I was hesitating to approach this project, because it is based on the difference between painting on the spot and painting from photographs. It’s winter and too cold to paint outside, and I felt that this might compromise the entire project. On the other hand, I didn’t want to defer the assignment until next spring.

One possibility I thought about how to overcome the problem would be to paint while inside, looking through a window onto a landscape. But I live in Manhattan, and looking out of the windows of my home I’m presented with townscape views. I’ve done several views out of the windows at home already, but I have developed such a longing for nature and trees that I can’t get myself to painting skyscrapers, apartment buildings and congested roads unless I absolutely have to.

I thought about painting in public spaces, but this doesn’t work for me. From earlier experiences I know that I’m really uncomfortable painting in public. And then, I simply don’t know about places that might work. I did some research on Google, but couldn’t locate anything.

So I thought it would be better to just do what was possible now and then later on, as weather permits, rework the exercises to get a feeling for the difference of the two approaches, photo vs on-the-spot. My idea was to travel to an outwards area of Long Island, called The Hamptons. It’s a preferred summer spot for many New Yorkers, and I thought that making a walk on the seaside in winter would be nice. Too cold for painting of course, but I could take pictures and then return in spring to paint on the spot. But it’s quite a trip to get there, like 3 hours of train or bus ride, and I would need a car to get around there because of the distances between places. Weather conditions are a factor too – I wouldn’t want rent a car and get into an ice blizzard or snow storm… so I wasn’t able to fit the excursion into my schedule as yet, but hope to do this in the near future.

In the meantime, I decided on something simpler to organize and went to Central Park to take pictures. It was a sunny day with an intensely blue sky and it had snowed. I wasn’t very satisfied with my pictures because I found them quite uninteresting as landscape views. But then again, painting from a picture can be an entirely different matter. So I decided to select two or three and give it a try for the first exercise.

Before I started, I made another mark making experimentation sheet with yellow, blue and green colour remnants. Before working focused again, I wanted to play around a bit along the lines suggested by my tutor: See what the colour does on its own, make marks and learn to watch them dry.

Exercise: Painting from a photograph

The task:
– Take 2 or 3 photographs of a landscape you can return to
– Print it out in the dimensions of your watercolour paper size (A3 or A4)
– Make a watercolourpainting of the landscape

Preparations

I made a printout in A3 of my selected photograph. Then I decided not to use the printed version, but work from the computer screen instead. This decision was based on earlier experiences with using pictures as a source. I have a digital camera and save all my pictures to the computer. I tried out different sizes as sources and in the end, none was as convenient as the picture on screen. When I need an image on a larger scale, I can use my TV as an additional monitor by attaching the computer. Some of the advantages are:
– The image on the screen is lighter
– The PC permits to seamlessly zoom in, if I want to take a closer look at a detail. It also permits to zoom out similarly easily. The resulting smaller image helps me to recognize the main compositional elements and distribution of lighter and darker tones
– My printouts are of mediocre quality. When I enlarge them to A3 or more, there are colour shifts at the seams where the paper must be cut and glued together.

I can use printouts once I want to get away from the computer, but overall I think that using the PC screen works better for me.

Approaching the motif

I chose a picture of a bridge in Central Park for this exercise. What I liked about it was the flurry impression of backlit leaves, and I found it was an interesting composition, combining organic irregular shapes of the trees in the foreground and the straight, planned constructed bridge. I also liked the atmoshphere of a sunny day in winter, with the New York skyline in the background of the trees.

I took a lot of time to look closely at my photo and consider the elements and details I would like to include in the painting. I also wanted to see whether there were aspects I’d like to analyse in preparatory studies. In particular, I had the idea of using coloured oil pastels to make small yellow and orange dots for the leaves, and overpaint this with a grey-brown wash for the middle ground of the painting.

