UserABC2021
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,990
- Type of diabetes
- Prefer not to say
- Treatment type
- Tablets (oral)
WOW @Alien Aspie
That is absolutely blinking amazing
I am still wandering around your painting...
That is not a cheat using the Procreate brush to create leaves, I have used them. But I am looking for an alternative by combining two brushes to create a custom brush.
Edit...it is so annoying to have to shrink your painting down to be able to post it...
"Still looks ok" - understatement of the Common Era. "Mr Aspie has produced a timeless, transcendent masterpiece transporting one to a place of peace and safety" Breckland Bugle.
Todays Art is much like yesterday's sketch, included as a thumbnail, the difference I see it took a bit longer.A4 about 45 minutes I tried to keep it freer and more fluid not sure I managed it but it's done...
View attachment 43362
Yesterday's very quick sketch...
View attachment 43361
Ah, a City/large town except Ely or Cambridgeyou cross the bridge into a type of purgatory before moving on.
I'm keen to learn and appreciate what is shared with me. Can you or @Muddy Cyclist explain to me how/where the freer and more fluid occurs/is achieved please. I don't doubt it is both of those but I can't tell how and want to appreciate the talent more. Thanks.You have managed to keep it freer and more fluid like you said @Muddy Cyclist
And you have kept the essence of yesterday's sketch.
I love this, so gentle and mysterious...
Well, I know proper artists use paper and brushes but I have been paper-free for many years so I have to make do digitally. Still so much in Procreate to learn, it is a truly amazing piece of kit.
I think you'll have to be initiated into artistic Gnosticism!I'm keen to learn and appreciate what is shared with me. Can you or @Muddy Cyclist explain to me how/where the freer and more fluid occurs/is achieved please. I don't doubt it is both of those but I can't tell how and want to appreciate the talent more. Thanks.
I will try, although it's more of a feeling of the artwork than its physical appearance. Some art can look just like a photograph, this would have been fine before film but now why bother painting as a photograph when that image can be captured through a camera? The great oil painters produced romantic images in almost photographic style as did the Preraphalites although there was an intensity of colour in their painting that even photography would find hard to emulate. Then you have the looser style of the Impressionists giving a feeling of the image but not actually painting it in detail. Then the abstract painters where it so often impossible to know what the subject is, that's at its simplest.I'm keen to learn and appreciate what is shared with me. Can you or @Muddy Cyclist explain to me how/where the freer and more fluid occurs/is achieved please. I don't doubt it is both of those but I can't tell how and want to appreciate the talent more. Thanks.
I'm sure @ianpspurs does have pleanty of Gnosticism although maybe not in the artistic sense but have no fear if he sticks with this thread he eventually will discover it. Remember art does not have any meaning, you either like a piece or hate it it's as simple as that and IMHO that's how it should be.I think you'll have to be initiated into artistic Gnosticism!
I will try, although it's more of a feeling of the artwork than its physical appearance. Some art can look just like a photograph, this would have been fine before film but now why bother painting as a photograph when that image can be captured through a camera? The great oil painters produced romantic images in almost photographic style as did the Preraphalites although there was an intensity of colour in their painting that even photography would find hard to emulate. Then you have the looser style of the Impressionists giving a feeling of the image but not actually painting it in detail. Then the abstract painters where it so often impossible to know what the subject is, that's at its simplest.
Thank you for taking the trouble to explain. I "get" A and B and to a certain degree C. Seascape freedom is lost on me. I suspect mainly because I have no idea of how this was made. As regards the later post about if a person doesn't like a piece that is fine, should one not try to find out what the artist was trying to do or convey? This joss sticks lark: I left Uni in 1974 we're done with them, desert boots and labelling milk.I will try, although it's more of a feeling of the artwork than its physical appearance. Some art can look just like a photograph, this would have been fine before film but now why bother painting as a photograph when that image can be captured through a camera? The great oil painters produced romantic images in almost photographic style as did the Preraphalites although there was an intensity of colour in their painting that even photography would find hard to emulate. Then you have the looser style of the Impressionists giving a feeling of the image but not actually painting it in detail. Then the abstract painters where it so often impossible to know what the subject is, that's at its simplest.
Watercolour is fluid @geefull is very good useing it in a fluid manner. At heart I am an oil painter and so my watercolour painting tends to become overworked, strong colours a loss of transparency, too many lines where a simple single brush stroke would do as well. So I have included some of my own paintings to try and show the difference.
A. over worked to much information although not quite a photograph.....
View attachment 43365
B. Almost abstract, only because I say its heathland and a valley is it recognised as such...
View attachment 43366
C Example of flowing freer style like above with enough detail to be convincing...
View attachment 43367
Then the seascape where the freeness is in the use of wet paint on wet paper and lots of spraying with water to push the paint about. Other than the rocks this is very free and no detailed brush strokes.
View attachment 43368
C is still complicated as paint needs to be layered, each layer showing through the next, however there is less detail, broader brush strokes, where in A there are lots of small detailed brush strokes.
I hope this helps.
PS sorry I used my own work to explain but it's more accessible than searching the net.
So you are creative! I was a Sytems analyst and programmer from 1976 until I retired and found that my creative skills were what made writing computer systems in machine code, basic, cobol and later c gave me the edge over many scientists who I employed, you have an amazing creative streak.I'm feeling about something, or be abstract, and it's not happening. I can do it with computer code, turn 1's and 0's into expressive forms like websites, forums, or programs, but that is it.
No, don't bother what the artist was trying to do, always too much analysis IMHO. Like or dislike.Thank you for taking the trouble to explain. I "get" A and B and to a certain degree C. Seascape freedom is lost on me. I suspect mainly because I have no idea of how this was made. As regards the later post about if a person doesn't like a piece that is fine should one not try to find out what the artist was trying to do or convey? This joss sticks lark: I left Uni in 1974 we're done with them, desert boots and labelling milk.
So you are creative! I was a Sytems analyst and programmer from 1976 until I retired and found that my creative skills were what made writing computer systems in machine code, basic, cobol and later c gave me the edge over many scientists who I employed, you have an amazing creative streak.
But I guess you are right about the emotions, can't explain that just part of me and in my music also, thank you for your compliments.
I'm keen to learn and appreciate what is shared with me. Can you or @Muddy Cyclist explain to me how/where the freer and more fluid occurs/is achieved please. I don't doubt it is both of those but I can't tell how and want to appreciate the talent more. Thanks.
That's a very interesting thought, Muddy. I have never thought of art has having no meaning.I'm sure @ianpspurs does have pleanty of Gnosticism although maybe not in the artistic sense but have no fear if he sticks with this thread he eventually will discover it. Remember art does not have any meaning, you either like a piece or hate it it's as simple as that and IMHO that's how it should be.
Just my opinion there are many who would argue 'The meaning of art' our emotions may show I'm sure when we create, painting, music, sculpture but basically it comes down to the audience liking or disliking.That's a very interesting thought, Muddy. I have never thought of art has having no meaning.
Why? Beats the carp out of posts on MacrosPS whoops I'm getting all @ianpspurs Joss Stick mode, must stop.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?