Caesura
 

Oil on MDO, 39" x 48"

Not the best shots of this - it's not easy to photograph. One of these days I'll get it done professionally. It's no rush because I have no place to show this, except my livingroom... Figurative work - even clothed - doesn't do well in Maine, or most of New England, for that matter.

Well, one day I'll trek this and some other things back to NYC and see what happens. I have to do a few more, though, and who knows when I'll have the luxury of doing portfolio work.

Oh, this was done exclusively from life - but not all together. I did plein air studies of the seascape, and drew the model from life in my studio. I did small color studies of her, as well, to try and match the outdoor lighting. The result is okay, but were I to do it again, I would paint a study of the model either on site, or outdoors... or at least photgraph her outdoors. It was a bit of a struggle to do it the way I did it.

Thought I might give the landscape a little credit in this closeup. Huh - I could probably sell it here in Portland if it looked like this.

I cannot see any of you pictures. They simply don't appear, I can see only an icon instead. Maybe others are having the same problem.

Sorry, I didn't pay attention to the "Attachments Pending Approval" statement.

Hello?
 

I think the approval of the images is taking a while because the Board members who have the power to do such things have been away at the PSOA conference.

I'm trying to be patient, too - but I am very curious to hear your reactions, as not too many people have seen this image. I photographed it only last week, but the painting itself was completed over a year ago. I suppose you all will have to wait a little longer to see it.

Stay tuned!

The suspense is killing me now, I've been checking each day since the thread appeared :D

Carolyn

Me too!

Ah, there it is! Hope it was worth the wait. ;)

Don't worry, it was.
Very nice work Rob.

Rob, I think this is a terrific painting and I love it. It has a wonderful haunting quality and her pose has such attitude. It seems to me I saw an outdoor male nude of Eakins in a similar stance.

I'm really interested in outdoor nudes (I also have a woman on the rocks painting) and I'm especially interested in the problems you said you had in transferring indoor to outdoor techniques. It seems to be the problems lie partly in turning the form, would you agree?

So well done!

Very nice,

has an almost surreal quality for me, and yes haunting and maybe a tinge of melancholy. :thumbsup:

Carolyn

Thanks for all the kind words. Sorry for the wait. It's kind of ironic, in a way, as this painting is sort of an enigma for me.

"Haunting" is a good word. I wanted some element of foreboding to come through. The red/green signal off to the left is an old navigational marker (for lobster boats, mostly) that indicates where the underwater shoals are located; pass on the red side, you'll bottom out. I positioned the figure so that she looks like she's contemplating a dive into the "danger" side of the signal. The fact that she is nude underscores a sense of fragility: she is unprotected from the harsh elements. Just to drive the point home, I showed the clouds lowering off to the left, as well.

I hadn't noticed the Eakins-like pose (The Swimming Hole was recently on display here at the Portland Museum of Art), but I definitely see some similarities. An unconscious influence, to be sure.

Linda - I've seen your nude on the rocks (hey, how come it's not posted here? nudge nudge), and I think it's wonderful. Getting the form to turn in outdoor light is truly dependent upon the handling of the reflected light - and outside, that is sky light. "Sky light" is all the light from the atmosphere, except the sun, which is, of course, your main light. This particular piece was a toughie, as I was relying on only 1/4 main and the rest reflected. The coloration and intensity of the reflected light is the key. The overall environment dictates the hue. In this case, it had an ultramarine cast, which, in the flesh tone, is realized through neutralization. There is a hue shift from a pure neutral (where the reflected light begins to model away from the core shadow) into a cool neutral (small additions of ultramarine) in the lightest parts of the reflected light. I messed with this through drybrush scumbling for the most part. It took a lot of experimentation, but I got it close enough, I think.

To get a better idea of the studio lighting setup from which I had to extrapolate, I'm posting my drawing of Hope (another great model), here and in the Nude Critiques section (click if you want to see it right away ;) ) and you can understand the changes I had to make in the shadow values in order to get a convincing "outside" look.

Thanks again for looking!

Well, if you ever get desparate to sell this piece, just take a table saw to it and market the left half in Maine and the other half in Metropolis. It'll give the collector's something to chase after and bid up when you're dead.

:( Jeez, I'd like to be around to see such a thing. And there's an implication that my work will only be worthy of collecting when I've gone to that big studio space in the sky (I hear there's really good light there).

Ah - I know you didn't mean it.

And I guess the saw will have to wait, as this is currently on display at the galleries at the New Hampshire Institute of Art. Perhaps I'll throw in a gift certificate to Home Depot if the painting is purchased. Table saws are expensive! ;)

Rob, I'm glad this post got refreshed, because it reminds me to ask you if you had any trouble coming up with the cast shadow of your model on the rock when you used the shot from your studio setup. I guess what I'm asking is if you assumed a time of day from your studio light setup and set up your shot with that in mind.

Sorry for the late reply, Linda. But, that is a good question.

When I did the plein aire studies for the landscape, I already had in mind the pose for the model, and had my sketchbook on hand with a thumbnail drawing of the figure (done from pure imagination, though I knew which model I was going to use). With the self-timer, I hopped up on the rock and assumed the same pose as the figure (yes, fully clothed ;) ) in order to get the cast shadow shapes on the rock. I later added the shadow into the study.

But, due to budget constraints, my studio lighing setup was Rube Goldberg-ish, at best. Plus, the model could only work at night, so there wasn't even an inkling of natural light in the drawing sessions. Thus, my inherent struggle with this thing. Again, hindsight-wise, this approach will not be repeated with regard to the figure. If ever I'm compelled to do this sort of thing again, I will find a way to employ natural light on the figure.