The first technical study in a new sketchbook (23 x 30 cm) indicated that the idea might work, but the paper was too light and had no texture. I anticipated that the oil pastel marks would look different on textured watercolour paper and therefore made another quick study in my A4 watercolour sketchbook. It was intended to only try out the effect, but then I developed it into a rough sketch of the scene. The painting began to work when I laid a dark wash over the bridge to increase contrast.

I was curious to see the effect of a darker background tone and made an abstract study using violet/green and black/red mixed washes over yellow and orange oil pastel spots. I realized that the intended effect would become more intense, if I used contrasting colours and dark values, like the purple background for the yellow spots. On the same sheet, I tried out using a bamboo stick to paint branches of a tree, and the effect of a nail brush. But these did not really convince me.

The quick study of my chosen scene made me realize that the picture had interesting tonal effects, which I wanted to study closer. I discovered that the trees changed their tone towards the sky from lighter to darker. This resulted in interesting contrasts – the dark bridge behind lighter trees, the darker trees before a just somewhat lighter middle ground, and then the strong contrast of almost black branches before the very light sky. I made a pastel drawing on grey paper (49 x 34.5 cm) where I tried to analyse the tonal values and capture these different types of contrasts.

This was a very analytical drawing: I began by analysing the lighter and darker values in the picture and tried to translate them into a 5-value scale, from lightest to darkest. I located the paper tone as around value 2, quite light. Initially, I used my grey pastel set without much thinking, but then I discovered that it was divided into 4 warm greys and 4 cold greys. Based on this discovery, I began reworking the drawing, using the warmer greys for organic stuff (the trees and the hay stacks), and cold tones for the stone elements, like the bridge and the skyline. This seemed to nicely separate the elements. I then applied a dark brown layer in the middle ground to unify that area. This shifted the entire area closer towards the bridge and was exactly what I intended to have the skyline at a further distance.

Watercolour painting: A bridge in Central Park

I started the painting with a pencil underdrawing to indicate the bridge and the other main elements: The skyline, the three trees in the foreground, the shapes of the bushes and hay stacks. I used oil pastels for the yellow and orange leaves, and white for the snow highlights. I used masking fluid for the backlit spots through the bridge balustrade. I began with lightest colours and then worked through medium and dark tones. Most areas were reworked because I wasn’t satisfied with the colours and tonal values of the first layer of paint. But in the end, I was quite satisfied with the painting.

I worked for two days on this painting, around 8 hours in total. This may be a bit too long, but I needed time to make breaks and just look whether I was going towards the direction I wanted, and analyse how I might improve the overall impression. Compared to previous worked out paintings, for example the yellow school bus, or the Stairway in Carl Schurtz Park, or the Chairs in Tudor Park, I think this painting is going more towards watercolour style – there is more transparency and more of letting colours run into each other.

Technical difficulties were with the large format – I found it easier to mix the right amount of colour for the A4 sketch of the scene. This large format (50 x 40 cm) requires greater amounts of paint, and also larger brushes for areas in the same colour.

I realized that I’m beginning to experiment with texture effects, for example using the dry brush technique for the shaded snow areas. I also liked how I was beginning to use wet in wet for mixing colours, for example with the hay stacks.

Contrasting to what the course materials assumed, this was not the first time I’m using a photograph as source for a painting. Rather, I switched to using photographs because I wasn’t comfortable painting outside for various reasons. I’m trying to approach a photo source “seriously”, taking time to analyse what I see and making studies that I think might help me for the final painting. I feel like I’m getting along quite well with the process – I can take pictures of scenes that capature my interest, and then paint quietly at home – independent of weather conditions and undisturbed by the presence of other people in public spaces.

Guided reflections

How successful is this painting in terms of overall effects?

I think the painting is successful. I feel that I captured the main elements that I found important and also successfully used oil pastels for the desired effect of backlit leaves. The skyline in the background is very important, because it conveys an important aspect of “you can never escape the city” This is what I feel when I’m in Central Park. There are trees, but… you can never escape the city…

How successful is it in terms of composition?

