Comment by Thomas Wezwick on December 26, 2011 at 7:01pm

I sure do like the simplicity........always harder then it looks......

Comment by Claudia L. Brookes on December 26, 2011 at 7:03pm

it helps if you don't have much time...

Comment by Robert Rohrich on December 27, 2011 at 11:16am

I like both of your figures very much.  However I wish you had had the time to suggest some minimal facial features.

Comment by Scott Palmer on December 27, 2011 at 7:25pm

Robert, she is going for the Peggy Kroll Roberts effect.... which is extremely simple and loose...  I think she has done extremely well with this style of painting! 

Comment by Thomas Wezwick on December 27, 2011 at 8:10pm

Or Gary E Smith.............

Comment by Claudia L. Brookes on December 28, 2011 at 8:43am

Actually, have become a fan of Peggy Kroll Roberts & have attended one of her workshops, also one of Kim English's--great training for doing quick figures in accurate masses. But don't know if it's the chicken or the egg, because I went to the PKR workshop because fellow artists had already pointed out that I painted like her. Also interested in the Charles Hawthorne/Henry Hensche color mass influence--it's big in Annapolis, MD, as a lot of good people there studied at the Cape Cod school at one time; for contemporary artists, think of Camille P's work--she has taken it a step further. "Light on  Goldsborough" was one of my experiments in that vein, and I like the painting a lot. Hensche's students went out into the full sun on the beach and painted clothed figures; the faces were usually obscured by large hats and  the values made extreme by the sun, so the exercise got to be known as painting "mudheads," since 'mud" that was the basic color you mixed for the heads & faces, and you couldn't distinguish features.

Comment by yvonne lunde-andreassen [vonnie] on December 28, 2011 at 8:54am

The colour is wonderful but, as Robert, would have liked some impression of facial characteristics.

 

Comment by Beth G Dean on December 28, 2011 at 9:03am

Claudia, you might want to check out Lois Griffel.  She took over the Cape Cod school from Henry Hensche, who was her mentor.  She is a wonderful teacher of the "Hensche method".  ALthough the school closed a few years ago, Lois still teaches, has 2 books out ( one fairly new) and has moved from Provincetown to Arizona. 

Comment by Margie Guyot on December 28, 2011 at 9:05am

I think your painting is FINE the way it IS!!!  Facial details would have taken attention away from the beautiful light on her legs, the fine brushwork.  You don't need to include small details that everybody knows is there.

Comment by Claudia L. Brookes on December 28, 2011 at 9:29am

Anyone looking for much detail in my paintings will probably have to stop looking, or look elsewhere.  I make it a practice to stop "sooner, rather than later," and to me, most paintings are finished as soon as I have captured an essence--it may be a  a recognizable image, a mood or feeling, an impression, or a light effect. As a consequence, I have rarely "overworked" a painting, and for some tastes (including my own husband's), I "underwork" pretty consistently. However, I have a pretty big following for the kind of painting I do, and I avoid the artist's common dilemma of knowing when a painting is "finished." I am most definitely an "alla prima" painter, believing that a painter's "handwriting" changes somewhat from day to day, so like to finish every painting in one sitting (no matter how long) if I possibly can. When I can't automatically think of what to add next, I am done. I teach watercolor classes and see many, many paintings ruined from overworking;  you can't destroy a painting from underworking!

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page