Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
With or without a cow - that is the question ?
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
Late to this, and a little reluctant to add to the flood, but I think your problem might be that you're looking to add something to provide a spot of life and interest, where the original artist probably intended from the outset to include his donkeys - it wasn't that he thought his drawing wasn't quite right so he'd better add something, I suspect.
Comparing the pictures, you have a well-defined path, where the original drawing or print is far less definitely laid out - it's not so much a path as a wide track - so there's no real left/right division; I think that might be one of the sources of your uncertainty - you have to make a choice which he didn't have to make: the composition is different.
So where does that leave me? Well - the mass is on the right in your painting, so compositional sense suggests that your cows or whatever you choose should probably be on the left (although I quite like the thumbnail picture with the animals on the right, just to be awkward). But to be entirely honest about it all - and you know me: if there's a mucky puddle, I'll jump straight in with my welly-boots - I'd re-paint that track, open it out, lose the defined border on the right and leave a suggestion that there might be a way through those trees to the buildings on the hill: and I think that would help you far more in deciding where any incidental feature should go, whether they be moocs or a straggle of hikers (my new collective term).
Of course, if this is a cunning invitation to you to ruin your painting, and you're foolish enough to accept it - I never said it, and it wasn't my fault.
http://www.isleofwightlandscapes.net
http://www.wightpaint.blogspot.co.uk
Posted
Thank you all for your input. Now I´ve got plenty to think about. Don´t know how soon I´ll be able to get back to it as I´ve got to mount and send a couple of paintings off for the Devon Art Society´s summer exhibition. If you want to take a peek, here they are https://landscapeartuk.wordpress.com/19-2/seascapes/seascapes-3/
Posted
Actually I quite like empty landscapes - I've got a touch of the minimalisms. Sorry Pat but, on reflection, I think I prefer the version of the painting without the animals.
In fact I sometimes think the addition of a bit of ruminant furniture can look quite twee and somewhat outdated - but then I can't stand those awful V's (sorry Syd) which are supposed to represent birds - I've seen many a seascape which in my humble opinion have been quite spoilt by their addition.
Posted
The decision taken I will now have to face the consequences. As my mother in law used to say - you can please some of the people some of the time but never all of the people all of the time. I went for a brown cow which was less conspicuous than an Ayrshire (brown with white patches).
Posted
<div>Having a son and daughter only 20 months apart in age makes me wonder how they can be so different. Brought up exactly the same, my son will swear quite a bit when he chats and nothing has ever been able to change him. My daughter, never swears. At 37 I don't think my son is ever going to change.</div>