Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Marvin Mattelson
Joan, You're getting a better idea but I think you're still stuck trying to differentiate between two seemingly opposite approaches.
|
Thank you for your post Marvin. Are you saying they're not opposite approaches? Should I forget about trying to make them different and just meet in the middle, which seems to be where this is leading?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Marvin Mattelson
Although my approach may be mistakenly viewed by many as being too methodical. . . . . Ultimately discipline provides the greatest freedom.
|
Methodical is good. I have an engineering degree and the main reason I got into engineering was because it was methodical. Methodical works for me. Perhaps that is why I'm trying so hard to name everything and find a place in my process for everything.
I think the best thing for me to do now is to just do it. I need to paint a portrait and use the 'layering' technique.
But, am I not back to the 'underpainting' method? I am comfortable painting a monochromatic portrait. With this step I can get my values correct. If the world were in black and white I'd be great. Too bad I can't be done with that first step! Then the next step is adjusting color. I realize most artists combine these two steps but I'm not proficient enough to place down value and color correctly at the same time. After my layer of color I can proceed to adjust the color with layers of scumbling. (Maybe glazing, whatever is necessary.) I feel comfortable I could do this. But, isn't this the 'underpainting' method?
I suppose it doesn't matter what the method is called, as long as it works.
Thank you everyone for sharing your wisdom on this subject!
Joan