Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Inspiration from Artists Week 84 Bonus Artist : Louise Ingram Rayner .
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
Welcome to this weeks bonus artist the featuring Artist this week is :
Louise Ingram Rayner 1832 - 1924, who was a British watercolour artists born in Matlock Bath Derbyshire. Her parents Samual Rayner and her mother Ann Rayner (nee Manser) we’re both noted artists. Louise studied painting from the age of fifteen at first with her father then later with established artist friends of the family such as George Cottomide , Edmund Niemann, Davis Roberts and Frank Stone.
Her first exhibited painting was an oil shown at the a royal Academy in 1852 the first of a series of oil paintings. From 1860 however her medium was watercolour which she exhibited for over fifty years. She lived in Chester but travelled extensively painting British scenes during the summers of the 1870 and 1880s .
Her paintings are very detailed and picturesque street scenes capturing the ‘olde world’ character of British town and cities in the booming Victorian period.
Information from Wikipedia.
I only came across her work last week and totally by accident as I was reading about another artist her work is beautiful done and the detailing is amazing but it has that aged Victorian look that is often not very popular these days . There is no doubting her skill as a watercolourist and I feel sure there are elements of her work that you will find interesting.
Posted
They do indeed have a very Victorian feel to them - she seemed to enjoy painting figures, too - almost a touch of Breughel, though his figures were a lot less ... cosy? Less idealized, perhaps.
She was immensely skilled, though even though she did enjoy painting people, carriages, and horses, her painting of the architecture through which those figures move is much more impressive.
Posted
An astonishing artist. Her work makes me think is this really watercolour? I've been aware of her art for sometime but have only seen it on the net, not for real, and had assumed she painted in oils. The buildings are wonderfully painted, as are the figures. Bruegelesque as Robert said...but more well behaved, none of that hanky-panky behaviour in Louise's paintings. I featured her briefly in my 'I can't believe it's watercolour' thread a while back. Good to see her work again.
Edited
by Lewis Cooper
Posted
I think one reason why Lew might initially have thought that some of her paintings were oils (perhaps she did paint in oil occasionally?) is that, in common with a lot of Victorian watercolourists, she used body-colour selectively.
Greater adherents of watercolour than I am might be able to tell us when the vogue for "pure watercolour", by which is meant simply not using white, began. From what I've seen of their work, Constable rarely used body colour (quite open to contradiction here), whereas Turner often did. A falling-to-pieces booklet I have from Winsor and Newton, authored by Hesketh Hubbard I think, recommended the judicious addition of Chinese, i.e. Zinc, white to watercolour; now we have Titanium white in watercolour, likely to be a lot more obvious in a watercolour painting, but I wouldn't hesitate to use it if it helped. However - I freely confess that the level of skill in the paintings shown above is beyond me - and might even have had Turner scratching his head. It's the delicacy in the architectural painting, less obvious perhaps in the figures, which is entirely remarkable.
This post has been removed as it violates our forum rules and guidelines.