I like the composition and think it is successful, too. I analysed the basic orienting lines of the scene when I started: the horizontal top of the bridge, the tilted skyline of buildings surrounding central park which leaves only a bit of sky in the upper are, and the curved lines of the bridge base and the terrain between me as observer and the bridge. These horizontals are contrasted to the strong verticals of the three foreground trees.

How well do the tonal relationships work?

Tonal relationships work quite nicely. The tonal study I made helped quite a bit in getting the tonal relationships right. The bridge is the central element of the painting, it is dominant through its dark colour. The middle ground is composed of the trees and the skyline and these are the mid tones of my painting. Within these midtones, I let the reddish brown for the trees mix into the blue-grey of the skyline and this has the effect of pulling the trees closer to the bridge and letting the skyline recede into the background.

Another important element was the strong contrast between the black branches and the almost white sky above the skyline. I deliberately increased the contrast to an almost black-and-white contrast in the sky area. Compared with the middle ground, the tonal values of branches before their background were very close together.  I think these different types of contrast make the painting quite lively.

How true to the photograph are the colours?

I think the colours are quite true to the photograph

Does this look like a study made outdoors? If not, why not?

This is something I can’t tell. I wouldn’t assume it was made outdoors because it depicts a winter scene and it would have been too cold for a painter to work outside. From personal experience, I’d say I wouldn’t be able to paint something like this outside on the spot, because I wouldn’t feel comfortable enough in Central Park to complete a painting with so many details.

How much does this resemble the photograph?

The painting does resemble the photograph, since it takes up the composition and the colours, but it is less fine in the details. It is also less “neutral” – there’s something very personal to the way how I painted the trees and other details. I think the painting is more interesting than the photograph.

Does resemblance represent success or failure to you and why?

When I see photorealistic watercolour painting, I always have a strange feeling and while I admire the technical abilities of the painter, I tend to not want to do that kind of painting. So, exact resemblance is not my goal when I’m using a photograph. I rather see it as helping me to make an “accurate” painting with respect to the size of elements, receding lines in perspective, maybe even with tonal relationships and colours. I also see it as an opportunity to practice application of paint, washes, texture effects by trying to capture the essence of what is visible in the picture. I’d see it as a success when I’m able to find a simplification that suggests a particular detail, rather than painting that detail explicitly.

So it would be resemblance that’s based on abstraction which I’d consider success, while I’m not interested in resemblance that’s based on exact copying. In these terms, my painting is only moderately successful, because there’s not much abstraction and too much literal copying.

What problems did you encouter doing this picture?

A big problem was when I wanted to indicate the lightest parts of the painting, after I had made my outline sketch. I tried to follow the advice of beginning with lightest colours and work my way through the darkest tones. But highlights are most prominent where they are set off against dark tones. Highlights cannot be painted, but must be “left out”, surrounded by a darker tone. So there was a deadlock – if I followed the instructions to begin with lightest colours, I had no possibility of indicating my highlights and ran the risk of overpainting them.

But also with the next tones, the problem reappeared, because my second lightest tones were from the snow shades. I needed the defining elements of the bridge balustrade to know where to place them, while instructions provided no help how I would know where exactly to place these lighter areas. My pencil underdrawing was only a rough sketch. I had the desire to paint the broad elements of the painting – the mid-ground of trees and skyline, the bridge, the silhouette of the hills towards the observer – but if I had done this, I’d have overpainted the lightest areas.

As a result, I found myself fiddling with the bridge balustrade highlights at a very early stage of the painting, and this didn’t feel right. But I saw no other way of resolving the conflict. I painted the bridge in a relatively light tone to have an orientation where to place the highlights. Then I added my snow tops and backlit spots, and then I proceeded to the larger elements of the composition.

The problem is not new to me and I think it will need a lot more practice to develop a work process that accomodates how to integrate highlights without getting lost in tiny details at the very beginning of the painting.

