Well, even though I did decide this week that I needed to stop beating myself up over how I paint skies, I still do want to improve in that area. So, I am continuing the Sunday Skies feature for a while longer, it is good practice for me in a non threatening situation.
This week, I used the same reference photo as LAST WEEK.
I’ll post it again so you can see the photo that was guiding my painting:
Once again, I didn’t worry about the land features in the painting, though I did give them a little more care than I did last week. But the land was still just silhouette, because my focus is the sky.
Well while there certainly is still room for improvement, I believe this week’s rendering turned out much better than last week’s.
Just as a reminder, this was how I painted the same sky last week.
I think next week I will move on to using a different reference photo, perhaps one with big billowy white cumulus clouds… we’ll see.
I’ve decided that each Monday I should post about a “Muse”. For my purposes a Muse can be any thing or person that brings me inspiration.
Today’s Muse is this painting, by Claude Monet:
Why did I pick this painting as my Monday Muse?
Well, as my readers know, I find it very difficult to be satisfied with my renderings of clouds. I have produced a few paintings where I was genuinely satisfied with the clouds. However, those paintings are the exception, and I certainly seem unable to reproduce the results at will. Its more a matter of “luck” than skill when I produce a sky I am truly happy with. Sometimes grueling hard work gives me results that I find acceptable, but not really pleasing. Well today, I was doing something I frequently do, browsing paintings online. I started looking closely at many of the impressionists’ work, particularly their skies. What I was seeing was encouraging to me. These paintings are beautiful, but if I isolate the sky like this:
I see brush strokes of blue, white, some yellow, a little that is kind of dirty yellow-gray… What I don’t see is photograph-like realistic clouds.
In fact, the closer you look, the less cloud like they become:
To me this is a wonderful encouragement, because the overall picture is amazing, even the sky is amazing. No person knowledgeable about art would say that Monet didn’t know how to paint. Yet when I look at the sky closely I realize that if I had done it myself, I would not have been satisfied. It is showing me that perhaps I need to step back and look at my paintings from further back. It’s okay for them to not look like photographs. The are PAINTINGS. I am my own worst critic of course, because when i saw this, at first I wasn’t thinking anything negative, I was admiring the beauty of the painting. The reason I looked closer at the sky was to see how he did it, and that’s when I realized that I would not have liked it if I did it, but I loved it when Monet did it.
Now does that mean that I will stop trying to improve my skies? No. It does mean though that I can stop stressing every time I fail to make it look exactly like what I see. I don’t necessarily have overwork my sky to the point of frustration, it is OKAY to put in brushstrokes that give the impression of clouds, especially when the sky isn’t the central point of the painting, but merely a backdrop for the rest.
I really don’t know why I didn’t grasp this concept before, after all, the artists I admire most are Impressionists and Post-Impressionists, neither of which are particularly preoccupied with Photorealism in their paintings. In fact, one of my frustrations with other aspects of paintings is that I find it difficult to loosen up enough, and yet with clouds, I was refusing to loosen up. I was trying so much to control every aspect and get the EXACT image held in my mind.