Last summer I wrote about painting with the computer, which I came to see as painting with light. It's more like the Navajo and Tibetan sand paintings than what is traditionally considered to be 'fine art.' Although I could print what I have done, even make note cards, for me, the main advantage has been taking away the pressure of having to create a product. Working with the computer with no pressure has totally been about vision and process. A few people have asked how does this work, and on Saturday morning I decided to do one, saving the steps, to write about.
Not always do I use a photograph for my inspiration. Sometimes the idea comes from dreams or imagination. Because I felt a photograph would best show the process, I chose one I had taken in Montana some years back when I was on a country road as a small cattle drive came past. I never mind getting stopped by such drives and hope the ranchers don't mind that I take their pictures. They probably get used to it. I have such photos from all across the west, sometimes of whole families with Mama driving the truck, the kids and Dad moving the herd, and occasionally even grandparents helping out.
To use as my subject, the photograph could have been printed, but what I think is simpler and better, given no print looks as good as what is on the screen, is reduce the photograph so it and the yet to be created 'canvas' can be on monitor at the same time. It helps to have a large monitor.
With my version of Corel Photo-Paint 7, the blank canvas is created under file to new where you can choose whatever size you want. The nice thing about the computer is supposing you later decide you need bigger or want to change the proportions, you copy it and paste it onto a new size or can crop to a smaller size. Definitely this process spoils the artist.
After clicking on the paint icon, I began with a big soft crayon tool. I chose colors that would provide the structure for the eventual painting. This is all very similar to my process in creating an oil painting. Another alternative is to paint a canvas all one color and let that peek through for a homogeneous feeling to the finished work (not bad spiritual analogy either for how we are all inter-connected.
Next, using a watercolor tool, I began finding the best colors for sky and background. This is where working on the computer really spoils you because there is no waiting for anything to dry. (This particular computer painting from start to finish took about 2 hours).
Blocking in the animals and figures came next; and for that, different tools were alternated-- small soft, custom fine felt, and soft and sharp tip. I added more cattle where I felt they better suited the feeling I wanted. I saw no benefit to the piece of highway.
More detail appeared as I worked from the easiest-- cattle which only required simple, suggestive shapes; to the more complex horses and riders. As with my oil painting, my computer painting is impressionistic-- not the literal colors or photographic representation but my feeling about the subject.
The father and his horse seemed to be the heart of this painting. If they weren't right, nothing else would compensate. The nice thing about painting on the computer is if something doesn't work, I simply wipe it out and start over. I have the confidence also of knowing I can revert back to the last saved version-- I save whenever I am happy with what I just did. With an oil painting, experimentation can lead to the need to scrape down and start over.
As I worked with the figures, sometimes I enlarged the canvas to enhance certain details more than would have been possible in the smaller size. The advantage of beginning with a smaller canvas is you can expand but also more easily see how the composition is working than if it doesn't all fit on the screen.
With a final save, I felt I was there. I could have done more detail, but I believe that you should use the least you can, to convey what you intend; and for me this is where it ends.
This is one of two somewhat different studies I did for the eventual oil painting. They provided practice and let me discover what the oil might look like, where the problems are going to be. I consider these to be quick studies.When you look at the original photograph, you might wonder why bother to paint it as it was pleasing on its own; but there are several reasons for painting something. One is the soul connection you get to your subject. You look at it, feel it inside, and take its energy into you as you work on shape, colors, decide what to include, and what to leave out. At a certain point, what you are doing ceases to be about the original concept or photo, but takes on a life and energy of its own. It demands that which will fulfill it.
For me there is also my desire to paint Western subject matter. Doing the work on the computer has taught me a great deal about animals which have never been my forte. In all my years of painting and sculpting, animals were purposely not on the menu. I painted landscapes and people, sculpted people (with a couple of wolves thrown in which always bordered on looking like German Shepherds); but with the modern West as subject matter, there have to be horses, cattle and usually dogs.
A horse is challenging all on its own, and add to that a person on its back and the challenge multiplies. With riders, you can't just paint someone with a horse, it has to look like that person is connected to the animal and moving with it. Then there is the little matter of proportions which always challenge me whether working with the computer or a brush. Now that I am back to painting with oils, I will see if these six months of 'spirit' paintings have helped move me closer to capturing that vision.