What further information did you need to make a more successful picture?

I’m not sure what this question wants me to comment on. I don’t think that I was in need of more information, but probably more practice with watercolours would have resulted in a more fluent overall impression. The painting is a bit overworked due to layering in the middle ground, I think.

How did you know when your painting was finished?

I felt it was finished when I had eliminated those elements that I found disturbing to the overall impression. It was when I found the tonal relationships worked and I had all areas of the painting defined.

What were the limitations of this exercise?

There might be some limitations inherent in the use of a static source, rather than looking directly at a scene. This may have to do with the eyes providing the brain with two different images, one from the left eye and one from the right, to produce a three-dimensional image. When I’m looking at a photograph, I already have a two-dimensional representation, and this certainly makes a difference compared to painting from a real scene.

I have not much experience in painting on the spot, but I tend to prefer painting outside. It’s because of weather conditions and problems locating a space where I can paint comfortably, that I resigned to using photographs.

Did you notice any differences in your approach and technique in this exercise, compared to those working from direct observation?

The main difference I noticed was that when I’m working from a photograph, I can do this undisturbed at home, can take all the time I want, and there’s also a “fixed target” that will not change due to time of day. So I tend to find painting from a photograph a lot easier than painting on the spot.

Painting at home is also convenient because I have a variety of materials to choose from, which I wouldn’t carry around when painting outside. Overall, painting from a photograph poses less practical obstacles for me. Nevertheless, I hope that I will be able to find places around New York where I feel comfortable enough to paint, and I’d definitely like to make painting excursions with watercolours.

Exercise: Painting on the spot

The task:
– Return to the location at a similar time of day
– Paint one or two landscape studies on the spot
– Reflect on the painting experience while still outside

Very unexpectedly, New York experienced mild winter temperatures, plus the weekend was approaching. As a result, I was able to paint my chosen scene on the spot! I was happy about the opportunity to complete this exercise in Central Park.

I’m basing this blog section on my handwritten notes that I took while I was still on the spot. I returned to the location of my photo source in Central Park, but the lawn where I believed to have taken the original picture from was closed to rest for the winter season. I learned that the place was called Cedar Hill, and the name of my bridge was Glade Arch. I wandered around and then found a space which was moderately close to the original spot and also offered a bit of privacy from the public visiting Central park. I was also at almost the same time of day – around noon, with a backlight situation.

I was glad to have found a place for painting, but realized that the view had significantly changed. The snow had disappeared, which totally changed the overall light situation of the scene. My different viewpoint had different highlights in the scene. Despite these differences, I decided to take the chance of painting outside, since I had my equipment with me and did not want to have come in vain. I’m including the documentary photo of the new viewpoint, together with the painting that I have made on the spot.

Reflections on the experience of painting

It was really mild this afternoon, I even took off my jacket and sat there in a pullover. It may have been close to 20° (news reported 68° Fahrenheit, sort of a record high for New York in December, on the first day of winter). Nevertheless, I encountered a bunch of practical problems which made me feel quite uncomfortable painting outside.

The most trouble I had with my uncomfortable sitting position. I used a paper bag to kneel on the wet earth, and this quickly became damp and cold. My muscles began aching in this position, so I switched to sitting, but this made me bend my upper body and quickly became very uncomfortable, too. I wasn’t able to accommodate the situation, and the physical discomfort led to quick exhaustion. Lesson learned for me is that I need a little chair to sit on when I go painting outside.

It was also difficult to handle watercolour, water jar, brushes, paper towels while holding my paper block. Not impossible, but a small bench or something to arrange my props would have helped a lot. I wonder how others organize their stuff when painting outside, and I’ll do some research on the practical side of this. I definitely need some practical tipps.

