on you, my grandmother’s mother (my great-grandmother), Alice Eastwood, was the sister of Thom Belle’s father, Thomas Eastwood. So, she and my grandmother were first cousins. I think that makes me a third cousin of Thom Belle's—whatever.

All the kudos in solving the mystery go to my family member who researches and keeps up to date with the family history and family trees for the rest of us. Without that knowledge, we would never have figured this out. In several ensuing emails and attachments, we corresponded with long out-of-touch distant relatives.

All the emails confirmed that Thom Belle Eastwood was, in fact, a painter, although there is no mention of where, or if, any of her paintings were shown or sold, no matter. What matters is that the relatives all spoke lovingly of her paintings which she gave to many family members and which now hang in their homes.

Thom evidently enjoyed painting still lifes, and she must have also liked classics, such as Pinkie and Blue Boy (about which I also recently blogged). I tell you that because she painted The Blue Boy, and her rendition is Today’s Image.

Though this has nothing to do with art, the lesson from this should be to talk with your family members and friends now. Get clarification on all those events and people your parents or grandparents talked about back in the day. As a little kid, you had no context, and you probably don’t have all the right connections about who's who.

Anyway, back to art. I guess I’ll have to stop referring to it as the ‘mystery’ painting and give it a name. S0, since I’ve always liked the dominant color, I think I’ll call it the Turquoise painting.

Cheers!

Getting My Art Groove Back On

Today’s Image

Sunrise On A New Year

Copyright 2009

As you can tell by the headline of today’s blog, I am “rarin’ to go” to get back to my art and artwork. It’s time after a long holiday break, which was enjoyable and enjoyed. Today's Image is a painting of mine that says, to me, time to start again.

Now it is time, and I can’t wait.

It began building a few days ago when I hung the 2010 Monet calendar in my studio area. It’s a calendar with a Monet painting for each month from the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C. His paintings are beautiful, which you don’t need me to tell you, and an inspiration. The January painting is The Houses of Parliament, Sunset, 1903. It’s quintessential Monet.

During the holidays, I had packed away a lot of my art paraphernalia so that there was room for gatherings and guests. (I also didn’t want anyone messing anything up or stepping on any of it :-).

Over the weekend I retrieved my paint and brushes and palettes. I pulled out the watercolor I’m working on and that I mentioned in a previous blog. It’s the one I began in early December and had to start over. It’s still only about 25 percent complete, but it’s the first thing I’m going to work on. I will post it when completed, I promise.

Early January is the time of the year when people declare crazy things like they’ll start over, do better, lose or gain—whatever. Artists are no different. We may, or may not, be more attuned to the creative process. However, I bet that most of us have an inner desire to create the best art work we ever have in the coming year.

Have you ever heard an artist say, “Oh, I think I’ll just blow it off; I don’t care if my work is worse than ever this year,”? Well, I haven’t either, and I don’t think anyone has.

I know it sounds corny, he said through rose-colored glasses, but it feels like a new beginning.

I hope it feels that way for you especially if you’re one of those for whom creating art is a painful, skin-shedding process. I don’t think it’s supposed to be that way. Hard, yes, but physically and emotionally painful—I don’t think so.

Anyway, as I began to work on my watercolor, mixing the right colors for the building that’s in the foreground, I began to feel much better. The holidays are a wonderful time, but when they’re over, there’s always a sense of loss for me that it’s all over for another year.

Painting helps put me in a good state of mind. As I apply the paint and washes, I can feel that I'm getting my groove back on for the coming year, and I hope you can, too!

Cheers!

A 'Mystery' Painting - Finding the Origin of an Unknown Painting & Artist

Today’s Image

Our Family's "Mystery" Painting

Photo Copyright 2009

I thought I’d close out the last OrbisPlanis art blog of 2009 with a mystery. I hope you like mysteries.

In my last blog I talked about several paintings that I remembered fondly from my grandmother’s home.

Today’s Image is another painting originally from her home that has been in the family for at least 50 years, maybe more.

Funny, we never named this painting like we did the ones I mentioned in my last blog (Blue Boy, Pink Lady, etc.), and I don’t know why. It certainly deserves a name.

It also deserves a past, and that’s what the mystery is. Who was the artist who painted this, and where did it come from?

The painting has a few hints that I can share, although they only partially answer the above questions.

In the lower left corner of the painting, there is a signature. It’s “T Harris” --I'm pretty sure that’s what it is. After the signature is “52” which I’m sure is the year in which it was painted. Now, I’m assuming that's 1952. It’s unlikely from its condition, but I suppose it’s possible that it could be a very well preserved painting from 1852 (or older?). Also, it's oil on stretched canvas (I think, but it's been framed and you can't see the back). It's 15.5 x 19.5 in (39.4 x 49.5 cm).

