Monday, December 18, 2017

The triptych - 3 of something is better than 1!

I've always loved painting multi-panel pieces. There's something magical about spanning across surfaces to create a bigger picture. In writing 'a bigger picture' it reminds me of David Hockneys work; and there's something to be said of that. His large mutli-panel paintings very much fulfill much that I love about this relationship of canvas and painting.



http://anguswilsonstudio.blogspot.com/2012/07/bigger-message.html

I tend to feel Hockney uses multi panels, because he's really interested in making something bigger. For me however a triptych is more about the partition of space rather than its scale.  For example, the triptych I have just completed is not excessively large, but great care and thought was taken between each panel and how they interact with each other. Indeed the subjects on the table, their arrangements and placement was considered not only for the overall painting, but how each would relate to it's individual panel.

in progress

I worked on the easel joined together by attaching each panel with strips of masking tape on the back. I then taped a larger 24X36 across the back of the 3 taped panels using more masking tape. This system wasn't overly strong, but it did stop the outer panels from falling of the edge of the easel. The 24X36 also gave the panels some firmness and rigidity.

in progress

I've been asked how far apart each panel should be hung? The answer to this for me is the brilliance of the triptych. Hang each panel next to each other, and then re hang with 8 inches apart. You will find the contrast is immediately palpable.  By simply hanging these panels at a differing distance, the painting has a dramatic and exciting change.

Groupings of flowers on long table
24X18 (each panel)                               Acrylic on panel.

To me, there is not a 'right' distance. Each panel is carefully designed to sit as a whole but compositionally strong on it's own merit. I have joked with collectors that the purchase of a triptych is not the ownership of one painting, but the purchase of 3 paintings, perhaps sibling family members. Each an individual in it's own right, but only truly complete when they are together!

 Groupings of flowers on long table (panel 1)
24X18                              Acrylic on panel.


 Groupings of flowers on long table (panel 2)
24X18                              Acrylic on panel.


 Groupings of flowers on long table (panel 3)
24X18                              Acrylic on panel.

Thursday, December 7, 2017

It comes along so fast

I can't believe how often this comes around! At the time of my children being born (2003-2004) I decided I would do a double portrait of them every 4 years. Without fail as 'that' year arrives, I'm always shocked how quickly it has come; I shake my head in wonderment that time has passed so quickly since the last portrait.

I confess that I dread the process, but it's also one that I enjoy. A growing family and life can be a whirlwind. Stopping to paint my children somehow captures a moment of fatherly love; or to be more specific 'artist' fatherly love. For a portrait is not only the embodiment of the individual, but also the artists reflection or imprint of themselves on the subject. I don't know what my kids will make of these paintings many years from now, but perhaps they'll see not only themselves, but my reflection of them? It's everywhere within a painting, the artist makes all the calls, especially when he's your father! Wear this, stand there, smile like this, hold that book; the direction is endless, both when posing for a portrait, and in life. But the artists imprint is also visible within the more subtle choices of color, tone, lighting etc. Having said this, the fact that I chose to paint my children with more grays than usual, and amongst the trash cans, is not a conscious message. They are wonderful, good, bright, funny, and well behaved boys, and I love them dearly.

So why a painting every 4 years? Largely this time frame was chosen to demonstrate a noticeable change in them as they grew. Too many years and too much would have changed, too few and not enough. Four years, just felt like the right amount of balance. I was also aware that I needed a fixed date to work to, without that I know I would have put the work off for months or possibly years.
  4 years was also chosen in part because portraiture really is 'not my bag'! No, I'm not being modest, it really is a struggle. I feel great achievement, that each portrait has captured them, and captured them faithfully. But understand this, many the hour is spent meticulously measuring the dimensions of the nose, eyes, or mouth, only to repaint the feature countless times as I struggle to capture not only a recognizable face, but a distinctive expression. To a trained portrait artist this can be achieved in minutes or hours, for me it is an illusive hunt. Tentative stabs in the dark, hoping my luck will hold and I may eventually find my mark.  Of course with more practice I would become better and more proficient, but as yet I haven't had the inclination to do this, and so remains my furtive attempts every few years or so.

