Composition - examples of note
 

Here's a painting that has a whimsical appeal by Philip Alexius de Laszlo.

Two person compositions are tough. Two apple compositions are tough. Twos of anything are tough. I've always heard it said, and it holds true to my eye, that odd numbers are more easily arranged and composed. It seems that when your faced with TWO, the exercise becomes - what can I include to bring it to three?

If you believe that the study of composition is the study of shapes and masses; if you accept that it is a matter of how these shapes relate to one another and to the edge of the canvas; if you understand that it is not about the literal head, chair, hand, but only how these items present themselves as shapes, (if you can create a sentence with too many commas) then it gets a little easier (He said, as if to know).

In this composition it appears that Laszlo has pulled out all the compositional stops. The positioning of the two in relation to one another is the first. The variation of their gaze, the different orientation of the heads and the variation of their height. But it doesn't stop there, we have other shapes to contemplate.

The bowl in the lap, the bubble against the chest which creates a third orb triangulated with the two heads, each matters of compositional interest along with the bubble above the heads, but the shapes that I think have a profound influence on the piece are the ones in the corners. The shadows on either side and the seemingly innocuous space left unattended in the top left corner. These three shapes in my opinion go a long way to cement the overall balance of the piece.

What do you think? Do you disagree with my conclusion, maybe have a theory of your own. As usual I welcome all opinions that coincide with my own and feign the want of those opposing.

And a matter that I forgot above ...

I think the boy's right arm is very important. It adds a strong horizontal component and tends to draw you like an arrow into the center of the composition.

Quest
 

Mike, I am on a quest to learn all that I can about composition. Thank you for your comentary. It is very helpful and - of course, CORRECT. That is, I agree with you. It will go into my notebook of information saved from all the sages on The Forum .

I liked your remarks Mike and I find it curious because I had never considered a composition with two main elements to be a problem.

Following your example I atached some images.

Godward
Tadema
Arnold
and Me.

Now Stephen Gjertson, Bill Watterson and Doug Wond.

Mike,
I think that the triangle from the bowl to the girl's head, looking at the bubble on top and back to the bowl is the compositional construction that should balance the picture.
In my opinion it fails to do so. I feel that there should be more space on the left side, about the double distance from the boy's elbow to the frame.
That would make the dark area of the boy's shirt, and the bobble in making, the center of the picture.

The two kids are much of the same size, but I feel that the boy's dark shirt is dominating the picture and therefore should be more in the center of the composition.

Maybe, if the print is a bit too light, my assumptions are fault, and should be forgotten.

Allan

Sorry, but the original Laszlo image creeps me out.

An off-the-shoulder, below the breast presentation of a 10-year-old, next to her brother or friend, is extremely creepy. Nothing artistic about it. Composition doesn't offer any salvation.

Next slide, please.

Here goes,
I took some lousy photos of some of his paintings in Amsterdam, this Easter. It was late and the light was too warm........

But what to look at is the glare in his self portrait, the long sweeping stroke from top to bottom. And the lady is just charming, even with her Spanish beard, sorry, note the lively brushstrokes.

Allan

It is easier to compose with odd-number elements since this lends itself better to a classical compositon scheme, i. e. central element as focal point and main protagonist balanced laterally by an equal number of elements.
It is very difficult to have a successful compositon with 2 elements, both of which are supposed to have equal protagonism. There are, of course, and have been exceptions wherein the compositions have worked out (Hans Holbein the Younger and his "Two Ambassadors" comes to mind).
I agree that the arm of the boy in the de Laszlo piece plays an important role; the spherical elements also fulfill their role; the shadows on the side serve to anchor the 2 figures to the base of the painting and almost give the whole thing a pyramidal compositional scheme, (perhaps because of this I personally find the painting a bit bottom heavy, but that

For all those creeped out . . .
 

It's hard to believe, but both children in the painting are boys. Laszlo painted numerous paintings of his young sons with long curls. There is even a portrait of his son, Steven, with a bow in his hair. Apparently, it was not uncommon to keep boys' hair long or even dress them in robes and lace, particularly for portraits. I have a photo of my late father in law dressed in a tiny gown sitting (pretty as a pearl) among his older brothers. Go figure. :bewildere

Here is a link to the painting information.

If you poke around on the website that link points to, (jssgallery.org), you'll find lots of Laszlo portraits. Mainly royalty, but also some family and friends. I find them refreshingly uncomplicated.

Great thread!

Carol,

At least you've figured out whats important. It's a difficult subject to tackle, because just when you think you've got a handle on a set rules someone comes along and breaks them with a resounding success. Maybe we could get something started here and between the bunch of us learn something new. I started this not to tell what I know (which was built on a solid foundation of ignorance) but to shake loose what others may teach me. It's a difficult and important subject.

Claudemir,

Thanks for those examples. It seems to me that when you bring many other elements (shapes) into the scene it then looses the element of being a two person composition. Each person being just one more shape within the overall composition. It's when things tighten up that it gets more challenging.