I was a bit disappointed that I wasn’t able to paint the view of my photo, but tried to adapt and get along with the new view. Unfortunately I had forgotten to take masking fluid and oil pastels with me, so I had nothing for preserving the highlights. In the new view, I would have needed to paint the trees differently, because they had one backlit contour and one dark contour. I might have worked this out using a darker background colour, but on the spot I wasn’t able to mentally slow down and properly analyse what I saw , then execute. I rather felt very pressured and in a hurry. On the one hand, this had the positive effect that I omitted all the details, on the other hand I think I missed out those interesting little things that might have been of interest for the overall effect.

Points about working outside

Did you feel that you are making progress in learning to focus and select?

While on the spot, I wrote that I saw only little progress. I found that maybe the ability to omit detail may have improved a bit. This was due to my feeling of being under  pressure, with just very short time for painting. I don’t know why I constantly feel like this when outside, because there is no objective reason – I had the entire afternoon until the sun would disappear. So I suspect it had to do with the physical discomfort. Maybe I wanted to end the uncomfortable sitting position as soon as possible. I was also quite dissatisfied when I compared what I had painted on the spot with my memories of the painting I had made from the photo source.

Now back home, I realize that this outside painting may be weak compared to the painting from the photo, but actually it’s a huge improvement over the first paintings I made outside. That had been in Central Park as well, maybe 50 meters from the current setting, and looking towards a different direction, at a scene with some trees. At that time, I had the same stressed and hurried feeling, and was barely able to depict some coloured masses in a very rough way. Compared to those earlier paintings, I realize that my technical abilities with watercolour have improved: Now I was able to lay washes to indicate foreground, middle ground and background, there are some recognizable tree forms, the bridge is placed nicely, there is some blending of colours wet-in-wet but there are also some clear object contours.

So the main improvement seems to be the ability to focus on particular elements of the scene that I have in front of me. Having done the painting from the photo may have helped a lot, because I knew what I was interested in and also had some practice how to depict it.

First paintings in Central Park, September 2013 (Part 3, Project 1: Where to look and what to select, Ex. Sketches from different viewpoints at http://ocawatercolour1.patricia-karsten.de/?p=741 in this blog)

 

 

How would you describe your experience of this particular location?

While on the spot, I noted that I didn’t feel comfortable at the location. Partly this was due to physical discomfort, but it also had to do with my longing for “real nature”, rather than having to resign to a cultivated park for drawing a landscape. I noted that I felt like in a hurry, as if eager to quit the place as soon as possible and get back home.

I had thought about doing the preparatory exercises for Assignment 3 in Central Park and had even taken the sketchbook and some drawing materials with me. But I decided that I wanted to try a different location for Assignment 3, even if this meant that I must find a solution how to paint on the spot when winter temperatures are coming back.

With hindsight, I realize that my main problem with the location had to do with physical discomfort, which I might alleviate by buying a lightweight camping stool and taking this with me. But then again, it’s true that I’m longing to get out and see landscape that is more natural and less crowded by afternoon passers by. If the mild and sunny weather persists, I might take the train for a trip to some nice place. I’ll decide tomorrow.

How did you cope with changes taking place in the landscape while you were in it?

I was painting rather quickly, so there weren’t too many changes taking place. There was some wind blowing away autumn leaves, but I hadn’t included them in the painting anyway. Sometimes the sun was intense with much backlight contours on the trees, at other times the sun was hidden behind some lighter clouds, making the light contours disappear. But I wasn’t able to work out the trees to include this visual information, probably due to the overall very pressurized feeling I had on the spot.

Have you experienced any limitations in what you were able to achieve owing to time constraints?

There were lots of limitations compared to the situation of painting at home. In particular, I didn’t have all the materials at hand to which I can resign at home. Having forgotten to take masking fluid and oil pastels with me, I didn’t have the tools to including some highlights. I might have done it using the background colour, but wasn’t able to slow down and work this out. I just wasn’t relaxed and comfortable and did not particularly enjoy painting outside, and this posed a serious limitation on what I was able to do on the spot. But I think this was not due to the objective time constraint of vanishing sunlight, it was rather a mental thing of not being able to relax and really concentrate on the task at hand.

