Painting Number 3

Hi all,
A week goes very quickly when you get to my age, but I managed to crack off another painting. Following on from the watercolour birch trees that I produced in painting number 2,  I thought I'd have another go and see if I could make an improvement. "It wouldn't be too difficult," I said quietly to myself.

My inspiration for better things this time, came from seeing a painting by Jane Betteridge in her book "Watercolours unleashed." Jane is one of those artists who paints with a lot of confidence and it shows in her work. My wife and I attended an exhibition of hers earlier in the year at Ticknall village hall and she had some great art on display. Her book is well worth a read and will inspire any artist who is stuck in a rut. Here is a link to Jane's website . Please don't forget to come back and have a giggle at my efforts.

Part of me would like to paint in her style, but yet another part of me doesn't want my paintings to be quite so loose. I like the idea of using Jane's style and technique for my backgrounds and something more detailed in the foreground. I guess I can only dream at the moment but one of these days, who knows.

Anyway, here's my painting of some birch trees in a bluebell wood. It is painted with Winsor and Newton artists' watercolours on 140lb Langton paper.

I suppose it is slightly better than my last painting but only because it isn't as green. The method I used isn't worth relating so I'll just get on with the review.

My review
Bad bits
1 Again I've gone for a sunburst yellow background and again, that looks totally daft.
2 The bluebells in the middle ground look okay, but I could have done with adding some in the foreground with more detail.
3 The foreground foliage in general is rather pathetic. I sprinkled some salt on it to give it some interest but I'm not impressed.
4 The birch trees have their markings all coming from the same side, which when you thing about it is really absurd.

Good bits
None

I can summarise this painting in one word, crap. I know it is only my third attempt but I was hoping for better. I'll score it just to be consistent but it isn't getting anything higher than a 7 out of 100.

What do you think, am I being to hard on myself? Your comments are very welcome.

Painting Number 2

Hi All,
Time seems to be zooming by at a hell of pace, perhaps one of these days it will settle down to a gallop. It's a shame time is going so fast because the best month of the year, for me at any rate, is almost over. The dandelions have gone and the bluebells are on the wane. Still the may flower is looking great and filling the lanes with its heady perfume.

Right, lets get on with it, I'm sure you are dying to see my second painting. I would like to think it is better than the first one, but I'm afraid it isn't.

The subject is one of my favourite trees, the birch. This tree, with its silver white bark is, along with tigers and kingfishers one of the most paint subjects known to man. If you check out some of the galleries on the Internet, you can bet your last lollipop that a birch tree will feature somewhere.

Here is my version, it is painted with Winsor and Newton  watercolours (artists' quality) on 140lb, not watercolour paper.
Method
I masked off the birch trees and when the masking fluid was dry I wet the paper and then painted it wet on wet. I made a few marks in the wet paint with a craft knife in an attempt to be arty crafty and splattered some paint from a tooth brush. Then I added some more details when the initial painting was dry.

So, what do you think. Any comments are welcome, but here's what I think just to get you started.
Bad bits
1 The birch trees taper to quickly and the banding is too stripy.
2 The overall colour is too green. My wife said it looks like I've been on acid and is threatening to hide my sap green so that I will use some other colours.
3 Seems silly now, but why did I do the sky orange? And while I'm mentioning the sky what is all the yellow about? It looks like there's been and explosion in a custard factory.
4 Some of the arty crafty marks that I made with the craft knife are okay but I think I have over done them.

I could go on for a while longer, but I think if I addressed the issues already mentioned I'd have a much better painting.
Good bits
Help me, I'm struggling here.
1 Perhaps the distant trees on the left hand side just below the sky are acceptable if you stand in a candle it room and squint a bit.

I'm disappointed and my score for this one is a measly 8 out of 100, so I've got a long way to go yet. However, I'm not going to get down-arted about it and I'm going to give the birch trees a second go. If you want to see how I get on please catch up with me next time. Until then enjoy your painting.

