I'm back in experimentation mode. I sketched this from an old B&W photo and toyed with using only three colors—with a catch. I mostly used just two of them, saving the third as an accent to define the focus of the painting. I'm not sure this worked. I can't decide if I needed the background to be even less colorful or if that would look gimmick-y. Or maybe the background needs to be lighter in value or less contrasty? I'll have to give it some thought and keep playing.
 |
| 12" x 9" |
Meanwhile, this is for Pat and Ken. Pat, because she wanted to see these side-by-side, and Ken, because he always questions the value of explorations with different media. Here's the same subject in watercolor and oil. The watercolor (left) is on aquaboard and sized 6" x 6". The oil (right) is on canvas board, sized 8" x 8".
My thoughts? Besides the differences in speed (weeks vs. months), the oil feels more formal and the watercolor feels livelier. She looks like she sat for the oil, while the watercolor seems more like a moment in time. On both, I do love that sweater! I don't think I have the inclination or the patience to do it again in oil pastels or colored pencil or even mosaic, so I'm done here.
I’ve seen home movies of my grandmother looking just like that minus the flowers. Tight away you know she’s outside of a church probably a First Communion.
ReplyDeleteThe WC wins. Skin and hair much more lively.
Yep, it's a church and a wedding! I really hoped to get that "typicalness" of the women and the time.
DeleteGrandma is interesting with the crowd behind her. She still stands out on her own. Even with the echo women close by. Now while the oil painting is impressive, the watercolor is expressive and so alive. I go for watercolor by a (s)mile.
ReplyDeleteI am guessing cobalt blue and one of the siennas, with rose for the accents. Gramma looks great. Myself I would like a darker background except for the people's heads which I think should be lighter so they stand out against the darkness.
ReplyDeleteWell I guess you know that we are all going to choose vibrant watercolor over stuffy oil paintings. But really, I like the reddish cast to the right side of her face which wears a more lively expression than her oily sister. And I like those blue accents on her sweater which oily does not have. Could it be because oil is too heavy and slow and does not have the joyful brightness of watercolor? I think we all know the answer to that one. And may I add that oilers are a bunch of dorks and watercolorists are the cool kids.
I'm still working up to making room for cobalt on my palette. I actually thought it might work better for this one as it's a little softer. But this is my usual Ultramarine and Transparent Red Oxide. The red is rose--you're absolutely right about that. I have to agree that watercolorists are the cool kids, but dorks? That cracks me up! Some of the old-time oilers were okay, even cool, I think.
DeleteI like the added context of the background on the first painting. She still stands on her own as a portrait, but I like the activity behind her . Yes definitely the watercolor is livelier and more playful, but it’s a nicely painted oil portrait too. But the mood doesn’t match the girl in the oil painting.
ReplyDeleteI would lighten the background characters just a bit and not uniformly. And maybe tone down the white dress which draws my eye away from the main focus.
ReplyDeleteI like both girls. A little more precision with the oil which is good and a little more expressive with the watercolor which is also good.
ReplyDelete