Composition - examples of note

[Michele Rushworth]

it does seem to me that the most interesting gift we can give to the viewer as artists is our point of view. What we see; what we choose to emphasize; where we stand as we paint - all these change as we step to the left or step to the right. All information comes to us based on where we are and what we receive, or what we chose to understand. (Anyone who has ever worked in journalism will recognize the unsettling experience of being at the same event as other journalists and reading the various - and often wildly divergent - accounts of the "same" experience. Nobody really has the same experience as someone else.)

Very well put. As you may know, Monet and Renoir painted together often and there are two paintings (in different museums, unfortunately) that show how they approached painting "the same thing" on the verysame day. The subject matter was a group of people standing near the water. As you might guess, Monet's painting emphasized the water and Renoir's emphasized the people. Two totally different approaches to the same "content".

[Mike McCarty]

Unfortunately, given away because he developed a habit of screaming unless I let him ride around inside my shirt for hours while I was painting.

I know what you mean LInda, I had a squirrel that would "ride around" inside my shorts. I had to let it go, you know, with winter coming on. You have to anticipate with animals.

And speaking of perspective, I'm pretty sure this is another one of your favorite artists: Sir Henry Raeburn with Colonel Francis James Scott, 50x40. I guess we would call this the "heroic" perspective, looking up to the Colonel as we are here. This bestows more of a sense of stature befitting a man of rank and title.

And then there's The Reverend Robert Walker Skating, also by Raeburn. Far from a state of repose, and well representing the "arrested action" compositional faction, this painting is carried completely by the action. There is nothing else, it is completely sparse and minimal in all other aspects and yet it has just enough, a simple lyrical charm. It contains no inconsequential elements.

However, inclusion of inconsequential elements will inhibit or destroy the unity and hierarchy in the painting, which, as described above, can only harm the composition as a whole.

I am intrigued by Mr. Deny's use of the word "hierarchy." I take him to mean that through the use of our focusing tools: value, edges, contrast, etc., we establish a hierarchy of importance leading up to (usually) our subjects face and eyes. It's a good word slection, I think, akin to what we might call "focusing" the elements.

And then a couple more by Raeburn which display a hierarchy of elements.

[Richard Monro]

Mike,
Here is another painting to add to the collection. It is the Calmady Children by Sir Thomas Lawrence. It is said to be the most copied painting in the world.

The composition of this painting is stunning. Lawrence uses an upward and inward diagonal to trap the views look on the face of the youngest girl. This is created in part by the use of flesh tone values starting with the highest value on the oldest girls shoulders shifting lower toward the little girl and also the gaze direction of the older girl toward the younger.

I have gotten permission from the Metropolitan Museum of Art to have a private viewing of this painting as it is usually not on display. I will be going to NY this winter and can"t wait to get my eyeballs on this magnificent piece of work.

[Mike McCarty]

Richard,

What a beautiful painting, thanks for that. I'm surprised that the Met would be so accommodating. I'll bet that a tour of all that is NOT displayed would be almost as gratifying.

Here are a few paintings by Edgar Degas. Now here's a fellow that understood a soft edge. This last painting is remarkable for so many reasons. When you consider all that he has accomplished in this composition it is staggering. From this single perspective he has successfully portrayed all the many characters of the evening. Even with greatly different lighting and the vast distances between the subjects he has managed to create more than just a suggestion of each, while drawing more attention to one. Not only is she in the highest key, but with the introduction of the woodwind(?) instrument against her dress (not exactly where he found it I'll bet) he creates the sharpest contrast.

[SB Wang]

Would you please improve this composition?
http://www.artrenewal.org/asp/databa...ge.asp?id=7755

[Mike McCarty]

It's a real study, isn't it SB? Valazques' The Spinners, 46x75.

I might replace the cat with a dog, but this is the sort of complexity that extends beyond my reach. As I look at it I don't see anything that looks discordant. It has some of the same types of eye leading techniques that we saw in some of his other less complex themes displayed above. It's obvious that he put a lot of thought into his compositions. It would not surprise me to learn that the design of this painting took much more time than the actual painting. The better the design, the faster the painting, I think. It also has some of the same compositional qualities as the Degas above in terms of distance and focus.

My own tastes lean more toward the simpler themes. I can find just as much to be fascinated by in a well done head and shoulder pose, but that's just me.

If you have a particular grievance with this composition just jump in SB. Good to see one of his where someone's head hasn't been whacked off.

[Mike McCarty]

Here are some paintings by Anders Zorn, Swedish 1860-1920.

This guy was pretty darn good, especially in the watercolor department. The two girls with a fan (lets see, that would make three) is a w/c 54x36 and pretty darn tasty.

And speaking of tasty, this next w/c is so rich I feel like I'm gaining weight just looking at it. It's like eating a banana split right after a big meal. I'd like to see it in person with a great frame, it might loose some of it's calories.

And then there's Gustav V, 201x123, just for the pure pomp of it, as he strikes his 19th century pose - Ahem. Striking, with all it's verticality.