Paint Test

Hi all,
In my last post, one of the issues with my first painting was the lack of vibrancy when it came to the paint. When I look at proper artists' work the colours seems to jump off the paper. My paint looked like it would have a job to dribble off the edge of the paper even with a good wind behind it. I said my painting looked wishy-washy and, even taking into account that the subject matter was a misty scene, it still looked out of salts.

If you are interested in art, you have probably been to the exhibitions at village halls where amateur artist have their annual display. There is no doubt that there are some good paintings hanging about at these events, but there are even more that, like my first effort, look like they could do with an injection of steroids. Could it possibly be the paint? Is professional quality paint worth the extra money or is it a bit of a snobby thing?

 My view on the subject was that if you bought students quality watercolours and didn't put too much water into it when mixing, the result should equal that of professional watercolour paints. I would therefore save my self a fortune because professional watercolours are about twice the price.

Anyway, I must have found myself in a pool of delirium because I decided to get my wallet out and purchase three tubes of professional quality watercolours from a nationally known hobby and art shop. Those three tiny tubes cost me almost £18 quid, if they contained tooth paste it would be gone in a couple of days and I'd be making an appointment at the dentist to have all my teeth removed before I allowed myself to be fleeced again.

The next thing I did was to set about doing a test to see if the paints were worth the extra money. Now I'll be the first to admit that my experiment might not be the most scientific in the world and you can make what you will of the results, but here's what I did. I drew a couple of irises and painted one with student quality watercolour and most of the other with the paint I'd paid an arm and a leg for. Here is the result.

I think you have probably worked out which was done with the most expensive paint, so what can be gathered from the evidence?

 If I want to do a painting that looks proper, I need to fork out and buy the best quality paints. It's no good telling myself that I'll use the cheap stuff until I get good because using cheap paint will only hold me back and I'll never paint anything worth risking an eye on.

 It also seemed to me that because the professional watercolour paint is a lot stronger, when I need a weaker wash the paint will, due to its increased level of pigment, go much further.

So, what I need to concentrate on now is finding professional quality paints at something like student paint prices. I'll let you know if I'm successful in a future post. Painting number 2 is well on the way and will be posted in a couple of days. Happy painting.

Painting 1

Hi all,
If you have been waiting earnestly for the first painting in my challenge I am very sorry for the delay. However, the ball has started rolling and here is my first watercolour effort.

Now if you can stop laughing long enough to read the rest of this post and look at it again through squinted eyes, I suppose it isn't that bad for a starter.

The painting is called misty village and puts me in mind of more than one holiday spent in the glorious countryside of Wales. The painting actually came from and exercise in an art magazine and it provide the inspiration to get me on my way.

The paper is cheap 140lb watercolour paper and the paints used were cotman watercolour. I followed the method in the magazine article and started by masking off some of the houses with masking fluid then wetting the paper all over before diving in with the paints.

Here is my review
Bad
1 The sky is a right mess; grey blobs on the right and splodges of mustard on the left.
2 The foreground is empty, surely something should be going on.
3 Some of the houses look as if they could fall over at any minute.
4 I know it is supposed to be a misty scene, but it all looks a bit wishy washy to me even though it is a watercolour painting.

Good
I like the smoke coming out of the chimneys. That was achieved by lifting some paint out with a piece of kitchen towel. The mountains in the background are also easy on the eye so it isn't a complete disaster.

Overall I would give it a score of 10 out of 100 so there is a long way to go yet before I can call myself a painter.

Lessons learned
1 When working wet into wet it is best to plan ahead. Paints need to be ready and mixed before wetting the paper because while I was ferreting about looking for the right colours and mixing them the water I'd put on the paper was starting to dry out.

2 Check out artists' watercolours to see if they are worth paying the extra money for.

Call in again next week for painting number two. I'm hoping it will be better but it could be worse.
Any comments on painting 1 will be welcome even if you thing it is a load of rubbish.