(All images can be enlarged.)
10 comments:
That is truly spectacular, rain. I love the results. It makes me want to paint with the computer. I've never painted on canvas, but this looks so cool-- it is utterly inspiring. Excellent.
With regard to especially your first paragraph which deals with the putting of the vision to canvas I can easily relate. Especially with the failure to meet your vision which will plague us all from time to time.
As a side-line to your post I stay quite viligent with regard to the art community and the evolution of digital art. Since I mix both photography and digital art I walk in double jeopardy. I walk to the beat of my own drummer just as you but watch and listen with extreme curiosity to those who have elevated themselves to positions of overseers of art. If you haven't read this brief take on the medium of our choice you might find it interesting.
"Wikipedia - Digital Art"
It is now and always has been a most interesting debate. And the digital revolution has only added wood to the fire. I believe now and will always believe personally that art is where you find it, regardless of its origin or the medium by which it is conceived.
As with many things in this old world I feel that much revolves around the financial aspects with regard to those who debate what constitutes art. A painting is a single entity and can attain great value where as many feel digital art can easily duplicate itself thus allowing for many "originals" if you will. Thereby defeating itself in a value-minded art world where "less" is better.
Forgive me Rain if I have strayed far from your intent of this post but this matter has been foremost in my mind for a time now. As previously stated, I find the topic most interesting and always have.
I have beautiful visions in my head but I can not even draw with a ruler! I just end up looking very child like. Even as a child my art was awful. I envy those who can take a canvas and turn it into beautiful art! whether digital or oil! You have a wonderful talent.
You are not only a gifted artist (regardless of medium) but also a talented teacher. You could teach this for a living and do quite well.
I believe I could actually be able to do this now, but only because of your fantastic way of showing this process in the steps and manner in which you did! I don't consider myself to be very artistic at all but at least, being able to figure out the hows, it could be a fun experience just to see. Thank you so much!
Beautiful.
You make it look easy. It's not easy tried it out in paint. Not a great selection of brushes to work with. Also not able to control strokes with my touch pad on laptop.
Thank you all for your comments. Your link was very interesting, Alan. It is a good question of whether digtial painting is a new medium or not really art. I think when people only concern themselves with the economic value of what they do, they are not dealing with artistic questions; but it certainly has got to be a factor. Possibly some who consider it to not be 'art' think it's easier to cheat with it. Maybe they just don't understand how it's done.
I tried using one of those tablets, janet, but had no luck with them. I also have not tried very many programs but my version of corel photo-paint 7 is really nice. It has a variety of tools, sizes and many colors to choose from. The one drawback, over what I understand the Wacom tablet to be, is it doesn't let you control how lightly the color goes down as I believe the tablets do. You can't shade as easily although with color choices, you can maneuver around that to some degree. But I have familial tremors and for me, the mouse I can control (when I don't, I just hit undo) but that tablet, I couldn't. I haven't given up on learning how to use it yet.
One advantage of doing this on the computer is, I think, a lot of people are intimidated by the idea of 'fine art' and here, you can play with it, experiment and you are investing nothing more than your time (if you already have the software program which I had). I tried the more advanced Corel Photo-Paint and didn't find it as easy to use as version 7.
With computer art, anyone can learn a lot about color usage, composition and drawing. When it doesn't work out, you just start over. My 8 and 5 year old grandkids really enjoyed creating this way.
I am really impressed with your description of painting in the computer and the stages you went through. I love your end product. Like Robin Andrea, I don't paint on canvas, and in my case, what I see in my mind's eye is impossible for me to recreate through my hands. Fascinating how the brain works.
Wow! This is utterly amazing! My God, you have incredible talent.
I just love the finished product. And there's no comparison with the photo. It's hard to explain...but to me, the photo is "flat." The painting you did is "alive." It has soul to it, which the photo didn't.
Thanks for sharing this.
I found this piece fascinating though I've never done any painting. As a young person I had a period during which I drew geometric figures which I colored, all very amateurish, which might lend itself well, for me, with using the computer -- if I only had time. But what you do is what I describe as real art.
BTW thanks for stopping by my blog. My visits to others blogs and personal blog posts are presently, and will continue to be, erratic for some time.
Post a Comment