Richard Murdock

Large Bouguereau Head Study

I thought I’d post a progress shot of the 48″ square Bouguereau head study I am working on. I’d say it’s about 75% done, simply because I’m hitting the 7th value on the skin tones, and the scarf and blouse are coming along well.

I did a small version of this painting last year, around 10″ x 9.” The goal of this piece is to explore the combination of 19th cent. treatment and 21st cent. scale. So far I like the effect it has in person, sort of an emphatic intimacy.

I’ve been evolving my approach somewhat because of this piece. My goal used to be getting each color to finished level at each sitting. I hated going back into a section. But I’ve been realizing the wonderful effects that can be achieved by layering the same HVC mix, and going back into mixes that are darker or more chromatic.

Please excuse this flawed photo. The panel is completely wet and large enough to make moving it in my tiny attic studio tricky. So, I had to take the photo from very close and there’s a lot of glare on the top section, making it seem less developed than it really is. We’ve had so much rain lately that drying is a challenge.

Always use the biggest brush possible?

This aphorism, “Always use the biggest brush possible” was posted on Rational Painting on June 12th, and engendered a very interesting debate. One side thought that it was good to tell students and beginners to work with the largest brush possible, while the other side thought it to be an incomplete belief better replaced by an awareness of the reasons behind choosing a particular brush: Desired stroke, opacity, edge, etc. 

The pro side countered with some of the advantages of using a large brush, namely saving time, being forced to consider the large forms first, and the painterly quality a large brush provides. 

The con side didn’t dispute the advantages, but questioned the issues inherent in holding such an all-inclusive thought.

Is it not more important to know why one chooses a certain brush? Its material, shape, spring and size all contribute to the marks it makes, and paintings are built with brush marks, even when those marks are hidden such as in my friend Tony Curanaj’s work. 

The debate raised some hackles and good questions. People always react when a belief is challenged, and artists seem to hold quite a few beliefs that can be challenged, such as the “never use black” belief. 

What do you think?

Great Art Doco

Please take a look at this documentary. 

Civilisation, Matthew Collings

Cadmiums and flesh tones

From Wet Canvas:

“Cadmiums typically have relatively low-chroma tints in fact and this is a specific feature some users value them for. Despite their reputation in some circles for being too chromatic for flesh mixtures it’s interesting to note that one of the reasons for the resurgence of interest in Vermilion/Cinnabar among oil painters was because of their reputation for higher chroma tints! And yes, many of those users were looking to use them for portraiture or figure painting.

Also, there is perhaps too much of a focus on chroma of late; while it is important to be able to judge it accurately for realistic painting, colour has other dimensions and all three of them need to be looked at carefully. And if one wants to isolate one to give particular attention to it is value that is THE dimension to strive to see and reproduce with accuracy.”

Too much focus on chroma? 

Response from a Rational Painting member:

“Matching color is an objective activity.    One can either match it or not. Wetcanvas’ controversy over using cadmiums is often irrational. At the 8th and 9th values, chromatic colors are essential for some effects in painting flesh. However, most pale models are not that ruddy and, only under some lighting situations do they get that light.    It is unlikely that average flesh painting will ever require cadmium or high chroma organic pigments to achieve an accurate appearance.   For artistic effects or to compensate for lighting and viewing distance, proportional rescaling of chroma might be necessary.  

Again, one can use cadmiums if they are adjusted and neutralized for the accurate representation of flesh.   Whether there is too much discussion over chroma is a matter of opinion and debatable.   Chroma, value and hue are interrelated.   It seems that when painting human flesh, a subject we are are intimately familiar and likely genetically programmed to understand, chroma is critical.”

I’m working on a 48″ square Bouguereau head study now. I’ve got the flesh tones up to the 6th value, and am really enjoying the interplay of hues across the values. One of the areas that seemed wrong was the deep red shadow on her cheek. I knew I had matched the color correctly (98% correct) but it seemed to be too chromatic, until I added a higher chroma red onto her scarf. At that point everything snapped into its proper relationship. Not too much focus on chroma…just the right amount of focus on chroma.

Jim Thalassoudis Solo Show

Jim’s solo exhibition in Perth.

Check it out if you like…….

http://www.greenhillgalleries.com/exhibitions/exhibition_details_thalassoudis.html

Turpentine, and mineral spirits

Virgil Elliott, www.virgilelliott.com

The darkening effect of turpentine is well known in conservation circles. It isn’t a matter of opinion or guesswork; it’s a fact.

Oil paint doesn’t really need to be thinned with any volatile solvent. One might get by with it if one only adds a little bit from an eyedropper and mixes it in well on the palette with a palette knife, but dipping the brush into it and mixing it that way is too imprecise to be considered optimal, because the likelihood of getting too much in one spot or another is too great. And that’s the way most people do it. Thinning beyond a certain point reduces the binding power of vegetable oils, so the question then is how far is too far. The only way to be sure is not to thin the paint with solvent at all. 

Paints ground on roller mills or pebble mills are already lower in oil content than the hand-mulled paints used by the Old Masters, so it stands to reason that we can add a drop or two of linseed oil to a good-sized pile of paint that needs to be softer, and mix it in well, without ending up with problems from too much oil in the paint. And that way there’s less disparity in surface gloss than when the paints are thinned with solvent, which makes the paint dry more matte.

Turps vs Mineral Spirits

Darren Rousar, Sight-Size.com:

First off, Mineral Spirits are a petroleum based distillate. As such it is relatively new to the artist’s scene and was originally used by artists as a solvent to clean brushes. Commercial paint manufacturers (as in house paint) use MS as well. IMO, MS is a stronger ‘thinner’ than turp.

OMS (odorless mineral spirits) is MS but with various aspects of it removed (like sulphur) to make it more nose friendly. OMS cannot dissolve certain medium additives.

Turpentine is a resin distillate from pine trees and is the more traditional artist’s thinner and additive to mediums.

Turpentine, when used to thin pigment for an imprimatura, presents no problems generally. When using turp thinned pigments over an imprimatura it is possible that one could remove some of the imprimatura layer with the brush. If this aspect is bothersome, there are more or less three alternatives. One is the tone your ground. A toned ground has colored pigment mixed within the ground layer itself. As this is suspended in oil it is ‘locked’ in and will not likely come off. Using your medium as your imprimatura ‘thinner’ would lock it in as well but then this underlayer may be too fat. Alternatively (and perhaps not a really great one at that) one could thin their imprimatura layer with retouch varnish.
I am sure this last one will give many pause. 

AFAIK, the only problem with turp or MS when used to thin a paint mixture (either in an imprimatura or the initial layers of the painting) is a thinning of the oil which binds the pigment. This may be a problem only in that the dried paint may not bond well to the surface. But a layer painted like this is a ‘lean’ layer. I am not aware of any studies showing that this is bad for the painting in the long run. Perhaps others are aware of such studies?

Layering, either intentionally or simply via the act of multi-session painting is always done fat over lean when using oil paint. ‘Lean’ here either means paint straight from the tube or more commonly paint thinned with something other than a fat (oil).

My blog and website combined…

I started learning to paint in this manner four years ago this month. After losing 30 years to thinking that realist painting was dead and buried — thanks Pratt! — I’m in a hurry to learn as much as I can. Fortunately, I’ve met some wonderful, helpful artists that have been extraordinarily generous. Trouble is, the more I learn the more I realise that I don’t know. I don’t even know what I don’t know, and it can make me a bit crazy sometimes. But I’m going to do as much as I can, and be happy I got as far as I get.