In addition to my choice of years, I also set out with the goal to paint each in a certain style. I.e. with each portrait I strive for a different aesthetic, almost as if a different artist has tackled each one. To a large degree I have failed at this; portrait 1 was an open book, so I simply painted it. Portrait 2, came the closest to the mandate. The arrangement was loosely based on a Joan Eardley painting that I greatly appreciated and there are some stylistic changes when compared to portrait 1. Portrait 3 however did not separate itself enough from the previous two. The problem I told myself was that it was enough of a struggle to capture a likeness. If I wanted to paint far looser with a much bigger brush, well then the details of a facial expression and likeness would be lost. This in part is and was an excuse, but I know there's also validity in it too. Though I yearn to paint each with distinction and variety, I'm unwilling to sacrifice too much for that prize. This years portrait (portrait 4), has reinforced this for me. Capturing them was less of a struggle than some previous years, but finding it's own 'style' was never resolved.  I had had a vague idea to paint them in a dramatic landscape, but the right time never arose. Additionally, one of my children (who shall remain nameless), was less than congenial about the task. Working from photographs, the moment of capture should be a matter of seconds however it never transpires like that. Ultimately I compromised and photographed them by the side of our home, nestled amongst trash cans & air conditioner units. My plan had been to place them in a background of my choosing, however ultimately I felt perhaps amongst the trash and chaos of this location was fitting to what had become a somewhat troubled painting. Perhaps I was just being lazy?


Portrait 1 -  2005
43.3X59    Oil
.
.

Portrait 2 - 2009
48X28.5    Oil
.

detail.

.
detail

You can read about Portrait 2, if you follow this web link
.
Portait 3 - 2013
48X34        Oil
.
.
.
detail
.
.
detail.

You can read about Portrait 3, if you follow this web link


.
Portrait 4 -  2017

48X32        Oil
.
.
I've been enjoying grays recently, and consciously wanted a painting with lots of those tones in it. Felt like a nice contrast to my usual dramatic color.

I know this painting is finished, and when dry we will hang it on our wall until a new one is created (4 years and counting), but it is far from my favorite. The interesting thing I find about the relationship of an artist and his painting, is that over time it can change. Portrait 2 for example at the time of it's creation I also disliked, but over time I learned to love it, and would even say I have come to miss it. Perhaps as time marches on I will come to love this one to a greater degree?
.
.
detail.

..
detail.

Sunday, December 3, 2017

Baltimore Museum of art, and a solo show in Richmond Virginia

Sorry I've been slow to update this post. At the beginning of November I traveled to see friends in Baltimore. Had a great day in the Baltimore Museum of art. Really nice collection with a good mix of art. Here's a slightly random set of photos, though I remember they had a lovely Klimt landscape which I should have photographed, but it wouldn't have done it justice.


I then drove down to Richmond Virginia, for my show opening with Chasen Galleries. After many years in the same location in Carytown, they have just moved (Just a few blocks away).  My solo show also served as their 'official' opening. I had about 24 paintings in the show, spread out across the 1st floor, nestled amongst some beautiful glass sculptures. It's a lovely welcoming new space and in a nice location.

Here I am with Andrew Chasen, the gallery owner. We've been working together for almost 9 years!




 .
A shot from the opening evening. There was a nice steady stream of people and a number of long time collectors, who I hadn't previously met.

 .
The next day I painted a little in the gallery.
As usual, I planned and begun the painting in my studio in California, I think took it with me and completed much of the painting on site. I then returned back to home to complete it (see below).

Pears, Lemons & Watermelon on Orange table  
12X24                             Acrylic on panel


 

 
It was nice to visit Virginia in the fall. Wonderful tree colors and Richmond was a lovely town to visit. I visited a number of parks and stretches of wood land, sketching a little and gathering reference material. I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a painting or two in the future, based on these locals.