Direct painting versus glazing

[Marvin Mattelson]

It seems to me that a lot of new painters on this site are trying to learn the technique of glazing over under paintings. Glazing was originally used to achieve more chromatic effects because of the narrow range of pigments available to artists at the time. Today we have a vast array of pigments available so glazing is not needed nearly as much. In the wrong hands glazing can also produce the look of a hand tinted photo.

In my opinion you first need to learn how to paint directly and master wet into wet technique. This is the only way to learn the subtleties of manipulating oils. Even artists that extensively employ glazing still must rely on opaque paint handling for certain passages. You should first master your ability to model with paint and then if you wish to augment this with glazing techniques go right ahead.

I

[Mai Ly]

Hi Marvin,

I am glad you brought this up. This is 'exactly' how I feel and what I am doing with my oil paintings. Although I would love to be able to paint like the old masters one of these days, I think it is better for a beginner (or someone at an intermediate stage) to master his/her own colour palette, understand how to mix and manipulate from opaque to transparent colours. On top of that, I also feel that some beginners overlook the process of learning and understanding their own tools, like brushes and painting knives. The better one understands one's own colours and tools, the better one will paint.

It is very inspiring to see paintings like, for example, those by Karin Wells (and I am sure she went through many years of hard training). However, I think it is important for a painter to have a solid foundation of the basics like those mentioned above, in order to perform and achieve similar results in the long run.

I agree with what you have mentioned and, again am glad that you have brought this up.

Sincerely,

Mai

[Mai Ly]

I forgot to mention in my previous post that, I went to your website Marvin, and your portraits are beautiful! I especially love the way you rendered the hands and fingers of the subjects. (And everything else!)

Mai

[Peggy Baumgaertner]

I just would like to make one additional point re Mai's response. Working like the old masters does not necessarily mean working in glazes.

Franz Hals, Rembrandt, Velazquez, and even many of Vermeer's paintings were painted directly. Also, the Bostonian's, Sargent, Zorn, the Russian's....I could go on and on.

Peggy

[Clive Fullagar]

Marvin,

At this stage, I am not sure whether I agree with you or not.

It seems to me that a lot of new painters on this site are trying to learn the technique of glazing over under paintings.

I fear I may be one of the perpetrators of the recent underpainting "frenzy" on this forum. However, let me explain my motivations. I have no delusions that by using the techniques of the old masters I will end up painting anything like they did. I merely engage in the exercise of underpainting to teach myself more about values and their range, and to give me options when it comes to choosing an approach to portraiture. In all probability I will return to direct painting after this exercise, but I am sure it will be with a greater appreciation of value.

I also think that we need to be careful here in presuming that underpainting was the only approach that classical painters used. Many of them used a direct approach mainly due to the time constraints of underpainting (waiting for each layer to dry). Direct painting meant you could produce more paintings quicker.

In my opinion you first need to learn how to paint directly and master wet into wet technique. This is the only way to learn the subtleties of manipulating oils. Even artists that extensively employ glazing still must rely on opaque paint handling for certain passages.

I agree, direct painting is an excellent, perhaps the only, way to learn about shaping paint. I think that we tend to ignore the three-dimensional aspect of paint - and glazing is not going to teach us anything about that.

Finally, I too am an admirer of your work. I could not find a more persuasive argument for using direct painting and the wet into wet approach than your portraits.

[Minh Thong]

When I started painting at the first of the year, everyone suggested monochromatic studies at first, so I did a lot of 'underpaintings' by default. And since I had a book about the technique and could search the Forum for even more, I started glazing over all of them. And I eventually started doing verdaccio underpaintings as monochromatic studies and glazing over those, as well.

Because I could draw a (very) little, it was easy to fall into the trap of completing a fully rendered charcoal drawing, laying a verdaccio underpainting down over, and then trying to glaze everything. It was all tightly rendered, just not very good.

Since portraiture was what I have always wanted to do, someone in another Forum suggested doing ten quick portraits from Old Master paintings. Just very quick oil sketches, really. What I found, much to my delight, was that I actually produced better work with the 'slap-it-on-and-move-it-around' method. Also, it seemed to be much more fun.

Nowadays, I mainly do rough value sketches with a brush in Umber or Sienna, often using a lot of rubouts, and then I just start in with colors, moving back to front. It still ain't pretty, but it's an improvement. I wish I could have been convinced to work this way from the very beginning.

Minh "Teacherless" Thong

By the way, Mr. Mattelson, I loved your site and would give up a bodypart to be able to move to NY and study under you.

[Mai Ly]

Hi Peggy,

Thanks for pointing it out. I was really thinking about 'putting the cart before the horse' when writing the post. I was not implying that all the Old Masters only employed the glazing techniques

Mai

[Marvin Mattelson]

There is no wrong way or right way, just the way that's right for you. Erroneous choices help us to clarify our true path. The only bad mistake is to continue to repeat behavior that results in negative returns. Therefore I never dissuade my students from trying to do it their way. In the final analysis, you get either reasons or results.

[Michael Georges]

There are many ways to paint and to learn to paint. I learned via the monochrome underpainting path.

I think the biggest mistake people make with monochrome underpainting is thinking that you glaze over everything.

You don't.

It is important to realize that the monochrome underpainting method is a great way to learn value and creating a 3d impression on a 2d surface. It is a great way for a beginner to create works using a controlled palette. It can teach you a lot.

Back to glazing. You only glaze where you need to and where it is appropriate to the work.

I am attaching a picture of a Bouguereau reproduction I did using this method. I only used glazes over the background, the book, and part of her garment. The rest was painted wet into wet in a more direct fashion - the garment, the hair, the flesh - all opaque paint. In places in the flesh, I left some of the verdaccio underpainting showing through. I did some final adjustment glazes in areas of her hair and a glaze of red over her fingers as they were not quite red enough.

So the technique does work, you just have to have someone teach it to you correctly. It is by no means the only way to paint or to learn to paint.

[Clive Fullagar]

Michael,

Thanks for this information. I will need it when I get into the next phase of my underpainting exercise. The Bougereau reproduction, by the way, is lovely. May I also say that I admire you for taking the plunge into painting from life - especially as your product is already pretty accomplished.