i love the sketches of the guitar player!
your paintings are great your sketches are great your life drawing are super dooper... lol great work mate
nice work on the trees and foliage..hmm again Pancho get the help of the masters..I really like the way Nicolas Poussin treats the greenery..such simplicity ..the way he plays off with lights and darks found within the trees..check him out ..he might help you improve some of yours..
Hey I know that reflecting pool.
Nice Work Ramon. Good to see that you're still rocking the oils durring the downtime (even with this heat.) Seems lately my work ethic has suffered somewhat on account of relationship issues and the day to day tedium. Need to get back in the swing of things though, and finish one of these drawings.
Just out of curiousity, have you ever been to that place the Atheneum on Park Blvd (in University Heights by El Zarape)? I was thinking about sitting in on some life drawing sessions there, but haven't heard much about the place.
Allejo, thanks for the advice. I don't particularly like Poussin, at least his landscapes because I find them too mannered. I think you suggested Corot some time ago, I've been checking him out and I really like his work, I've also been seeing how Sargent, Sorolla, and James Gurney handle trees.
Jason, I know what you mean about slacking man, actually those were gouache paintings done much quicker than oils, I haven't had the patience to work with oils until today. I haven't been to the Atheneum, but I was considering taking a class there awhile ago
Here's my first oil after a brief affair with gouache I actually feel like I learned a lot about handling oil from being away from it. I've also been studying a LOT of perspective lately and damn it was helpful in painting this. Since this painting turned out halfway decent, it's probably going in my portfolio along with the still lifes.
Last edited by Ramon Hurtado; July 19th, 2008 at 11:56 PM.
Here's a finished charcoal layout for the tree painting (which I'm basically handling as an animation background painting). I plan to transfer the outlines and do a gouache painting of the subject soon
Also, a cast study I worked on for a few hours till the light changed. I'm going to start doing more of these.
Oh, and I found out about an amazing painter today
PS. I just got a new computer and I realized how different my images look on this screen. The paintings look gaudy and terrible! I can only imagine what people have been seeing over the years and considering to be my best efforts!
Plein air I started today, still have some more work to do, need to straighten the pillar, add the bars for the window, the plants in the foreground, etc.
Today I ventured out into the sun again to settle a score with yesterday's first plein air. I managed to finish the plants in the foreground and the window bars. Overall I'm fairly happy with the values here, I think this is an area that's been seeing some improvement in my recent work. Also, I think the perspective is right for the most part, I can't praise Rex Vicat Cole's book enough, I think my understanding of the subject is more intuitive now.
That's a nice painting, Ramon. It has a nice sense of light. I would only say that the shadow on the ground in front of the garbage can doesn't feel like it's resting on a ground plane. It feels like a solid mass with the garbage can. Maybe it needs some reflected light or to have a warm tone scumbled into it. You are really kicking butt with your paintings.
Last edited by deepbluehue; July 21st, 2008 at 09:32 PM.
thanks deepblue, I hadn't caught that!
Random facts: I know it's hard to see but it's not a trashcan, actually, it's the water tank from the painting with the big tree. I was basically standing in opposite spots in these paintings. Also, fun fact, that big lump straining the green cloth thing is one of my cats sleeping
Excellent, that last one! Good job of separating foreground and middle ground. I think though you may have a few to many large whites there at the same value. Back wall, giant rectangle and then the sunlit stone wall in the foreground. Could be teh photo too though. Flowerbed is painted very well!
what substrates and grounds are you using?
[url=http://galleryonefone.blogspot.com[/url] This would be my gallery in Sweden
This would be my Pleine Air blog
Tim:Thanks for the comments...but...sub..stra..huh? I'm guessing that means the priming...right? Anyway I'm using wooden panels I got for free from my cousin who used to work at a furniture factory. I prime them with acrylic gesso, and when I paint outdoors I usually only thin with mineral spirits.
Here's something I did today at the San Diego marina. The boat left just as I was finishing, I was really lucky it didn't leave earlier.
Last edited by Ramon Hurtado; July 24th, 2008 at 01:35 AM.
