I have been reading a book by Kevin Weckbach of Colorado, “A Visual Palette”. While here in Denver for the PACC show, I went out to dinner with several artists and sat at a table with my friend Janet Anderson and Kevin. Of course, we talked about painting and teaching. Janet showed me his book when we got home. I have heard and talked about the three levels of painting, but Kevin put it much more eloquently and expanded on the thoughts than I had.
First he wrote about the fact that all good paintings were first a good abstract painting. I agree. Any painting must have good design, composition, use of color, edges, values, etc to be a good painting. All paintings start out as abstracts with the placement of shapes. The addition of details is the decoration and really unnecessary to a good painting.
All (or at least the majority of artists) start out in level 1, the rendering of objects, what we see. We paint a cup or a flower.
Level 2, the next step is to paint shapes. As an advancing artists we start to see, values and color to define our world. We no longer see an object to paint. It is the shapes and values that compel us to paint something.
Level 3 is harder to define. It is when the artist reaches that zen zone. The artist is putting emotion into the painting to convey how they feel about it. Not every artist reaches this point, nor do they attain it in every painting.
At this point the artist is able to rearrange, compose, change values or colors to orchestrate to the painting to give the viewer an emotional connection.
I had always stated this a little differently, but I like what Kevin had to say a little better.
- paint what we know
- paint what we see
- paint what we feel
I haven’t finished reading the book, but I thought this was something interesting to pass along to you.
Talk to you all later.
Becky
This is a good summery. I enjoyed reading this.
I’ve evolved these past two years, leaving zone 1 and 2, and entering zone 3 a lot more. I change values and colors and such to try to evoke feelings a whole lot more than I used to.
I do still at times render recognizable things…at least as it appears to the viewer. I do want them to see a sailboat or a barn for example. But for me, during the painting process, they are shapes first, with some details draped on them. not many mind you. just enough to suggest the thing.
Tom Lynch, watercolorist, teaches artists to play the “looks like a” game. You know…”looks like a sailboat” or “looks like a truck.” He doesn’t suggest painting a “Hunter 41″ Sailboat or a “Totoya Rav4 with sports package.”
Anyways, I thought this article summarized the three phases pretty well. Nothing wrong with being an artist in any phase. it’s all an individual journey for each artist, but it was a good summary of the maturity of an artist.
God bless,
I agree, it is up to the artist how far we want to go. A “rendered painting” can be beautiful and just as well executed as a loose painting. I have a friend, Richard Hall, who paints seemingly detailed, realistic paintings, but he moved beyond photos, knows his edges and what to leave in and out.
And, he has set a tone, a mood for his paintings.His paintings are wonderful.
Simple and eloquent … Thank you for your thoughtful writing, Becky. Refreshing to hear and will share with my students.
thank you Diane. I appreciate that.