Allan,

I had the same feeling about our left side of the painting needing to be wider, but then I look at the position of the heads and bodies in relation to the canvas and I begin to wonder. I thought that the bowl was the weakest part of the composition, then I thought that maybe he thought he had to include it to complete the narrative of the bubbles. I just don't know. I never had any negative feelings regarding the boys dark shirt.

Those are some interesting brush strokes in that self portrait.

Steven,

I never considered the inappropriateness of it. Who knows what was on this guys mind a hundred years ago. I can see where it would probably push some buttons in some circles.

Carlos,

Thank you for those excellent points. How much of the success of your painting example do you contribute to the negative space?

Molly,

Thanks for that info. I have a photo of my father at about one or two in a dress. He is holding an apple with a big bite out of it.

Here's another of that same Laszlo son Paul Leonardo. It's possible he didn't end up on the rugby team.

This seems to be the key. Good idea, and something I will try to think about next time I have a double portrait to compose.

Mike,
The austerity of the background in the Murillo piece (more like "vacuum") serves to rivet the attention on the two women; the whole composition would have been weaker (I think) if the artist had included secondary elements in the background. Which does not mean in any way that background or negative space is the third element--I am of the opinion that an element in a painting has to be a "positive", actual element.
Degas introduced a third element in his painting below, the table in the foreground, but the painting remains a 2-figure composition. His background is also austere and we are focused on the 2 women. It is quite easy to include a 3rd element (not 3rd "figure") to make the painting coalesce, the challenge is when we limit ourselves to the austerity of 2 figures and still pull off something powerful.


Not sure if I got my point across...

Could have sworn I attached the image in my previous post. Here it is again, I hope.

"The Rules"
 

Hey Mike, I'm still LEARNING "The Rules" Gotta know them before you can break them ....successfully.

Carlos,

I'm not sure I understand your meaning completely. Maybe it's just a matter of semantics. If we are studying the relationship of shapes and masses isn't one shape just as good as another? Are you distinguishing the term element from shape or mass? If you believe, as you stated, that your first example would be much weaker without the vacuum/shape to the right, then can't we accept it as a compositional element?

I agree that when the "elements" are reduced to the absolute minimum this is when we are put to the test.

Similar to your example Carlos, a more contemporary painting by Carol Katchen.

Carol,

I think this is very true of any field. I suppose that if you stay within the genre of representational art, whatever that means to you, that there are some rules that could be applied consistently.

Our friend Chris Saper is always rightly pointing out those nasty tangents that appear within our compositions, likewise there are certain conventions which apply to the edge of the canvas.

There is, however, a whole world of atypical representations out there. If I were to be generous I would say that those operating successfully in those genres would have first had a handle on some set of conventional rules.

And speaking of two bunny compositions, Easter will be here before you know it.

Carlos,

P.S. I just got a post card from my daughter from the coast of Spain. Hotel Aigua Blava, Platja de Fomells, Bergur-Girona-Spain. However that gets sorted out.

Oh these daughters, I'm reminded that you too have a daughter ...

Okay.
My problem is that I never compose with a conscious thought on the negative space my painting will have. I never have a conscious intention or effort to make it have an effect on the whole. For me it is just something that happens as a result, an effect of some sort. So I never consider it to be a compositional element. I suppose if one DOES consider it beforehand (what role the neg. space will play), and takes it so into consideration, then it could be taken as a compositonal elelment. I don

Thanks for that Carlos. I think I understand your meaning. My daughter is back now and went on and on about Barcelona. She also got to visit some little towns where Dega spent his time. I haven't had enough time to talk to her about it. My daughter is majoring in museum management and curation at her University.

***

Here is a two person composition by Wm. Bouguereau. I wonder if the presence of the break through the trees on our right side of the picture had anything to do with him trying to add a third element. It's amazingly close in size and roundness to the shape of the girls heads, and almost at the same height.

Also, here is a Raymond Kinstler composition. I wonder who's set of compositional rules he was reading from. I think the thing is, even when things seem to be scattered and haphazardly placed, they can still follow a set of conventions. This seems to be the case with good abstract art when only shapes and color have to carry the day. I would say that the signature here plays an important role in balancing this composition.

A valuable issue, Mike and all, about which I also wrote an article years ago, edited by Cynthia Daniel, submitted to American Artist magazine. Douglas? ' book mentioned this point.

Hello Schubert, hope things are going well for you.

One of SB's beautiful portraits.

Instead of adding one to make it three, J.S.S. decided to subtract one to make it one. In matters of design it seems to me that this takes on the same attributes as a single person composition. Of course the young girl doesn't get the same full play as the mother(?), but isn't this the way it should be.

Here is a contemporary artist Allan Banks. Mr. Banks uses the book in this familiar scene, along with some background accompaniment to make this composition look natural. Unlike the flowing gowns of years ago, these are the types of every day scenes we are likely to be commissioned to portray today.

And then there's the occasional two tree requests - father and son.

My friend Mike:
You are in Florida! How nice you posted my picture twice! Much obliged! That girl was in Kissimmee, FL. Cynthia likes it, too. I wonder if she looked like that way when in that age. I got this commission from Cynthia Culpeper of Orlando, deceased 5 years ago. I painted a portrait of her husband for a gift.
I suffered political persecution in China. Thank you for your caring.

