Landscape is usually considered to be on locale painting genre. Now this needs to be understood. Why this need for on the spot painting?
Since the impressionist rebellion, painter understood mainly one thing, that he needs to paint what he sees. The earlier romantic period for example, was idealizing whatever subject was to be painted including landscapes. The followers of landscape were relatively less in number and they also painted a bit glorified view of the world. Beauty was so elaborately painted that it was sometimes looked aggressive. Impressionist showed us the beauty of painting the reality and fleeting glimpse with 'real' colours. The brain was pushed back and eyes came in forefront.
On the spot painting teaches many things to all artists from all levels of seniority and seriousness. The light and colours, the perspective, the conversion of 3D to 2D , and how to compose the vast reality in front on the small rectangle of the paper. The efforts to show the time of the day, the season, the sumshine and cloudiness all teaches one thing or the other. Even in cities the on the spot painting teaches a lot more than one may assume. Its not only the beautiful villages which are right material for excursions but also the bustling cities if you manage to find enough space and quietitude for yourself. The business of life and fast pace is really a muse to an artist with that liking.
So we all agree that landscape is better learnt on the spot. Then comes the question of references. Many a times artist finds it hard to get space at say a railway station or market. He chooses to do a key sketch, with colours if possible. We in india, don't have the real tradition like English, of doing travel sketches in sketchbooks, prefering instead to make drawings or rapid sketches. These preferences apart, artist feels the urge to put the view on paper and conditions are uncomfortable or even 'hostile'. So he makes adjustments and sketches.
And that brings us to the more modern phenomenon of landscapes in studio or from references Usually all these years in all the exhibitions of landscapes, we see query on the face of the viewer esecially fellow artists, IS IT ON THE SPOT?
We need to understand this question and its intention and answers and motive behind them. And legitimacy and advantages /disdvatages of the painting landscapes in studio.
We all know most of us want to paint on locale but dont. We are condescendingly accept the sketch references but not photos used for reference. Sketches finally are done on the spot. Photos? They also are taken on the spot! We all know the larger works are not feasible to do on locale. And sometimes smaller too say, in vegetable market. But we see many times the question asked if there is doubt and apologetical answer or plain falsity from the painter regarding the reference .
Why the question and why the apology or falsity?
We have experienced many things while working with photos. I am keeping sketches aside because truely we all know its seldom done. Artist will rather paint full painting then and there, or take a photo. All of us, including yours truely have lied many times as having done a sketch while we all know that we had shot a photo.
Working with photos has a lot of disadvatages. First its a 'picture' in itself albeit by camera but a 2D picture. So the adventure of 3D to 2d is lost. And also the composition and perspective part. And photograph is still. It is tough for a beginner at least, to imbibe the flow and movement of the place from a photograph in comparison to live scene. Many times photograph tends to have different feel in light and colours part too. And most troublesome part for one who tends to paint on and on and on, is overworking. He doesnt know where to stop!!! Too many details creeping in from the photograph so it is somewhat difficult to eliminate things.
So, its agreed that working from a photograph is a not a suitable choice for many especially beginners and also advanced amateurs. But if you notice, all the disadvatages are not insurmountable. And they are of the skill level problems.
Firstly one who has a capacity for minimalism or has a knack of different angle of view, these problems wont arise. A minimalist will eliminate from actual scene and from photo with equal finnesse. And one who 'sees differently' will take the photo with that angle only. Coming to this, its imperative to take your own photograph. Its a taboo to use others' photos however great they seem to you. And even when the photographer is a friend and allowed its use! Afterall photograph is also a work of art and we dont copy others' works, do we?
So the arguement of the photo misleading doesnt hold true. As far as perspective and colours and light is concerned, one who wishes to paint his own thing and not 'depict' the scene faithfully wont find it a much of a bother. And frankly, the case of wrong perspective is based on the old fashioned idea of 'correcting' the 'illusions' in vanishings. Verticles have to be verticles! If one is intelligent, he will see that skycrapers do look tilted to naked eye too. So if one wishes to experiment then photograph will be an usefull aid for deviating from the reality.
But, all these are remedies for acquiring skill for working from photograph.
And for that, i from my own experiences over the years, will vouch for mixed approach. Working on locale is a must for a landscape painter as a riyaz. Complete reliance on photos can be detrimental for grounded studies.
And on the other hand it is stubborn attitude to insist on on the spot painting and taking pride in it. Especially when what is painted doesn't merit that pride.
It is the final work and its quality and maturity beyond the overt skill and technical mastery, that justifies the means. Work from photo or on locale, without keeping any insistance, just looking for bettering each time. Its better to paint a sublime work in studio rather than make a hash of things on locale. And if a certain painting has to be painted on location, then dont fret for the inconvineances of hot sun or rush around!
Enjoy!
Its a taboo to use others' photos however great they seem to you. And even when the photographer is a friend and allowed its use! Afterall photograph is also a work of art and we dont copy others' works, do we?
ReplyDelete>>>I have a different opinion here. Using photo reference without photographers permission is definitely not ok, but with permission should be ok. Photography and painting are two diffrent artforms and just like adoption / adaption of drama can result into cinema , it can happen be case of using someone elses photo with permission.
You are right in principle. I was talking in context of experiment from reference. The difference is whenever one art form takes inspiration from other it is not competing or there is a fear of redundancy. But in our case, especially representational art n photography, there is an undercurrent of competition n both are finally 'pictures". No other pair is so similar even drama n cinema. Books inspire cinema. Poetry inspires sculptures, literature inspires music. But photographs n paintings are too similar.
ReplyDeleteAnd so we are witnessing merging of fields of photography, graphics n painting in contemporary art world. Bcoz finally all are" pictures"...
ReplyDeletePicasso once said, "Bad artists copy. Good artists steal....". This process of taking a subject and redefining its form can make it current its place in history. Eg: Munch's, "Scream", Botticelli's, "Primavira".
ReplyDeleteAlthough originally paintings most of the people redefining these master pieces have never seen them but it was the photo they interpreted. Making all including the original relevant.
Copyright is the only way to preserve legal ownership of a image, other wise, respectfully don't copy make it your own.
Value your opinion?
well, copying others photograph is a different topic for discussion just like referring old master paintings. my object is how to use photos as reference when on locale is not feasible. and also against the disdain towards use of photos. but you do have a point here. thanks :-)
ReplyDeleteThank you for your feed back, value your opinion and maturity in which you write subjects. I want to learn so much about art and to grow. So glad I found your blog, brilliant.
ReplyDelete