Helen Opie said. While it may not be possible to teach composition beyond 'templates', I do believe that one can teach and awareness of composition, so that the student becomes aware of composition and of looking at in in other's paintings, thus eventually learning to make interesting compositions themselves without templates. I found I learnt a lot from Skip Lawrence's technique of getting his students to describe each painting's composition as he showed our previous day's work in his 'magic mat' & frame. Doing this every morning, with a wide variety of paintings/compositions helped make all of us conscious of the many varieties (templates?) of composition, and this in turn gave us a planning-vocabulary when setting up our own compositions. Download lagu ending hunter x hunter suara angin.
He'd ask, 'What sort of a composition is this?' And we were to reply with whatever we thought it was - mostly he used Edgar Whitney's varieties of composition, yet there was always room for dissenters or for suggesting other descriptions - we weren't learning templates, we were learning principles of composition, to give us something to think about when doing our own composing - OR when we found ourselves in trouble over an unsuccessful painting and could look into our (mental or noted) 'dictionary of possibilities' to see where the trouble might lie.
This is a wonderful book, and very much of its own time (late 30's early 40's). Long sentences of ruminative thought, theory, and allegorical language: 'Nature is not the least concerned with artistic attributes, although she has prior claim on the artist and insists that her qualities receive first attention. If she is to be represented, she demands that she be not occasionally but often consulted' The sentence is inspiring and throws me into a whirl of intention, but I cannot help laughing as This is a wonderful book, and very much of its own time (late 30's early 40's). Long sentences of ruminative thought, theory, and allegorical language: 'Nature is not the least concerned with artistic attributes, although she has prior claim on the artist and insists that her qualities receive first attention. If she is to be represented, she demands that she be not occasionally but often consulted' The sentence is inspiring and throws me into a whirl of intention, but I cannot help laughing as I read it. Descriptions, exhortations, and ruminations come in threes: 'While it is important that the artist thoroughly develop his artistic powers, it also is important that he use a tremendous amount of observation, concentration and painting to acquire sufficient knowledge of typical shapes, proportions and other characteristics of outdoor form, line and color, for as Whipple says; 'Natuure does not capriciously scatter her secrets as golden gifts to lazy poets and luxurious darlings, but imposes tasks when she presents opportunities.'
' There are many examples and annotated photographs of beautiful painted scenes, but it is difficult to understand what Mr. Payne means in his footnotes about them. He describes principals of composition but it feels as if he could take any painting he likes and ascribe impromptu qualities to it: 'This canvas reveals the circular form of arrangement with a U influence. The vertical lines of the tree are well opposed by the strong definitions of the ground planes, as well as by the more subtle values and softened edges in the distance.' But with all of my sniggers and giggles about this book, there is also much solid information about a color palette, working habits, and materials. It adds up to an invaluable source of inspiration and instruction. After all, E.A.
Edgar Payne Composition
Payne painted gorgeously. I am happy to have an insight into his methods and ideas. I am sure to return time and time again. As much as I wanted to like this dense little book written in 1941 by a famous California landscape painter, the going was so treacherous that I had to give it up. Interspersed with wonderful information about composition were all sorts of beliefs about 'talent' and the inability of the feeble to paint. And then there were many just outdated beliefs (when you paint a cloud it should fill up the sky in a puffy cumulous way). So, from where I stand, I felt I could absorb some of this as helpful, a As much as I wanted to like this dense little book written in 1941 by a famous California landscape painter, the going was so treacherous that I had to give it up.
Interspersed with wonderful information about composition were all sorts of beliefs about 'talent' and the inability of the feeble to paint. And then there were many just outdated beliefs (when you paint a cloud it should fill up the sky in a puffy cumulous way). So, from where I stand, I felt I could absorb some of this as helpful, and then later find it was messing up my painting. I do admire Payne's painting, but this is an example where old mores and beliefs just don't work with the present.
This is a wonderful book, and very much of its own time (late 30's early 40's). Long sentences of ruminative thought, theory, and allegorical language: 'Nature is not the least concerned with artistic attributes, although she has prior claim on the artist and insists that her qualities receive first attention.
If she is to be represented, she demands that she be not occasionally but often consulted' The sentence is inspiring and throws me into a whirl of intention, but I cannot help laughing as I read it. Descriptions, exhortations, and ruminations come in threes: 'While it is important that the artist thoroughly develop his artistic powers, it also is important that he use a tremendous amount of observation, concentration and painting to acquire sufficient knowledge of typical shapes, proportions and other characteristics of outdoor form, line and color, for as Whipple says; 'Natuure does not capriciously scatter her secrets as golden gifts to lazy poets and luxurious darlings, but imposes tasks when she presents opportunities.' ' There are many examples and annotated photographs of beautiful painted scenes, but it is difficult to understand what Mr. Payne means in his footnotes about them. He describes principals of composition but it feels as if he could take any painting he likes and ascribe impromptu qualities to it: 'This canvas reveals the circular form of arrangement with a U influence. The vertical lines of the tree are well opposed by the strong definitions of the ground planes, as well as by the more subtle values and softened edges in the distance.'
But with all of my sniggers and giggles about this book, there is also much solid information about a color palette, working habits, and materials. It adds up to an invaluable source of inspiration and instruction. After all, E.A. Payne painted gorgeously. I am happy to have an insight into his methods and ideas.
I am sure to return time and time again. As much as I wanted to like this dense little book written in 1941 by a famous California landscape painter, the going was so treacherous that I had to give it up. Interspersed with wonderful information about composition were all sorts of beliefs about 'talent' and the inability of the feeble to paint. And then there were many just outdated beliefs (when you paint a cloud it should fill up the sky in a puffy cumulous way). So, from where I stand, I felt I could absorb some of this as helpful, and then later find it was messing up my painting. I do admire Payne's painting, but this is an example where old mores and beliefs just don't work with the present.
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |