|
Hi Mike,
I've gotten into the habit of taking a digital photo of my work at the end of the working day. (I keep it in its own seperate 'Work in Progress' file, and I date it so I don't confuse myself.)
Two things to remember: 1. photographing your reference pulls apart (and also clumps together) values more than in real-life; and 2. (this is why you are photographing your work-in-process) photographing your painting pulls apart values more than are apparent in the real-life painting. In other words, what looks okay on your easel may look choppy once you photograph it. What I usually discover from the photograph of my painting is that I need to make more gradual value changes than what I have painted.
Photographs of paintings also intensify chroma, especially in cadmium colors. This "reads" to me as a value change although technically it probably isn't. I've been trying to calm down my color lately (ha!) and so I've been leveling those chroma changes.
If I photograph my painting each day I get a "heads up" as to where my painting is running amuck, and if I'm lucky I can divert a train wreck before it's too late.
How your paintings reproduce in a photograph is critical to how one is perceived as a painter, since it's rare to see a specific artist's paintings hung on a wall.
Just wanted to add that one person's 'subtle' is another person's 'dull and boring'; just as one person's 'dramatic' is another's 'crass and tasteless'. It's all just a taste issue. I think all artists should paint according to his/her taste, using his/her best technique and trust that your market finds you. Just my humble opinion.
|
Threaded Mode
