I seem to be constantly unearthing the past lately when I look for other totally unrelated things.
I found this photo of a watercolour sketch that I did in 1987 inside a book. 22 years ago! The photo is a little the worse for wear but I recall the image well. It is of my niece when she came to visit me in England many years ago. She was perhaps 2 or three then I think. Rather fitting as tomorrow is her birthday and she's back in England.
Its a shame the photo isn't better. The colours have faded a bit and aren't really representational of the original but the overall values are still there.
I don't know where the original of this is. I don't recall if I gave it my sister or not. I did another piece of her but in oils that my sister does have. I don't have an image of it though and must get one for my files. That was done around the same time also.
Its interesting to find old pieces and compare them with my current style. I don't know if styles do change a lot, even over time. Experimentation takes place with mediums and supports but style seems to stay with a person.
What do others think? Is this similar to my current style or have things changed in the past 22 years?
8 comments:
I think your style then was bolder/darker. Now you do things that are softer, even when your colors are bold. Does that make sense? I do think the photo of your niece looks like your mom. Your mom is usually frowning in your drawings of her. I believe that you said she doesn't like you drawing her. Your niece has that same look even tho it is from looking intently.
I agree -- I don't think you'd use those dark blacks today, especially not for a child this young. This painting has a lot of impact but it seems too intense for a two year old!
I think the "fits together neatly" aspect of your style is there, but yes, I think your values are in the softer ranges now - you still have a range, but your darkest darks aren't so dark.
Your work now seems a little more playful than this (I suppose in terms of color).
It's a great portrait - your work, at any stage of your style is brilliant, dear friend.
This is gorgeous! I think maybe the above comments might be true, but even though you've used darks here, they're still fresh and not opaque--very fresh and delicate. I really like this!
I think there are similarities to how I work now, but maybe the intensity of values is more subdued these days, I agree. I really need to see the original to compare it accurately.
There may be some resemblance to my mother, I haven't really noticed it. And yes my mother hates either photos of drawings of her.
The darks in this are too dark I agree, but not black, more intense sepia. Black was beaten out of me many many years ago. :) I think I was trying to replicate the strong lighting that sunshine produces.
Rose you're always so kind. Thank you. I think styles generally remain the same - its your signature on the world. They evolve over time a little in terms of palette and mediums.
Sue, its difficult to portray a small child in watercolour. Its either too dark or too washed out. I'm still working on a happy medium for it.
I think your style now is softer and more impressionistic but even then - gosh, 22 year's ago - you were darned good!
You were definitely bolder with your values, less concerned with detail and more with basic shapes. Not afraid of a few pencil lines showing either! This could pass as a study or a finished piece, IMO. Kudos! Your artistic talent was evident back then, too.
Time sure does fly Rhonda and there are pieces even older than that still knocking around! I'll have to dig them out and have another look.
Yes I think I was too Billie. Funny how things change over time, but remain the same in some ways too.
Its good to look back and see where we came from.
Post a Comment