Thanks SB, and thanks too for quickly sending the fifty bucks. If you want another posted just use that same PayPal number BR549.

*****

You say there

It seems that no one liked this two person composition of R. L. Stevenson and his wife by J S Sargent, as noted below:

The first [portrait of Stevenson], an endeavor of 1884, now missing and most likely destroyed by Stevenson

And another amazing watercolor by JSS.

Here it seems that Sargent worked his composition through the use of il-defined shapes of shadow and light. It's amazing how much we are able read, not so much by an images literal depiction, but in the context in which we find it.

The thread reads - "Examples of note." I suppose they would be more "of note" to the person who posts them, rather than any definitive measure of greatness. Composition, style, and manner of placement being a subjective matter.

These three (all by Philip Alexius de Laszlo, I've got to get over him and move on) are surely "of note" to me. However, I can see how the very stylistic execution of the first two: Lady and Lord Mountbatten 1924 and 25, might not appeal to everyone. As to the last example: La Contessa Annade Noailles, I cannot imagine how anyone could find criticism with this work of art. It seems perfectly done, the way the eyes and hair burn themselves into the paper keeps me coming back again and again.

This design stuff is difficult to talk about. It

With the following paintings I feel barely competent to remark on their size: This guy could get an awful lot done in a small space.

Each by Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema:

1 The promise of Spring 15x9
2 Vain Courtship 30x16
3 Unconscious Rivals 18x25 w/detail

PS: Don't try this at home, this is the work of a highly trained professional - work big!

Gee Ma, I

Here's an article written in Paris regarding Philip Alexius de Laszlo. My notes don't show much more than the quote below, but my recollection is that it was written by a contemporary.

"But do not imagine that fame and success win themselves without effort! In the technique of the kind, the aristocratic or worldly portrait is not easy; quite the opposite, is it not the most difficult one to succeed, since under pains to generate a method, it is necessary for him to discover discreetly the individual character under the picturesque sumptuousness of pomp or the correct uniformity of the distinction? In a ceremonial setting, in an atmosphere of elegance and of courtesy, the angles round off, intimacy blurs or conceals; and, under the peel of varnish, the task becomes more difficult. With his first portraits of high dignitaries and of grandes dames, in the resemblance of a pope and a prime minister, de L

This is one tired sitter - slumping in spite of that corset. Poor baby...
But certainly a well done and sensitive portrait - thanks for sharing it.

Oops - the subject is - composition? sorry for getting off topic. The artist uses those folds in the background rather nicely to keep an interesting shape in the middle of the painting and to not let that diagonal line of the body become too distracting.

Thanks for responding Julie.

Unfortunately you didn't make it within the 30 second time limit so the Lexus model LS 30 ought 6 will go back to the dealership.

Do you think that this: Jessie Chaffee 40x30 by Daniel Greene, is an improvement over the Alma-Tadema above?

The're both nice. No. 1 has more detail to move the eye around (what ARE those things in the corners? animal skins?).

It's not really a fair question as to whether the D.G. rendition is an improvement. They both have their moments. As to what those hanging things in the background are ... I'm not sure. It may be completely apparent if viewed in person.

Speaking of Daniel Greene - I admire this composition very much: Wendy, 30x20.

To me Greene's rendition is not an improvement. Alma-Tadema's model may seem tired, but has a natural look, leading me to believe that her eyes are seeking for something by her own, finding some interesting object to look and pass the time while sitting and that makes the painting stronger. We can almost imagine what she is thinking of. Greene's one look like if the model was told to look at that specific direction, forcing her eyes beyond the natural movement. The result was a still pose, not natural at all.
To me...

Regards,

Ant

Hello Ant,

I think you make a reasonable observation. I would love to be burdened with the choice of which to hang over my sofa, assuming that they matched the fabric that is.

Below is an excerpt taken from a much larger text. It certainly goes to the subject of composition. I've had these same thoughts but have never been able to find a proper term, which the Viscount identifies as "arrested action."

It's one of those things that can be refuted by any number of beautiful examples, but still I think it's noteworthy.

********

JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF ARTS

TWENTY-THIRD ORDINARY MEETING
WEDNESDAY, 20TH MAY, 1936

Chairman: THE RIGHT HON. VISCOUNT ULLSWATER, P.C., G.C.B.,

One of the conditions which I think also necessary in a portrait is that there should not be arrested action. There should be repose. After all, the picture will probably be looked at for many years. Generations to come will look at it, and arrested action always leads the spectators to a sense of fidget and uncertainty as to when the action is going to be completed. A man who is just raising a glass to his lips, for example, is annoying, and fidgets. I begin to think, how long will it be before he drinks that cup of tea or glass of wine?

**********

These thoughts are cousin to the thinking that a person should not show a broad toothy grin. What are they amused by? What joke was told stage left which brings the sitter to this state of excitement? And on and on. These questions, having been brought to the viewers attention, could be considered a distraction from the essence of the individual being portrayed.

Once again, many examples could be brought to bear which refute this line of thinking, but it never hurts to have them in your note bag.