It looks balanced to me. I don't know if some stranger looking at it would have any idea what it is or if that would matter. Sorry for the lateness, had the doldrums.
I kind of like backgrounds that don't relate to their foregrounds. I think it makes them both pop a little more. I did that a lot in my tomato mosaics. I don't know if it's sound artistic theory but I like it and I am the artist.
Something happened when you added the background. For me, it's more striking than the fish and has become the subject. In fact, I don't see the fish anymore. Now it's gone from a fish in water to a marine landscape, starring the sky. The fish looks like a stormy sea, so at least it's still aquatic.
"and I am the artist" nuff said. So you don't want any feedback from other artists? Anyway, I like the color difference between fish and water. The thing is the fish looks like each little section was lovingly dabbled in with colors and water. Contrastingly, the water looks like it was painted without much interest or consideration and it shows.
I love feedback, and especially when it is a bit negative, that's the way you learn stuff. When people say that it's great you don't learn a thing. I know it can be tough to be critical, and people are sticking out their neck when they go a little negative. To try to coax something out of them sometimes I ask them what do you like least.
I lost a couple days trying to figure out how to do the background, and wasn't that enthusiastic about it, but I thought, like I always do, that something will turn up, but nothing much did. Went over them three or four times, got in a little texture, like you see sometimes in stained glass, and that's the best I could do.
I'm glad you responded, Ken. Maybe if you put it aside for a bit and come back to it...or you can always turn it upside down and go after the less interesting part until it clicks and you get into it.
I love the fish but not crazy about the water. They just don’t relate to each other imo. Sorry you’re down in the dumps. Just keep painting...
ReplyDeleteI kind of like backgrounds that don't relate to their foregrounds. I think it makes them both pop a little more. I did that a lot in my tomato mosaics. I don't know if it's sound artistic theory but I like it and I am the artist.
DeleteSomething happened when you added the background. For me, it's more striking than the fish and has become the subject. In fact, I don't see the fish anymore. Now it's gone from a fish in water to a marine landscape, starring the sky. The fish looks like a stormy sea, so at least it's still aquatic.
ReplyDelete"and I am the artist" nuff said. So you don't want any feedback from other artists? Anyway, I like the color difference between fish and water. The thing is the fish looks like each little section was lovingly dabbled in with colors and water. Contrastingly, the water looks like it was painted without much interest or consideration and it shows.
ReplyDeleteI love feedback, and especially when it is a bit negative, that's the way you learn stuff. When people say that it's great you don't learn a thing. I know it can be tough to be critical, and people are sticking out their neck when they go a little negative. To try to coax something out of them sometimes I ask them what do you like least.
DeleteI lost a couple days trying to figure out how to do the background, and wasn't that enthusiastic about it, but I thought, like I always do, that something will turn up, but nothing much did. Went over them three or four times, got in a little texture, like you see sometimes in stained glass, and that's the best I could do.
I'm glad you responded, Ken. Maybe if you put it aside for a bit and come back to it...or you can always turn it upside down and go after the less interesting part until it clicks and you get into it.
DeletePersonally I'd love to see the amethyst tones of the fish emphasized more. OPERA!
ReplyDelete