Some more work on the finished gouache version of the HP Lovecraft painting
like the water on the boat one, and the detailed foliage on your house painting...
on your gouche.. I think the movement of the eye is a bit too fast..if you notice..everything points to the center of interest.. the perspective, the warm colors ,the empty space beetween the donkey and the tree. i think you could still tweek the elements in your composition..
make the expression of the tree more forcefull..people tend to look at faces, even up the key on it(the contrast) so my eye stays longer around the piece..
if you know what i mean ..i start from the left because thats how most people read..and in less than a second am focused on the point of interest..so there is too much balance on the right..varied a little..
you could make the donkey bigger, have more definition on him, maybe turn his head somewhere..he is turning..very obvious to your hot spot (boringg...) even the rake on the haystack is pointing to the right..make it point up (they serve as strong stops..you have the big one which is your tree, where are the smaller ones, hierarchy!!)..or point the opposite way..diagonals in compositon make the eye move fast..they serve as pointers..so point it some other way..
the upper left part of the tree,next to the moon can be darker..to tie back to the moon..remember that we focus our eyes on the lights and the darkest darks.
Maybe add some elements on that empty path ,to make it slower transitional..maybe the man..left some stuff as he walked to the tree?..
maybe add another human element, (put a son or a little daughter) maybe he stayed in the cart, looking scared far beyond..
i also think you diminished the man too much..make him bigger, the same with the gate which i really like how you design it like..make it bigger..
The tree is shown too much as a whole..blow it up some more..so the upper limbs encase the whole scenario.. check the boring POUSSIN haha.., see how he manage to stage trees within the picture plane. you might argue that you wont be able to put the face of the tree, so move it down..maybe to eye level..is too up there..relate it to the man..maybe the tree face is just behind him...one element is accentuated more when you put his opposite,next.. a man is looked older when you have something to compare too..a young child..one is more beautiful if you put an ugly element next to it..the law of balance..something the masters used extensively..
thanks for the comments guys, I'll respond individually later in the week. For now here's a study of prud'hon
after an old italian engraving...unfortunately I gave this poor bastard a huge left hand
This study and the one after Prud'hon have been great for learning more about modeling form, and arriving at a more finished result. The lesson I learned was to keep values close and use fluid paint for the transitions (I thin with mineral spirits) to achieve smoothness without overworking. Hope this is of some use to someone
I think I'll be doing a lot more grisailles in the future!
Thanks for being the real deal, pancho. Just viewed the whole thread, well done. I'm especially impressed with your dedication to the human figure--your hard work has, and still is paying off.
If I may, some thoughts on the Lovecraft piece:
I haven't read the book/short story/whatever it is, so I don't exactly know what you are trying to capture. Regardless, to me, you lost a lot of the mood presented in the original charcoal drawing. I think it may be an issue of color. Though the orange presents a brilliant contrast to the blues surrounding it, it seems a little blown out. This may be partly due to the photograph or my computer moniter, but it seems like it gets a little too warm. Also, the latern casts a little too much light, and it dominates the painting. When I think of scary, I think of dark. I would personally have toned down the strength of the latern, and thrown a little more of the right side of the painting in the darkness. This might take some of the focus off of the ruins, and place it on the tree, which I assume is the most important element of the story. You might even shift the angle of the figure. He seems to not even notice the tree, almost as if he is looking past the ruins at something off in the distance. If this is better in keeping with the story, then by all means leave it, but I imagine that the figure would be viewing the tree. Also, on the ruins: I don't really believe them. It may be due to the stage of the painting, but they don't quite seem grounded. I also have no idea as to their original function. Though part of the mystery of ruins is guessing the function, it must be remebered that they weren't always ruins--they once served as an important structure. Does the story give any clues as to the original function of the ruins? If not, create one, and try to work with that. As they stand, they seem placed more as a symbol for ruins rather than actual ruins.
I hope I didn't offend, I just wanted to present some of my thoughts.
Thanks for your thoughts Sedig, they're much appreciated.