Did you have the picture from the previous exercise as some kind of model in your mind’s eye?

Yes, this effect was very present. I was able to adapt and accommodate the new viewpoint on the bridge, but I was definitely focusing on those elements that I found crucial in my analysis of the photo source painting. I focused on the skyline of the buildings, on the silhouettes of some dominant trees and how there was a shift in contrast from middle ground towards the sky. I also repeated the mixing of colours for the green and yellow bushes. The backlight effect of the bridge’s balustrade was now different, without snow and from my changed viewpoint. I adapted and simplified this element. Overall I’d say that painting from the photo had a very good preparatory effect for painting on the spot.

Assessment of the two exercises: Painting from a photo vs painting on the spot

What have you learned about the strenghts and limitations imposed by these two approaches?

There was one thing I really liked about painting on the spot. This had to do with the greater freedom with the composition made directly from the scene in front of me. Drawing the main lines of the composition with pencil felt very organic and less constricted by a fixed preselected photographic view. I was free to move a little to the left or right to adjust. I also liked that I was able to walk around and inspect the bridge from all sides, which helped me to understand the structure of the landscape. I did this after painting when I was on my way home, so the effect is not present in this painting, but it is something I’ll keep in mind for future excursions.

The main drawback of painting outside is for me the practical issues of having to carry my materials around and anticipate everything, from supporting props to something to sit on, or maybe something to protect against rain, wet ground, insects, and so on. I also tend to feel uncomfortable in public spaces with people around me.
By contrast, painting at home in my studio gives me all the time I want to take for preparatory studies, trying out effects, looking closely at some detail. It is very convenient, because I have a lot less practical issues to worry about. The photo source is static and I can take 4 hours to paint the one fleeting moment of glaring sunlight on some leaves.

But then, this may be exactly the dangerous point in painting from a photo source: The opportunity of including details that are fleeting and would escape my attention if I was painting the same scene on the spot. On the other hand, if someone is decided to focus on detail, he’d do this whether outside or in front of a photo at home, so maybe it is rather a matter of conscious decision regarding the desired amount of detail and painting style.

I tend to be rushed when I paint, and being at home with a photo source permits me to slow down and really study. I think this is good because it enables me to observe closely. When I’m outside, I just can’t do this, at least not at this point of my learning process. It is an aspect I will have to work on, because generally, I prefer working from direct observation and think it is important for my development in painting.

Which of the exercises has been more valuable to you?

Actually the painting on the spot exercise has been more valuable, because it presented a challenge that I had decided to avoid for many reasons. I had been struggling with weather conditions – in summer it was incredibly hot, and in winter too cold for painting outside – and also with the social issue of exposing myself with all my painting stuff to the public in Central Park.

I think that I will come to really like painting outside if I manage to organize it in a way that relieves the practical issues. I need a lightweight chair and a drawing board, and something to put my colours and water jars on. Something to shield the eyes from sunlight, and maybe a hat in hot weather. I also need a location that is more natural, and preferably outside the big city. Maybe then I’ll be able to develop a feeling of privacy and comfort when painting outside, and this will make a huge difference.

Which of the paintings has been the most successful and why?

From the two exercises, I think the painting from the photo source was more successful than the painting made on the spot. The painting from the photo is much more worked out, it includes those details I found interesting in the setting. It has a full range of tonal values from very light to very dark, and there are different types of contrasts and also a variety of textures.

Compared to this, the painting on the spot was executed in a hurry and contained only the bare minimum of the elements I had found important. There are no light effects, and everything is much less pronounced.

One problem was that the scene had changed, compared to the original photo –  a different viewpoint, no snow, and different backlight effects which I wasn’t able to capture on the spot. But the central difference was that at home, I took the time to analyse what I see. I made some studies to try out techniques. I also had the time and patience to rework areas that weren’t very successful in the first go.

