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
I thought you made some good points Lew, I looked at her painting again with your observations in mind and part agree with you . I then looked at other paintings and old photos I do think that the windows were smaller in most buildings including shop fronts possibly due to coat and the manufacturing of the glass . I also noticed when visiting museums with old building etc such as the excellent one in Cardiff St Fagins that the doors do seen lower and wondered if this was to conserve heat .
So you post was daft and it did one of the things I like about this thread ,it made me look closer and then research for more information I do think that others a also prompted to find out more about the subjects or the artists so bonus all around.
Posted
Oh dear, I wish I hadn't edited my point out now. So I'll make it again. Years back when I first found this artist I thought the people and animals that populate her paintings were too small compared to the buildings. Having thought that I now can't 'unsee' it. You may not agree. I'd been to places like Singleton, a museum that rescues old buildings about to be demolished and rebuilds them in it's open air museum. Many of the doorways were very low...not so in this artists paintings. I thought she'd got the proportions wrong, but on looking at vintage photos I find they DID have large doorways...here's a pic...
...so maybe I was wrong about this artists work.
But I'm unable to shake off the idea that the people are too small.
Sorry Robert. Sorry Dixie.
...so maybe I was wrong about this artists work.
But I'm unable to shake off the idea that the people are too small.
Sorry Robert. Sorry Dixie.
Posted
No apology necessary Lew. I know the feeling of having a idea in your head that won’t go away it’s happened to me several times . It’s a case of I’ve seen it and as you said earlier can’t unsee it , bit like having a sketch that had a slight mistake yiu see the mistake every time as it seems to magnify.
Posted
You are right Lew. What a great observation. I took her painting of Conwy, much of which is unchanged today and overlaid a photo that someone had helpfully taken from the same spot. The corner building has today lost its steps but is otherwise just the same. The figures should be much larger. Even allowing for the fact that people are generally bigger today, they are far too small. I have indicted the height of people from the photo in the same positions 
on her painting.
on her painting.
Posted
A fascinating piece of detective work Colette. You can see the discrepancies in the picture you've chosen above. There's a figure sat on the bottom of the steps you mentioned, as painted this step would be the height of a chair seat (The knees are level with the top of the step, and the feet are touching the floor)...massive steps like this are very unlikely even if the figure is a child. As you've clearly shown with your overlay, the figures are too small. Why?? I've no idea.
I hesitated to make this point, and edited it out earlier because I didn't want to be seen as trashing this artist, I admire her work very much. So, we have one of those oddities of art that make it more interesting for me. When you look at the wonderfully painted buildings, here we have an artist who understood proportion very well...so why paint the figures too small?
Edited
by Lewis Cooper
Posted
Well, I’m confused! The figures look fine to me. The group of people next to your blue line Collette are mostly children so would be smaller. Maybe post the more recent photo you have of this scene, and I may change my mind! As you say it’s difficult to unsee something once the idea is in your head, but I quite like and admire her work. The detail is amazing and fascinating and she has great skill. I’m only viewing on an iPad, so my view size is limited: might be different if bigger.
Posted
So, now in detective mode I found this 1913 photo of Castle Street Conwy, which I assume is the same view? The man on the left near to the camera, appears huge! All very strange.
Thinking about it, I wonder if she painted the scene, and added the figures later/separately, as there are so many of them in most of her paintings.
Photo deleted because of copyright - see later post.
Edited
by Tessa Gwynne
Posted
His is really intriguing and I doubt we will find the answers I personally am not bothered, like Lew I think her artwork is excellent . To be honest in the in out grout , one minute I see the figures as small next time I look the fit the scene really well .
I do think Tessa’s point about painting the figures in later is a very good one, I can’t imagine trying to ad all those figure at the same time as painting those superb looking buildings . People you can make up and but you could not imagine the details in the buildings, you have sold me on that bit Tessa.