I guess this is as good a time as any to explain what I'm after with the Lovecraft painting. In the story, a sculptor dies, and his friend makes a big fancy tomb for him, full of sculptures, etc. Near the tomb there grows a large, misshapen oak tree that resembles a dying man. Years go by, and few of the townspeople ever go by the place at night.
My idea was to loosely base the painting on this. In my mind I saw a curious man who comes across the ruins and decides to explore. He's supposed to be absorbed by the ruins, which draw so much of his attention that he doesn't even notice the tree. The man isn't supposed to be scared, and the mood isn't supposed to be all that scary either.
the man is the focal, first thing to be noticed, then the tree, then everything else as time allows. Hence why I saved saturated colors for that area, along with the strongest value contrast. Allejo, I know lot of elements point to him because I designed the composition that way, bearing in mind that things are read from left to right. The idea is to arrest the viewer's attention with the guy exploring, then they might start to wonder about his surroundings, etc, and look at other elements in the composition. The main lines of the tree were created such that they would create a visual pathway for the eye (look for it, it's an s curve) to enter and exit the composition.
That being said, I'm not sure how much I like this painting at this point. I haven't worked on it for a few days, and I'm actually pretty discouraged by it. I might just start another composition (or continue along with the kafka one). Although I have all the research done for the Lovecraft one so I might as well finish it. However, as it stands i don't feel like it's showcasing the best of my abilities.
Anyway, thanks a lot for the criticism guys, I really appreciate it, and I do need a little kick in the ass every now and then I'm off to read Harvey Dunn's notes and study some master paintings, see if any inspiration comes my way.
Hey Ramon.. just wanted to drop in and say I really love the boat in the marina. Im loving the reflection.. one of my favorite paintings of yours
"We are the music makers... and we are the dreamers of dreams."
Pancho nice grisailles..LET ME CORRECT U,you gave the POOR bastard a RIght hand hehe
hmm im doing some GRISAILLES with charcoal..after Michelangelo..damn this guy knows so much anatomy is overwhelming..but is who im constantly studying so im not giving up!!hehe question how are you able to work with turps without the paint becoming chalky?? i actually use thin down paint for the underdrawing only..done sometimes with raw siena or burnt umber..then to finish I take black and white with Oil only...
Man, your drawing skills are improving really really fast.
Last edited by the_allejo05; August 1st, 2008 at 04:28 AM.
Well crap. I feel kinda like a five year old who just said something really insensitive but didn't know it at the time.
Whatever you decide to do with the painting, I'm sure the decisions will be good ones. Keep up the solid work.
Joe: Thanks man, glad you liked it
Allejo: haha yeah to be honest I always get left/right mixed up, i was thinking it was his left/our right....or something.....my 2nd grade teacher would not be proud of me right now
Michelangelo is great to study, he did know a lot of anatomy. However, he still made some mistakes, or added extra bumps, etc. His drawing and compositions were so good that most of the time we don't even notice though. So if you run into something weird don't be too surprised.
Keeping the paint from being chalky mainly has to do with how much white you use, i only use as much as necessary. Plus, you should dip your brush in turp before you but the paint on, so the paint won't stay in your turp container and dirty it up. I ran out of oil about a month ago, I prefer to use turp whenever I can anyway, and use paint out of the tube at the later stages. Also, only use as much turp as you need, don't let it get runny.
Sedig: Oh hey, no worries man The reason I post here is to get honest opinions, by contributing you're doing me a great service!
hopefully I'll have some work to post later today
Portrait of my little sister Sam. I used white gouache for the lights, inspired by a drawing by Lorenzo di Credi. According to the jury at home, I managed a decent likeness this time
Last edited by Ramon Hurtado; August 1st, 2008 at 10:28 PM.
Been a bit busy lately. Just wanted to give you a quick heads up!
You're doing great. Keep up the good work.
"There is no such thing as 'accurate drawing'. There is beautiful
drawing, and ugly, and nothing else." JAD Ingres, Ecrits sur l'art
Hey Tom great to hear from you man, your absence will only be excused by showing us what you've been working on!