But despite the shortcomings of the painting made on the spot, I am aware that it represents a big step forward compared to my earlier attempts to paint a scene in Central Park. So overall I’m very glad I took the opportunity of the mild weather for this experience. There’s a bit of hope that if I get myself organized and find a suitable location, I’ll find real pleasure in painting outside.

From the experience of doing two approaches with roughly the same scene, I’d say that taking photos will be very valuable to make preparatory studies at home. These permit to try out techniques and also help to find out what I find particularly attractive in a landscape. I think without having made the painting from the photo beforehand, the painting on the spot would have been much weaker.

Ooops…

Several hours later at home, after I had completed the blog entry, I realized that my original photo source had not been taken as a view from Cedar Hill. Instead, it must have been taken from the lawn on the opposite side. I don’t know why I did not realize this when I was there. Maybe it was because Cedar Hill had become sort of a favourite location to sit and relax when I was in Central Park, and then my mind was busy digesting that the lawn was closed and finding an alternative spot to paint. I think I took the original picture on the previous excursion after I had left Cedar Hill, making a little deviation on my way back home because I had been attracted by the nice view.

Looking at my first painting, it is so obvious that the picture was taken from the left hill, and not from Cedar Hill which to the right side of the bridge. So strange that I didn’t notice this on the spot. But anyway, the original viewpoint would have been much too exposed for me to sit and paint amidst the many passers by. I think this error doesn’t devalue the experiences I made and the learning that took place, because the most important changes were changed light situation due to the disappearance of snow and painting from a real scene instead of painting from a static source.

Approaching Assignment 3

The following exercises are directly preparing assignment three. My main difficulty was with the time of year, because it is really too cold to make sketches or watercolour studies outside. I therefore decided to base my work on photographs, not on sketches made on the spot.

I had originally planned to make an excursion to Long Island, The Hamptons, to prepare the assignment, but then postponed the idea because of difficult and unstable weather conditions. It is quite a trip to go there, like 2 – 3 hours by bus or train, and I’d have to rent a car because distances are large and public transportation unavailable. I thought it was too ambitious to squeeze such a journey into a short winter day, and I wouldn’t even be able to make studies outside because it was freezing cold.

After some searching, I decided on a visit to The Cloisters instead. This is a relatively new building in the style of a medieval castle, which hosts a collection of medieval art of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It is located in Washington Heights at the northern end of Manhattan, in a park which offers nice views onto the Hudson river. This was what attracted me to go there. I walked from the subway station through the park up to the Cloisters, and made several photos on my way.

Now the problem with these photos is that it was a grey day. All my pictures are pale in their colours, and they depict dried, wintery plants and trees without leaves. The overall mood is that of a cold winter’s day without sun – and somehow the whole collection of pictures is not very inspiring. Upon first look through the pictures, there were several with interesting views or details, but none fit into my idea of “beautiful landscape”. Any line study would be dominated by bare tree shapes, truthful colour studies in muddy pale greys and browns with some occasional dull green spots. Duh…

I found this so uninspiring that I decided to look whether I could find photographs on the web with landscapes I’d love to paint… my keywords were “tuscany travel pictures” in their German translation (“Toskana Reisebilder”), and I landed on the website of the photo community of the German GEO travel magazine. Around 150 pages of travel pictures from this area. I looked through around 25 pages and selected around 10 for closer consideration. My favouriste was a portrait format with two sheep in a foreground and the tuscan hill landscape developing into the horizon, with yellow-green colours up to the horizon. But there was also a picture of a tuscan stone house surrounded by trees, bushes, flowers and a hill landscape. Or another with a poppy field and a lane of cypress trees.

