Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Abstract painting.
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
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2
Message
Posted
I don't think there is any definitive answer to this. When I first started on abstract work I did a quick compositional pencil sketch much as I do for many of my 'realistic' works and used this as a guide (but no more than a guide) to produce a finished work. However nowadays I have a better idea of how the colours will work and the overall effects I can achieve using different techniques and tend to simply go in with colours and marks to see how they react and then develop on this. At each stage I play around with the colours and marks to 'encourage' them towards a compositionally acceptable image. I can never fully envisage the end result but that's the fun of painting abstracts. As with more traditional work it is often difficult to know when to stop but I guess we all have that problem.
I can only speak for myself and I guess others will work differently but I do find that as long as I am enjoying the process the end result will be worth it.I quite understand those who do not enjoy abstract work but do get a little frustrated by those who dismiss it out of hand without giving it any attempt to understand and appreciate it. What I call the 'closed mind' set. I am out this morning but as soon as I get back I will post one of my latest and will be interested to know the reactions of others to it.
Posted
Abstract paintings can be as different in approach as figurative works, there are a multitude of methods used to go about it. Some might start with a vision of what they want to create and others use a process to get there.
If you look at Mondrian it seems he was formulaic in his approach (with blocks of colour separated by straight lines) but he got there after trying to make images without form or colour and going through various stages.
How different Kandinsky paintings are, I think he often wanted form (the precise thing Mondrian would seek to avoid) and movement, sometimes he would mix figurative and abstract with for instance a portrait or animal against an abstracted background.
And then of course you have people who abstract real things, like Dali or the cubism movements. A kind of mix of abstract and figurative which breaks all the rules. Here is a sketch from my critical studies folder where I was trying to explain the abstractions based on a guitar...
Art can be a bit pretentious or over thought, abstract can be as simple as drawing without looking at the paper... which sometimes has some pleasing results.
How different Kandinsky paintings are, I think he often wanted form (the precise thing Mondrian would seek to avoid) and movement, sometimes he would mix figurative and abstract with for instance a portrait or animal against an abstracted background.
And then of course you have people who abstract real things, like Dali or the cubism movements. A kind of mix of abstract and figurative which breaks all the rules. Here is a sketch from my critical studies folder where I was trying to explain the abstractions based on a guitar...
Art can be a bit pretentious or over thought, abstract can be as simple as drawing without looking at the paper... which sometimes has some pleasing results.
Edited
by Daveyboyz
Posted
I'm not sure what 'abstract art' is, it's a tag that seems to cover a multitude of art, much of which I wouldn't consider abstract. Much of it I find interesting and beautiful. Generally I like Kandinsky. I struggle with abstract expressionism...the big guns being Rothko, Pollock and maybe Swartz. I guess I end up liking paintings rather than artists...by which I mean, for example, I'm a big fan of Renoir but don't like a lot of his work (not abstract, I know, just making a point). Here's an artist whose work I really like...I found him while searching for abstract art...I don't see him as abstract at all. But he turns up under the abstract banner. I wouldn't know 'how to start an abstract' - the original post -it isn't my thing, and covers such a wide spectrum.
Anyway, here's Brutsky, found under abstract...but not (in my opinion)...love his work.
http://artodyssey1.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/nathan-brutsky.html
Posted
I'm afraid I don't have many favourites among the 'masters. when it comes to abstracts. My favourites are mostly the younger contemporary artists who rarely feature - such as (off the top of my head) Pasher, Faust and especially Dranitsin
.
Rothco: some great works but many of his paintings don't cut the mustard for me.
Kandinsky: colourful but usually incorporates objects which in my book makes them semi-abstract - not abstract. Also a bit too fussy for my taste.
Mondrian: a tad contrived
Brutsky: I agree with Lewis - great work but not abstract
Anyway I have posted one of my abstracts in the gallery if you care to take a butchers - it's at :
http://www.painters-online.co.uk/gallery/art-view,picture_209472.htm
please do let me know what you think.
Edited
by MichaelEdwards
Posted
I like your painting, Micheal. It's definitely abstract, but I can read things into it. That may seem a trite thing to say, but I like paintings I can respond to. Unlike Rothko's work which leaves me stone cold. Here's another trite thing...sometimes when I'm painting my walls I buy emulsion match-pots and paint square patches on the wall...they look like mini-Rothkos. Buts lots of people like Rothko. I do find Kandinski interesting. Mondrian less so...but his checkerboard pictures in primary colours are a good graphical device...you see it used by other artists all the time. The only thing you could say about Brutsky is that his figures are slightly abstracted, but he has a distinctive style that I like. I don't think Ellen's painting is abstract, it's clearly a city-scape but she's put her own distinctive 'take' on what she's seen. That's good.
I posted a cartoon based on Al Capps bitter criticism of abstract art...in it I did a Swartz (abstract expressionist...might have the name wrong) painting which just involves sloshing paint around aimlessly (just my opinion).
I don't agree with Capp, in fact there's vastly more abstract art that I like than I dislike. It sounds like Sylvia is in the dark about how to start an abstract...so am I.
Posted
People very often misunderstand the meaning of abstraction. It very simply is a nonrepresentative nonfigurative form of art. You don't have to "see" anything in an abstract painting just enjoy the shapes, colours and forms which go beautifully together. It's very difficult to do a successful abstract and those who say that their three year old could do better are mistaken ( mostly!). There is a lot of rubbish around but also really enjoyable and smashing creations.
I want to learn to paint beautiful abstracts and hope that I will succeed.
Posted
Clyfford Still is one to look at. I agree with Satu's definition of abstract.
I went to the Abstract Expressionism exhibition at the Royal Academy when it was on. My intention was to have gone to Tate Britain, but didn't fancy the walk from the Mall Galleries. The exhibition was an eye opener and hugely impressive.
Posted
Sylvia I think this is absolutely stunning, just love the vibrant colours. Could read something into it but can also just enjoy it for what it is, a wonderful explosion of colour with lovely dynamic lines. I know you have a lot on at present but I do hope that one day we'll see more beauties like this from you. Still wet here so intend to have another painting day after doing some messages and am determined to try something more abstract again.
Posted
I just found a couple of bits from my GCSE's some 25 years back... as I said I liked abstract at the time but I guess that's because arguably there is no right or wrong way to do it. Its amazing how differently you can go about it but also I think if you do a few you find tried and tested devices which ends up becoming your sort of style.
The last one started off as a doodle when I was on the phone at work...
The last one started off as a doodle when I was on the phone at work...
Posted
I usually consider the word abstract it it's "…to abstract (take) from something". In that sense a pedantic definition might even say that all painting is abstract in a sense; but that would be pedantic. In the more conventional sense of the art-term, by accident I found an interesting Tate Modern YouTube video with an 'expert' explaining and demo-ing the process of a 'typical', I think it was De Kooning, but I might be mis-remembering. I've had a quick search but I can't locate it now. However, Tate do a whole series of good videos on various topics/subjects. So do MoMA but I find them to be less informative.
My own absolute "…if you could only save one disc…" abstract artist would be Mondrian. His tree paintings demonstrate what abstraction is about very effectively I think. In the earlier ones you can see how he's started to look at specific qualities in the subject which are gradually refined through the series. I never tire of looking at them. I include one early/one late as illustration but it's worth looking at the series.
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2