Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Can someone break down what this painter is doing technically?
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
Not really! It’s for the individual to interpret what he or she sees and feels in any painting. Artistic expertise doesn’t play a role…a complete layman to art can still make a judgement.
Tell us what interests and excites you about it, and why you think it’s ‘good’…that’s a starting point for you…
Speaking as a painter, it doesn’t do anything for me, others may see it differently!
Subjective is the keyword here I think!
Posted
I can't add much to that! The artist has used a number of techniques, though it's hard to isolate one from another - even if you could, the virtue of any work is the sum of its parts rather than any individual techniques. Is it "good"? Well, it's a fool's game to judge an abstract painting from the way it looks on a screen, but it's saying absolutely nothing to me nor showing me something at which I'd cast so much as a second glance. If you were to tell me it sold for millions, I'd believe you: but in itself, that doesn't mean anything.
Posted
The bottom line is does it matter if you don’t have the expertise to know why you like it , you do and getting to understand it may just change your judgment. There is much about it that I can say I like , it’s a painting that isn’t telling me anything about itself, I like and appreciate paintings that tell a story this doesn’t , its not encouraging me to make a story up about what I see.
Posted
Coming back - I suspect the artist has used, and this assumes it's an acrylic, glazing, a dripping technique, scumbling, in different parts of of the picture. If it's an oil, I'd suspect the use of wax in places.
Which all adds up to one thing - unless the original poster can tell us the medium, it's nearly impossible to analyse the picture technically - you can achieve that dripping technique on the left of the picture with Turpentine in oil paint, or water in acrylic; you could achieve the glazing with a resinous medium in oil, like Liquin, of with any number of mediums in acrylic. Other media are available, though I suspect it is either oil or acrylic.
Still, the ultimate issue with the painting is that its various parts need to come together to make a satisfying whole - and for me, they don't. But I'm hardly the ideal audience for abstract work: and whatever materials were used, and in whatever way, I still couldn't tell you whether it was "good", mediocre, uninteresting, or a work of great significance. So - could you tell us the medium; the context - e.g. where is it, who painted it, is there a title for it: give us a chance to have a stab at it!
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2