critiques of members work

a small sketch done on the beach recently - 6x6.5inches

oil on paper

Your composition is a bit empty, but that typically works with beach scenes like this one. I think the colors you chose here are very rich, and vibrant... this is unusual for such a scene... it makes it stand out to me. The technique you used to apply the color turns this into a more surreal work than a realistic one. I like it!

I like all of your work (I already looked at your art site, very nice!)

Excellent, Vivien. The sandbar is particularly evocative for me.

I've already told you, Vivien, that I love your stuff. That piece would look perfect in my bedroom. I agree that the colors are unusual and effective for a beach scene. Makes me want to launch a little sailboat and sail into that dark horizon. Sorry, not much of a critic {Oh, it's lovely....}

anyone have any negative comments?? anyone else going to post an image?? pleeeeeeeese - I would love to see your work all of you!

Ok, here's some negative:

There's no seagulls in your picture. :wink:

I'm not an artiste, so no, I ain't got nothin' ta post.

I am not an artist, sorry. Maybe I'll post a photograph later.

this one is a computer generated image





based on local woods

and so is this one

I like your non-computer generated images better - just a personal preference. Of the 2 generated images here, I like the second better. It looks like agate and I love rocks. Of course, you still use a wonderful color pallet!

I'm often a tough sell, but I do like your work. The mastery of technique is evident. The extended portrait mode that you use (see Raven's Realm), are of particular interest. I often use a similar aspect ratio (24"X48", or 48"24").

If you want to comment on my stuff, have at it. It can be seen by clicking on the link below.

very interesting.

I don't know much background to the Kachina dolls so would probably get even more out of them if I understood the mythology? I like them but the paint quality seems more interesting in the pure landscape.


(they are native american artefacts aren't they????)


I slightly prefer the canyon, which has wonderful colour and depth and space.

Well...call me Roar-shark (heh heh), but to me, in the original painting posted, I see a subtle human figure in the sky, reaching out in an anguished way towards the orange stain (reflection of the setting sun, or maybe not....), balanced with a placid shoreline. It is more complex in my eyes, than it first appears. Almost a political statement, really, about the poisoning of our seas. I'm not being sarcastic, by the way.

The computer-generated pieces didn't really do much for me. I took a peek at your gallery. You are a great painter. Stick with it!

Hate to nag you about this, viv, as I know you like the effect, but painting on un-gessoed paper is asking for trouble. I'm sure you want your paintings to last, maybe you could try to find a method that gives you the same effect, but it archival?

I like your use of texture and color.

In the first beach scene, you used your signature as a main compositional element. Depending on your fame, a signature can help you sell the piece, but I feel that having a large signature in this sort of piece draws away from the feeling of the beach. I think you are trying to convey that tranquility, emptiness, and constant motion of the beach (evidenced by the texture lines, sparse composition, and soft colors), and I feel that your name makes me think of you more than it makes me think of an empty beach.

I don't find the colors in "based on the local woods" as pleasing in the first one as they are in the second. The colors don't seem as thoughtful, like you're going for a fauvist, straight out of the tube primary abstract. As color is one of the major components of an abstract work, I gravitate towards more colourist undertakings (as in the second piece).

Portal thanks for the comments, the reason the signature appears large is because that is a very small painting - only 6x6.5 inches - I'm not a painter who splurges a great big signature across work! The writing is actually quite small.

I don't work on paper except plein air - in the studio i always work on canvas (and usually much larger) if it is in oils or acrylic. With these I give serious care to the archival qualities.

I like the way oil on paper behaves for sketching and the paper is good quality art paper so will have an adequate archival life - 100 years down the line ... well ....

gesso or any primer destroys the quality that i like for sketching. When doing work intended to be finished pieces plein air, then i use 'Cryla' paper, a primed paper with a canvas like texture that is archivally sound and suited for oils and acrylics.

I understand your archival concerns but particularly when sketching they aren't my primary concern.

A lot of contemporary artists use household gloss paint and other far more worrying materials archivally - household paint fades and cracks and is not intended to last long term. The cubists used newspaper. Rothko's paintings are deteriorating rapidly and seriously in some cases.

The blue woods are about dusk and the colours were intended to be heightened and possibly a little fauvist - but the colours in the second one are also heightened but daytime and are therefore perceived as more 'natural' i think. I love experimenting with colour and pushing it.

One of the rules I follow for critique is that if someone puts their work up for critique I assume that it is:
Completely finished
ready to display in a museum somewhere

so while I aknowledge that your painting is just a sketch, I will critique it as though it is hanging in the national gallery, because that does more for you.

The size -does- make a big difference! Maybe for the next critiques you could put the size, media, and titles on every one? I hope to have some things to critique after I get my website (teeth grinding) up.

I enjoy your sky and water panels. There is someone who I work with who does the same thing with a different concept - she divides landscapes up into seperate panels to tamper with the illusion of space.

If you don't mind my asking, which types/subject matters of things that you make sell the best?

Until quite recently everything was on canvas, with most being around 24X30, or 36. I like the larger sizes where there is room to be very loose in applying the paint. Small and miniture paintings tend to require very tight control.

To keep costs down I've recently been moving to masonite panels. A 4'X8' sheet of masonite costs less than a 12X18 stretched canvas. Cut up I can get five 24X48 panels and a couple small surfaces to boot. I'm mounting the masonite on 1X3 mitered pine frames, and giving it four coats of gesso over panel and frame. I extend the painting around the frame, thus eliminating the need to purchase pricey frames. Smaller panels, with gesso on all sides don't need the extra support, but I'm left with the framing. The 2'X4' landscape I recently posted (see below) was painted on just such a panel.

Canvas is cheaper than masonite, if you don't buy the cheaply made store bought canvasses. You can make your own frames, buy unprimed canvas and strech and staple it to the frame, and then prime the canvas with some gesso coats. If you're using masonite, it should be backed by a frame anyway, or it will buckle.

If you have access to a woodshop, you can make these things yourself, if not, there are usually people who work in woodshops who sell them. You could try calling your local art school and seeing if they know anyone who builds frames, and trying local woodshops.

my teacher has been experimenting with Aluminum sheets backed by aluminum. It has an interesting texture.

Asherman, for some reason your links aren't working for me. I'll keep my eyes peeled for your work.

It WAS done just as a sketch but is now framed and i have sold some of the series. So it was a finished piece in the end but started life as just a sketch - complicated!

If it was a work in progress i would say - we also had crits with work in progress - don't you?

mmm my panels are about time - the scale, weather, season, time of day, state of the tide all change

Landscape sells best i would say. Life drawings are also popular but the number of shows are more limited. Light and colour are my primary concerns and ever since i was very young i have been aware of the changing light and mood in the landscape - so the fact that they sell best may simply be because of my feelings that filter through and people can relate to? other artists have strong feelings about other things and so the viewer picks this up and relates.

A friend has success with paintings she does that are based on Victorian photos picked up in antique shops - they are not cutesy but are thoughtful and contain character and insight into the time and character of the unknown person. She is currently doing a series based on photos of Victorian prisoners. She sells well but it is a kind of smaller market - if they are going to hang a painting of someone on the wall they generally want it to be of a family member. She has done commissions but doesn't enjoy them.

Yes. hurry up and get your site running! - in the meantime you can upload work to Ravens Realm or other free site and then copy the URL and post work here.