Thursday, March 31, 2011

reworking a plein air piece

11x14 pastel on marble dust board
Uncle Harold's field is where I worked last Spring. The light changed so fast therefore I adapted by doing many  pastels, most of which remained unfinished. I found this one when I was cleaning my studio and decided to give it a second chance. For two days I have tried to strengthen the focal point and  make it easier to travel through the painting. I focused on using my pastel I the ways that I love. A mixture of dancing marks, smooging and lots of fixative made a new painting. Better or worse?
step 1 plein air
step 2


Donna T said...

Better! I love the transformation from "real" to "feel." You gave this painting so much more life, Loriann!

William Cook said...

Not sure. The original has the honest immediacy of a life study, but the "decorated" version has the breath-taking qualities of a finished studio piece. Those irreverent squiggle marks, the violet amplifications, and the foreground adjustments are absolutely delightful. And the eye is indeed moving around more freely. But the "capture" of the hot back-light sun defining the glare on the field, and the relief of the shadows under the trees is lost (not that you should try to regain it). I'll lean towards the
revisited version since your work so often involves such well executed memory impressions , and those squiggle marks really are cool.

SamArtDog said...

Yes, better. More impressionistic and daring.

B Boylan said...

The revised certainly is more playful in both color and mark making. At first impressions, It was a toss up for me, but then again, I love the freshness of the newer one.

loriann said...

Thanks Donna!
Real to feel I like that expression...I may have to use that.

Hi William, I do understand your unsureness as to which is best. I like the studio version now. When my marks get squiggly and dance like I know I am at my most comfortable-having fun times.

Thanks Sam! Daring, eh? I think it was freedom...nothing left to lose.

Hi Brenda and thank you! I think I agree.

Nika said...

Yes, better!!
1. The tree edges "breathe" and move better
2.It's more united coloristically
(a made-up word)
3. There's more movement back and forth now because of the darker value areas in the foreground you installed
verry good indeed, Loriann.

Marilyn R Miller said...

Far better! Far more Loriann Signori!

Anonymous said...

Hi Loriann,
The third one is the charm.I think that it is the most fully realized.I like the loose gestural quality and colors of the foreground. The tree on the left has been replaced by loose gestural marks-suggestive -that allows the viewer to decide what it is there. Eliminating that tree as a separate shape keeps the painting from becoming static since there is a similar shape on the right. The eye is also entertained by the gestural marks which direct the eye back into the painting. STEPS 1 & 2 are by themselves complete but the third one is the one in which you have gone beyond what is there. Step 2 has some beautiful passages of light in the large tree mass. Loriann you dance with the pastels. If all three were displayed in a frame from left to right it would be interesting to follow the changes as they evolved.

BTW- You mentioned that you are planning big things-perhaps very large pastels or oils ? How large are you thinking of going?


loriann said...

Hi Nika and thank you for your reasons. I love your new word coloristically.

HI and thank you Marilyn. Glad you stopped by.

Hi NJ,'Some of the differences you mention were just what I was intending to do. Thanks for your vote of confidence.
As for how far I have my biggest pastel measuring 3ft by 4ft-and it sold right away! My largest oil so far is 2ftx3ft, it's almost finished...and a new board made that is about 4x4! The problem is for the biggies I have to work on the floor since my arm still can not stay extended for very long at all. Most of my recent work is small enough that it can go in my lap. More time, more healing.
till later, L