The painting was a gift from an elderly neighbor friend of my grandmother’s in Houston during the 1950s. I only know the neighbor as “Mrs. Downey” who was originally from Calgary, Alberta, Canada. She had moved in with her daughter and son-in-law in Houston, Kay Newton and Dr. Bern Newton. I do not know if Kay’s maiden name was Downey or not.

I Googled several search words, of course, such as " T Harris, painter, artist, Houston, Calgary," but there were no hits remotely associated with the artist or painting.

And that, folks, is the extent of my knowledge of this painting. It has hung in various houses and various rooms at various times in which our family has possessed it.

If anyone has a clue to its origin, feel free to leave a comment or email me.

If it turns out to be a masterpiece by a famous, famous painter of whom I’m unaware, wouldn't that be a great way to start 2010!?

Cheers and Happy New Year!

Discovering "Blue Boy," "Pinkie," and "Red Boy"

Today’s Image

Sarah Barret Moulton: Pinkie by Sir Thomas Lawrence

In the Public Domain
This is the time of year when people tend to do a lot of reminiscing about holidays past and the year--in this case, the decade--coming to a close. That got me to thinking about some of the art I remember from my childhood. Without giving out the exact timeframe, I will only say that it was a while back.

Some of the art I remember from my grandmother’s house is indelibly burned up there in my brain, and I can see it "there" whenever I want to.

Hanging on her walls were "Blue Boy," "Red Boy," and "Pink Lady." At least that’s what she called them, so that’s what we called them. I’m still lucky enough to be in possession of "Red Boy" and "Pink Lady," although "Blue Boy" somehow vanished over the years.

These are framed prints, of course. If we had the originals, I wouldn’t be sitting here writing a blog about them, now would I?

I decided to do a little online research after I recently viewed "Red Boy" and "Pink Lady" again. Here’s what I found out. I hope you find it interesting.

"Blue Boy" is really called THE Blue Boy, and it’s by Thomas Gainsborough painted around 1770. According to Wikipedia it was Gainsborough’s most famous painting, and it’s a portrait of a man with the unflattering name of Jonathan Buttall. It says it is a historical costume study intended to pay homage to the Dutch painter Van Dyck of Charles II. It stayed in collections in Europe until it was sold to American railroad magnate, Henry Huntington, in 1921. It hangs today in the Huntington Museum in San Marino, California.

Based on the comment received by a reader, I subsequently edited this blog to clarify information about the painting known as Red Boy. Blue Boy and Red Boy are often thought of together because of the obvious similarity in names; however, the real Red Boy was painted by Sir Thomas Lawrence depicitng Charles William Lambton.

The painting we were calling"Red Boy" is actually titled Manuel Osorio Manrique de Zuniga by Francisco de Goya, painted about 1790. It shows a little boy in a fancy red suit with lace standing next to a cat and a bird cage. The original hangs in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City.

And it turns out, "Pink Lady" is actually Sarah Barrett Moulton:“Pinkie” also by Sir Thomas Lawrence. It was painted about 1794. Sarah was the daughter of a wealthy plantation owner in Jamaica, and her family nickname was Pinkie. It also hangs in the Huntington Museum.

Anyway, I’m glad to know the actual titles and artists of these three paintings that I remember so vividly from childhood and which I still enjoy today. Perhaps they sparked my interest in art.

I have one more “mystery” painting from my grandmother’s house that I’ll discuss in my next blog. Maybe you can help me discover its origin.

Cheers!

Using RED in Your Artwork

Today’s Image

A Good Use of Red

I’m seeing red, and you probably are, too. You see a lot, and I mean a lot, of red this time of year. I’m pretty sure you would agree with this.

I like red. I really do.

I don’t paint with it a lot or even much at all--oops, make that any at all—I just checked the paintings I’ve done this year. There are no objects in any of my paintings that are painted red.

I’m talking red-red. I mean red, so that you can’t help but notice that something in the painting—like a rose or vase or a fire truck—is painted RED. That would be something painted straight cadmium red light or medium or some similar screaming red.

Now let me be specific, so you don’t think I’m not telling the whole truth. I actually use red in every painting I work on. However, it’s not the straight red right from the tube. Red being one of the three primary colors, of course, I use it freely and copiously—only it’s mixed in with other colors so that the correct hue and value are achieved.

Red is like the little kid in the shopping cart screaming at the top of his or her lungs for a piece of candy that Mom or Dad refuse to give. Please, would someone just stop him or her from making such a screeching racket.