I convinced my sister, Sam, to sit for a longer portrait today. Her one condition was that one of our cats be included, so I obliged. Here's the start, about 2 hours so far with breaks. Just resolving the composition, proportions, some of the modeling, etc.
Likeness is good so far (at least according to mom and Sam), but I will make it stronger as I progress. I might work on the underpainting a little more, finish the other hand and the cat (if he doesn't fall asleep again) before moving on. I plan to work some full color direct painting on top, and maybe some glazing on the skin.
I'm thinking I'll finish in the next 3-4 sessions, things are going very smoothly so far. The recent grisailles I did are helping so much, ditto for all the anatomy I've been studying. I'm just happy because I'm seeing the planes more clearly than before.
Nice Pancho.. I think on your first portrait of your sister..there might be a little problem with the eyes area..the eyes should be more set in..but again..is not easy..just keep going back to your skull, and master drawings..
the Longer seating of your sister is nice..but try to keep the lights and darks separated (sp), my recomendation is to start with only your darks ,stablish a good transparent underdrawing..a sort of watercolor with only the burnt umber, try to do all your values with only that color, then slowly add the whites (always think of white as the light actually falling on your masses..Also i think you are missing your lines..start with lines as a guide..specially around the hands and cat..there is a confusion of mass there..although is my favorite part of the painting, then you can subsequently lose the lines and put tone. I think you suffer a little bit in your work from life..when you want to do things 3d already..meaning..start seing things flatly, values flatly, it is easier..model with light..softly,then slowly built up to mass..slowly put construction and geometrize things.. the bigger portrait of your sisters suffers from looking too much at her face..thats why the features look bigger than they are..also be more sensitive, she is a girl,not a woman..treat soft very softly. Hmm also think the surroundings of your sister,the background,the darkness and lightness of the objects around..the sofa ,etc..the pose, really design that..best examples..Vandycke and Sargent..they knew how to simplify a protrait elegantly ,dont get me wrong..nothing wrong with honesty but taste shows hehe.
oh i'll post two favorite paintings from Leonardo..he is the most excellent when it comes to softness in values..look how simple the features of the face are treated..notice also..than in the underpainting.. he has decided that the nose..being the most projecting feature of the face receives the most light, and how that graduates slowly from there..(is good to think of a profile view..when you are trying to decide..things in perspective, think topview,front elevation,side view..like an architect. the angel on the other hand ,he thought of the most light hitting the forehead..then it graduates down from there.
although the faces are idealized...and look like dolls and statues..learn the lightning
Also, on the portrait, one of the problems might be setting up your light, a 45 degree is best..instead of half light ,half dark..,meaning you should get some light on the cheek.also watch your reflected lights they should be less intense than your highlights...(i here mean the reflected light you put on the ear and hair..although that might be your intention..but still there is no hierarchy of lights..they compete for attention and that makes your portrait suffer from 3dness),just as you think different values in dark..you should in light. study Masterworks..how the light patterns are dristributed on the human body..these they learn from the antique,and if you notice..they are always repetead throughout many masters..it is not only knowing the planes of the face..but how to artistically and properly they are lit..is a language..then you can brake free..
Last edited by the_allejo05; August 2nd, 2008 at 11:09 PM.
Hey Allejo, I agree with you on the first one.
On the 2nd one, I'm not sure what you mean about keeping the lights and darks separated, since I'm already doing that, it just might be a bit unclear since it's an underpainting. I did start linear and flatly, I did a charcoal underdrawing, then proceeded with thin umbers (as I always do) modeled the form as far as I felt necessary and gradually added white. As for the cat and all that being unclear, well, have ever tried to keep a little kitten still? Plus, the cat won't be particularly hard to paint.
Also, the lighting is basically 3/4 light to 1/4 shadow, a classic setup that the masters used all the time. I know reflected lights are darker than actual lights, and I'm sure this holds true in both portraits. If you're referring to the first one, that's not reflected light, that's light from another window...i.e. two light sources. For the record, I look at masterworks for about half an hour before I start any major project
There are far better portraitists than Leonardo, but I'll check him out to see what I learn.
Thanks for the comments
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)