I saw different avenues I might take for the assignment:
– Look harder at my authentic photographs and try to bring out in painting what had captured my interest in the first place. The task would be to remain truthful to winter shapes and colours and try to bring out their particular beauty
– alternatively, use my authentic photographs as a point of departure for some invention on colours and shapes, changing the original scene into a direction I’d find visually more attractive. For example, intensifying colour hues and contrasts, leaving out some things and emphasizing others.
– or thirdly, use the Tuscany photographs from the web and let myself be guided buy their beauty, trying to capture the colours and landscapes truthfully to those photographs. (I checked out copyrights of the site and there was no clause prohibiting private use of materials submitted to the site.)

I found advantages and disadvantages in each of the approaches. Using the Tuscany photographs might be beneficial because this would permit going beyond my own photographic and geographic limits. It would permit depicting scenes out of my current reach, and in a completely different palette of what I have currently available when painting from nature or recent pictures taken by myself. On the other hand, there is only one single picture of each scene available, meaning that I have no context and no other resources related to that particular setting.

By contrast, using my own pictures delivers lots of context for the location. I can easily return there, for example in spring time, and add some more pictures, or try painting on the spot. Being truthful to what I have captured on the photographs places the emphasis on bringing out the aspect that captured my attention. It also involves an analysis of winter colours. Or if I depart by exaggerating and changing my photo source, the emphasis would be on developing visual phantasy about the place, a different but also quite interesting task.

I opted for a coffee break and then wanted to come to a decision. Two things were important for me: A feeling of challenge and being personally involved, and secondly it should fit into the aims of the assignment. I couldn’t do anything about the problem that I won’t be painting on the spot, but I could try to choose the approach that works with other central requirements of the assignment.

Exercise: Preparatory sketches

I finally decided on the option that I found most difficult: Use the photos I took and remain truthful to them, and try to bring out what I had found interesting about the view when I was on the spot. I chose four different views of the Cloister building and made quick compositional sketches in my sketchbook (23 x 30 cm) using 4B graphite sticks. I focused on getting the essential elements and shapes in their placement right. I also paid attention to my own responses while drawing, to sense how interesting I found the scene as a source for a larger painting.

I found compositions 3 and 4 more interesting, but the photos less so to work from because of either not enough or too much visual information about the building. I preferred views 1 and 2 which showed The Cloisters from the adjacent hill. In particular, I liked view 2 because the portrait format included more of the road and the trees in the foreground, which resulted in some more variety in colours and adding depth to the entire scene. It may not be apparent from my sketches, because somehow view 2 looks like the weakest of the four compositions, but I thought it was the most interesting and fruitful for further study, and I wanted to continue with that one.
Line study and watercolour study

Task instructions suggested to make a line study to establish the main lines and shapes, and then make a watercolour study for particularly characteristical colours and their lightest and darkest values. Well I tried, but I think the scene I chose was not particularly friendly to these kinds of study. There were very few clearly defined shapes – the building maybe, but the scene is dominated by only vaguely defined elements and constantly interrupted lines and shapes. Difficult to identify anything particular. I tried to capture some of the main elements, but found this very hard to do.

Then the colour study. I think it is successful in capturing the colours that were actually present – pale, cold, wintery colours. I used masking fluid for the lights on the branchwork and this was maybe a bit too much. In the final study, I’d have to tone this down to get the right amount of light in the dominating grey-brown area of bushes and trees.

 

Exercise: Photographs for source material

I took quite a few photographs when I was on the spot, but the assignment due date is approaching. Due to working full time, I must make a decision how to use the few leisure time I have. Making more visits at different times of day and different weather conditions means I use up the time I had reserved for painting, and further delaying assignment submission.

I decided to proceed without making more visits to The Cloisters, and try how I’d get along with the photographs I had taken.

Collect objects as visual clues

Unfortunately I had forgotten to collect objects when I was there. I must admit that this kind of activity is new and did not feel natural, and I wasn’t able to connect to the idea of using objects to prepare for a painting. Then faced with the same dilemma of making another visit and using up the time I had reserved for painting, I decided to proceed and see where I would get without visual objects.