Hello there friends,
Today was another great, full and productive day of painting. And that means more than simply sitting at the easel with brush in hand, color on palette, and progression on canvas.
It also typically means music blasting, coffee consumed, and lunch neglected. Today was no exception. However, it also means I do a lot of thinking. Artists are more than just painters, sculptors, draftsmen, etc. We're also full-time philosophers. We think. A lot.
So there I was making progress on a new figurative painting, and thinking to myself, "This is the perfect opportunity to challenge myself and my technique." If there is one thing with which I struggle when it comes to figure paintings, it is overstating things that do not necessarily need to be defined. So what do I mean by that?
Less is more.
I tend to be too tight and rigid when it comes to painting the figure. Lately, I've been working on a lot of landscape pieces in a series I've called
Scenes of Creation. You've seen some of them. And as I was working today on this current figure painting, and as I've been painting my
Hands series, I've asked myself, "Why have I allowed myself to be so loose, relaxed, yet intentional with my landscape work, and so overly tight and careful with my figurative work?"
I understand fully that landscape painting is a totally different kind of painting than figurative and portrait painting. But I also know that there is a way to be more relaxed in my technique with figurative painting as I am with landscapes. At least I should know this by now. After all, my favorite painter of all time, whose praises I sing all the day long, knew full well that when it comes to painting the figure, less is more.
Velázquez was just about the greatest master of doing more with less. There are countless examples of how he did this in his figurative work, but let me show you one that clearly demonstrates what I'm talking about:
So here is one of my favorite pieces by Velázquez called
The Forge of Vulcan. He painted this on his first visit to Rome, so the classical influence of the figure is clearly apparent here in comparison to his previous work. But Velázquez does something here that is also noteworthy. Something arguably more significant in his treatment of the figure. Take a closer look at the foot of one of the figures depicted here:
If I were painting this, I would be so caught up in capturing every detail of the foot - every line, every vein, the individual toes and their toenails. And probably even the dirt underneath those toenails. Velázquez seems to have forgotten to finish painting this foot. Was he really that careless or distracted or absent-minded. Did he start this foot, take a break, and then work on something else when he came back to the painting, completely forgetting about the foot he started? Or was this simple, sketched-in handling of the foot completely intentional? Did Velázquez have the wisdom to know that this was all that was needed to make this a convincing representation? I absolutely, 100% believe so. He knew that less was more, and that he could accomplish more with less. Some details don't need to be defined in order to make a convincing statement.
So here is the start to my figurative painting from today:
Let me start by saying this is a small, 14x20" oil on linen canvas. And it is by far one of the most difficult poses I've ever tried to draw/paint in my life. It is already a difficult task for me to draw or paint a reclining figure. But to add to the challenge, this figure also has that twist throughout her pose so that her bottom half is facing toward the viewer, while her torso faces upward, and her head is turned away from the viewer. But it also makes for a great display of the anatomy of her skeletal structure that I love.
The truth is I was ready for this challenge. As artists, we have to continually and gradually challenge ourselves to try things we think are too difficult. This is one of the reasons I'm working on a series of paintings that focus on hands. I've never felt comfortable in my ability to draw or paint hands, so it's time to conquer that. This figurative painting is a stand-alone piece, not part of any series. It's a challenge for me to conquer something. For one, my ongoing effort to improve my proficiency in drawing and painting the figure. But also my handling of the figure, particularly my paint handling. As I've worked on this piece, I've been studying some contemporary academic figurative works, and trying to determine ways to make a convincing statement without going overboard on detail. The idea is not to fall short on effort, or take a lazy approach to painting. But when your goal is to accomplish A, B, and C, you really don't have to waste your time focusing on D through Z.
I've always said that the main objective of the painting process is to move from general to specific. But the big question that we have to answer as we're working is "How specific do I need to get?" How specific is
too specific? Do I need to put toenails on those toes? Does each individual finger need to be painted? How much of that eye needs to be defined? How many creases in the forehead do I really need to paint or draw? Honestly, the one thing I can say I have ever applied the "less is more" principle to in figurative painting has been the representation of hair. Hair and beards. If anything, it is the one thing with which we have to be a bit abstract. Incidentally, I sense a bit more freedom as an artist when I'm painting the hair because I feel less pressure to make it look exactly precise according to what I see on the model or photo reference.
Thanks for indulging me with this little blog post. Sometimes this really is like a journal for me to spill out random thoughts I had on a given day. Today was such a day, and this post is such a post. Please stay tuned for more coming up, including more scenes of creation, more hands, and the completion of this figurative piece.
