Before the storm

Add a Comment

Comment by Jessica Futerman on January 30, 2013 at 8:12

Hi Michael - thanks very much for taking the time to add your comments!  You might be right about the reason the block-in is better, but at the time, it seemed too simplified to leave as it was & the middle foreground & ochre hill didn't make sense.  I also found it difficult to keep the water such a light value without it becoming a boring white mass (likewise the sky).  And once I got going, I just kept making changes, as you see!!  Anyway, I'll see what I can do with it.  Hopefully I can learn something from this!  

Comment by Michael J. Severin on January 30, 2013 at 6:04

Hi Jessica. Although your finished painting is excellent,   I agree, your blocked in painting is much better ... and here is the reason:  Your value relationships between the arranged masses, really make that block-in glow!!!  Your value relationships also establish the great depth in the block-in. Also, you have some really nice shapes in the block-in that you eliminated in the final painting.  When you over painted the block-in, you lost much of your original value plan and lost the nice shapes you had in the mountains, lake, and that middle foreground.  In the block-in, the shapes of your mountain are great and they seem to relate to each other as 1 shape mass.  In the final, you completely change the mountain shapes.  Your lake had a great shape, but you changed that also.  You could have stopped at the second image ..added the sunshine sparkling on the water (as in the final), and called it a day.

Comment by Jessica Futerman on January 30, 2013 at 4:05

Thanks a lot for the very helpful advice, Stu!  Will work on it some more & see what happens.  I thought about letting the path disappear in the foreground, but didn't consider having it come out at the bottom - interesting idea.  And I was having trouble with the colours of the mountains because the photo distorts them - will try to fix that.  Didn't think of highlighting a path through the water - another good idea.    I really appreciate your taking the time to give me such useful comments!  Will post the painting in its next version....

Comment by Stuart J. Gourlay on January 30, 2013 at 3:24

Jessica, this is very nice.  Several comments to help you: first, your road makes a nice lead in, but it would do better if it came out the bottom of the picture and not the corner; second, your hills in the foreground would look better if you put some trees sticking up over the top to break up the line of the hills; third, you could lead the viewer back into the painting better if you highlighted a path through the water that leads your eye back; fourth, your diststant mountains should be a little bluer--basically the way atmospheric perspective works is that first you lose the yellows and then the reds, and everything gets lighter.  What this means is that your closest  range is a green, then blue green, then blue violet, then blue, each getting lighter with distance.  The fifth thing is to make your blues a little greener in the sky and water; things harmonize better that way.  You are doing a nice job, and I have given you a lot to think about.  I think your son likes the block in best because of its more abstract nature and more tonal (rather than colorist) style.  Try using a photo editor to turn these images into black and white images and print them on your printer and see which you and your family like best.  And by the way, maybe you are all set for Richard's next workshop on abstracting the landscape!  I hope this is helpful to you.  Your work is coming along nicely.   Stu