Red is perfect for attracting attention, but you should—no, you must--use it sparingly; otherwise, if there’s too much of it, it loses its punch, if you know what I mean.

That’s what red is like, a punch. They must have been talking about red when they came up with the term “a punch of color.”

Have you noticed there’s no such thing as a royal red? There’s a royal blue and a royal purple, but no royal red. I think I know why.

Red is not a civilized color. It’s wild and wants to be free. No wonder the Fauves used it.

How about a nice alizarin crimson? Now there’s a civilized shade of red. Then there are all the maroons and the deep, dark cherry reds. Those are wonderful reds.

If you add white to red, which seems like the right thing to do to tone it down--watch out! You get pink, red’s bastard step-child. Pink is a completely different color from red, and it can ruin your painting if you try to mix it.

There’s an old joke you’ve probably heard about how to get your painting(s) selected for a show or juried exhibit. It goes like this—“if you can’t paint it big, paint it red; if you can’t paint it red, paint it big; but you’re better off painting it big and red!”

And that, my friends, is how I feel about red.

Cheers!

A New Way to Illustrate and Author a Book!

Today’s Image

Jenny Gives A Pony Ride

A Book for Children

Copyright 2009

I wanted to tell you about a children’s book on which a fellow watercolorist and I collaborated—I authored it, and she illustrated it. First, the details—it’s titled Jenny Gives A Pony Ride (and it’s available now on Amazon.com). It's cover is Today’s Image.

I thought you may find it interesting the way the project evolved.

It all started last summer. One of the members of my watercolor class has a definite style of painting that is recognized as being open, flowing, soft, and which usually puts you in a cheerful or relaxed mood when you look at her paintings. She also illustrated a previous children’s book titled Too Too Many TuTus, a clever title I think.

This artist also likes to paint animals—dogs, cats, chickens, pigs, and cows, among others. One day she brought her painting of a donkey to class. During one of the breaks I casually told her she should write a story to go with the portrait of the donkey.

She replied. “Why don’t you write one?” I thought, well, OK, I can probably do that, and that’s how our collaboration started.

I thought about the story line for a couple of weeks, and actually wrote it in about a week. It’s about a little donkey named Jenny, which also happens to be the name for a young female donkey. Jenny lives on a farm with her family and best friend, Boswell, the dog. Jenny, who dreams of giving pony rides down at Old Main stables, wants to try out for the pony-ride team, but runs into an obstacle because she’s a donkey.

It’s really a story about how it’s OK to be different. I hope you and a child in your life, if there is one, enjoy it. Here’s the link to order one or you can just go to Amazon.com and type the title in the search box to find it on Amazon. (And thanks!).

Anyway, with the story in hand, the illustrator and I met for two or three work sessions where we decided which and how many paintings we thought we needed. It was totally an iterative and collaborative process. Sometimes the story dictated what the art should be, but sometimes one of her paintings added so much to the story that it was edited to accommodate the art.

The book was published and produced totally online through one of the new print-on-demand publishing or self-publishing services. Basically, you write the manuscript, plan and layout the art with the text, then save it as a PDF file, then upload it to the service. For a fee, you then receive proof copies, as many as it takes until you’re satisfied. The book is then “published” on the service’s site and also on Amazon.com.

It was a great experience where writing and art come together to produce something that I think readers, especially children, will enjoy. After you’ve read Jenny Gives A Pony Ride, please feel free to write your own book review on Amazon.com!

Cheers!

Are Art Rules Made To Be Broken?

Today’s Image

An Un-ruly Art Car

Photo Copyright 2008

Are there “rules” in artwork? I’ve been thinking about this recently as I work on my current watercolor. Hmmm…

I had a couple of false starts on my painting, and by that I mean, I actually started completely over. Why, you may ask, would I do such a thing?

Well, it seems my current painting contains architectural detail on several buildings in addition to a broad street that brings the viewer into the painting from the lower left corner—and, it seems, I did not straighten it properly as I laid down my sketch from the reference photo.

The view I’m painting is several stories above street level, looking out at the horizon and at the same time down to the street. One reason I wanted to paint this picture—it reminds me of some of the Impressionist paintings of Paris streets, and if it were reminiscent of that, that's fine by me.

Originally I was advised to straighten and align the painting so that the left side of the main building was more vertical (?) than it appeared in the photo. The camera “lies” or so it seems.

Therefore, I “straightened” the building as I sketched the main elements onto my relatively expensive sheet of 300-lb. watercolor paper. Then I happily began painting my picture.

However, during critique, parts of other buildings then looked askew to several people who viewed it.

