Painting is now complete! (new thread)

Post by **MovieStuff** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:11 am

I posted this in the other thread about matte paintings but it was getting buried on like page three or something so thought I would just start a different thread to make finding these images easier near the top.

As I mentioned in the previous thread, there are various things I would do differently but, overall, I'm pleased with how it turned out.

Here's the final via a quick snapshot:

And here's a detail from the painting:

Enjoy!

Roger

Post by **Nigel** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:35 am

Those clouds would make Bob proud...

Looks great.

Good Luck

http://members.cox.net/home-theater/ · Post by **JCook** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 3:24 am

Makes movies, builds hardware and paints wonderfully can you cook too?

Nice painting...I wish I had your talent. My wife and I were looking at some paintings in a bay side gallery in Annapolis during a business trip last winter. There were several ship at sea style paintings that we both fell in love with but knew better than to ask how much. My handwriting isn't pretty let alone painting.

Post by **Patrick** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 4:33 am

Very moody, Roger. I like the play of light and the variation in tones.

Post by **feinto** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 5:13 am

nice details on the cowboy..i like the mood and feel of the painting. Good Job...can you cook?lol

Post by **MovieStuff** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 5:42 am

I can't cook for beans. Glad you guys like the painting. It was relaxing, in an exhausting kind of way.

Roger

Post by **Taelon** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 5:42 am

WOW.

And I thought all you could do was build Workprinters!

Post by **lunni** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 8:27 am

You have a good moody feeling there with nice surface detail and all!

Thing that bothers me is the cowboy and horse. They make the composition loose and they lack depth and dynamics. Horse is very stiff, like it was wooded. Horse is flat and it lacks shape (3d). There is kind of cut-out-of-paper feeling in them. Also they look too big, like they were giants.
Their perspective is not quite there either, like they were shot with different focal length than the landscape ;) Sorry my intention is not to sound harsh... Other than that it's a nice picture, keep on good work!

Post by **MovieStuff** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 2:18 pm

lunni wrote:You have a good moody feeling there with nice surface detail and all!

Thanks!

lunni wrote:Thing that bothers me is the cowboy and horse. They make the composition loose and they lack depth and dynamics. Horse is very stiff, like it was wooded. Horse is flat and it lacks shape (3d). There is kind of cut-out-of-paper feeling in them.

I would have preferred to have the horse walking but it didn't work out that way when I was shooting the reference photo and I'm not a good enough painter to fake it. I can on some things but not on animals and people. I wouldn't say the horse looks flat and lacks shape but I do agree that it looks stiff or, rather, both the horse and cowboy look "posed". Movement would certainly have added some depth and dimension to the horse and rider.

lunni wrote:Also they look too big, like they were giants.

Yeah, I kind of felt that way afterwards, too. In reality, they are exactly the right size for the shot but I think the problem is in the detail. When doing a painting like this, you have to determine the level of detail you are going to use throughout the painting and I was just too rusty to maintain continuity throughout. That can create a false impression of differences in scale. Something I need to work on. The same thing with the river below. In reality, it is about 60-80 feet below and probably several hundred yards away but that sense of distance got lost in the painting process for the same reason.

lunni wrote:Their perspective is not quite there either, like they were shot with different focal length than the landscape

Again, their size and perspective is a perfect match. That is something that I have always made sure of when shooting reference photos to be comped together. However, horses have a funny tendency to shift their weight when standing for a long period. They will push their rear leg forward and under their belly a bit, like this horse did, and it creates an almost Escher kind of effect where their rear leg looks displaced and on a different plane. It is a common bitch among western artists working with horses and the really talented artists know how to compensate for this. I'm not one of those. :?

lunni wrote:Sorry my intention is not to sound harsh... Other than that it's a nice picture, keep on good work!

Oh I've been a professional artist way too long to be offended by critique of my work. If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, then I must have painted a duck!

Thanks for the comments!

Roger

Post by **Scotness** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 2:32 pm

-- Clever film techniques, "Radioactive Man"

From the Simpsons wrote:Nelson, Ralph, and Martin watch a man paint black patches on a white
horse.

Martin: Uh, Sir, why don't you just use real cows?
Painter: Cows don't look like cows on film. You gotta use horses.
Ralph: What do you do if you want something that looks like a horse?
Painter: Ehh, usually we just tape a bunch of cats together.

here

Post by **ccortez** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 3:38 pm

If I had a paint-by-numbers kit and paid a professional painter to complete it for me, it wouldn't come close to what you were able to accomplish after a long layoff.

Some people have all the talent, the rest of us just proudly proclaim the genius of our talented friends. ;)

Post by **CHAS** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 5:27 pm

I think you did a great job...

Makes me wish I'd paid more attention in my art classes...

Post by **MovieStuff** » Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:53 pm

ccortez wrote:If I had a paint-by-numbers kit and paid a professional painter to complete it for me, it wouldn't come close to what you were able to accomplish after a long layoff.

Some people have all the talent, the rest of us just proudly proclaim the genius of our talented friends. ;)

CHAS wrote:I think you did a great job...

Makes me wish I'd paid more attention in my art classes...

Thanks and thanks. Again, this was really a struggle because I never considered myself a particularly gifted painter to begin with, so trying to do this after 20+ years was both fun and traumatic at the same time. My next painting might not be quite so huge but, on this first one, I figured I needed the extra space to create a margin for error in my somewhat sluggish motor skills.

Roger

Post by **lunni** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:39 pm

MovieStuff wrote:If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, then I must have painted a duck!

Now this is pro talking!

It seem's you have done your home work and know your horses:) I'm no painter myself, although have done long days of drawing and sculpting (human models) some years ago as part of industrial design education. I guess I'm a bit anal about shape and form sometimes... but then again that's what I should know about... Haven't ever tried to draw a horse myself but I guess it would suck if I did.

Anyhow here's some steel (not horses but cows) sculptures by a finnish artist. Click on "uudet" to see how amazingly dynamic creatures she creates from scrap steel. Some of them look rather stiff in those pictures, but the ones I have seen in real life are just incredibly life like. You can figure out the scale... Click on "Piha" to see an larger view and some sculptures from different angle.

Post by **tlatosmd** » Fri Jun 16, 2006 7:18 pm

JCook wrote:Makes movies, builds hardware and paints wonderfully can you cook too?

Too bad you're both married to other people already, eh? :lol:

*runs and hides because of his impertinence*

Anyway, your painting skills are truly breathtaking Roger!