The discussion about this straightening got quite involved, which is a word I don’t really like to use. We got off on eye-level and site lines and vanishing points—both above and below. This is in addition to the fact that it’s a foggy, misty day, which fuzzes up the whole thing.

The consensus from this discussion was that the painting would never “look right” due to the misaligned views, so much so that I got the impression viewers would experience vertigo or worse.

I started completely over with sketching the main elements on a whole new sheet of watercolor paper. And I began painting the picture again. I will show it to you when I finish it, but that probably won’t be for a few weeks and after the busy holiday period. But I will.

So anyway, to bring this discussion back to where it started—are there rules in artwork?

Well, of course, but are they iron-clad? In my humble opinion, no way. In fact, I think that’s what makes art, art. I know some, many, or most of the famous and well-know painters studied and followed all the art-school rules.

But aren’t spontaneity, creativity, and ‘joie de vivre’ (to throw in a little French) just as important? I certainly think so.

Cheers!

A Practical Way To Frame Watercolor Paintings

Today’s Image

Metal Sectional Frames

Today’s blog is a about a practical way to frame your watercolor paintings-- at least what I think is a practical way. I’ve blogged about framing before, and I like to bring it up every once in a while because it is part of the whole art process.

If you’re a regular viewer, then you know I embrace frugality. Let me explain, if you will, being frugal is not the same thing as being cheap. I see cheap as being focused only on price with little or no regard for any intrinsic value and certainly not quality.

Frugality, however, is a lifestyle that seeks to find a balance in value and quality for the purpose of not wasting or needlessly squandering assets. It is the antithesis of consumerism and over-the-top spending. I see frugality as part of “being green.”

Okay, enough of that; back to my practical picture framing.

I am assuming that if you are a watercolor painter, then occasionally you want to frame your work in order to enter an exhibit or as a gift or simply to hang in your studio. I frame my watercolors for all these reasons.

Let’s face it. Framing can be expensive, or what I think is expensive; that is, upwards of $200US for a medium-sized painting and even more if it’s a custom frame job depending on the cost of living in your areas. The Plexiglas alone can cost $40-100US.

Let me add, I don’t want my paintings to look cheap. No, I want them to look professional. I don’t want the viewer to even notice the frame(s) in either a positive or negative way. It’s the art they should be looking at. An artist friend once heard a professional artist say that a frame is similar to a nice pair of shoes for an outfit—they should complement the outfit and neither detract from it nor attract attention to it. I like that, and wanted to pass it along.

So, being frugal, I asked several of my artist friends, some of whom are also frugal, what they do to frame their paintings.

Here’s what to do:

Purchase sectional metal frames (in black, silver, or brass--and Today's Image) in the lengths needed when they are on sale half-price. I can’t find a brand name, but I buy them at one of the chain arts & crafts stores in my area. They are usually on sale every third week or so. (You can’t assemble the frame without hardware, so don’t forget to get it in the little plastic bag next to the frames. You will only forget it once if you have to make an extra trip back to the store!)

Buy the less expensive foam core as the backing for your picture and frame. The arts & craft store I mentioned carries foam core in 30 x 60-in (77 x 153-cm) sheets for about $6US on sale, and you can cut them yourself to the size you need (very carefully, please) with an X-acto knife or similar.

Rather than buying the high quality and more expensive .25-in (.6-cm) Plexiglas at the arts or framing stores, I get the thinner, and less expensive, acrylic sheet. A big-box home improvement store in my area carries the Optix brand of acrylic sheets in the .08-in (.2-cm) thickness. It’s perfectly suitable, AND they will cut it to your exact measurements for FREE. You can’t beat this deal.

One piece that I DON’T scrimp on is the mat. It’s so integral to the beauty, or whatever, of your artwork that it needs to be done right. Buy a quality mat, and let the framing professional cut it for you. This is one time I don’t mind the cost (at least not too much). A 24 x 30-in (61 x 77-cm) mat cost me $13US.

Assemble the frame yourself. If I can do it, so can you. The metal sectional frames are relatively easy to put together. You have to align the corner pieces just so, but it’s easy once you get the hang of it. I first assemble three of the sections with two of the sections being the longest sides. Then stack the acrylic sheet, the mat, your painting, and the foam backing. Carefully slide this “sandwich” into the three assembled sections, and then assemble the fourth sectional side. Don’t forget to install the springy curved pieces that hold the picture tightly inside the frame, but WATCH OUT—those things can really spring back in your face, so you should wear eye protection.

All that’s left is to add a wire hanger, and your masterpiece is beautifully (and frugally) framed and ready for the spotlight.

Cheers!