Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Rainbows.
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 spent a couple of hours looking at how rainbows are portrayed in art. I looked at various artists, masters through to less well known artists through to modern day. I know a painter gives their own impression or interpretation of what they see, or what they imagine. Some were breathtaking and stunning with all the components of the various surroundings added. It must be a very difficult object to achieve. They all looked, how you would expect a rainbow to look, arched, some colourful, some with a hint of colour. Looking at them, I couldn't help think, you catch a glint of a rainbow, high in the sky, then, you may follow it as it broadens and the colours intensify and then weaken as it fades and disappears, before it hits the ground. In most of the paintings, my eye was drawn to the bottom of the rainbow, first, as my eye followed the arch upwards. I thought this was very unnatural. What I'm trying to say is, they all looked very unnatural. Have you looked at a painting with a rainbow in it, which you think, is a realistic or good interpretation of a rainbow. I've never tried to paint one. I'm sure I'll give it a go at some point, when I'm brave enough.
Posted
I have looked at rainbows in paintings just as I would any painting but not really studied them. I have always thought that they were very difficult to paint and I haven’t seen any that I would say are so realistic, some were very good representations but the majority were not that good. Having said that I could not do any better than the worst of them if I tried well after all it’s trying to paint a perfect illusion, painting the illusion of a illusion.
Posted
Well I can tell you from experience that they aren’t easy…
Keep them low key and don’t try and get all seven colours in sync, it doesn’t look right. You need an impression!
I generally turn to the Masters to see how they represented a rainbow, usually Turner and Constable, Turner in particular in my case.
This is one example of how Turner approached the subject, he’s not attempted to put in too many colours… this works for me!
Edited
by Alan Bickley
Posted
There's a Constable rainbow painting as well, I think... I've never tried to paint one, but I'm sure that trying to reproduce every colour in a rainbow is going to make any naturalistic painting look odd: I've seen paintings, especially in acrylic, where a hard edged, bright rainbow has jarred completely with the landscape beneath it. Not easy, in short, and they don't hang around long enough for us to be able to paint them from life; whereas photographs invariably (almost) enhance the chroma to such an extent that the colour balance is likely to be off the scale in any painting made from them. In short - I'm in no hurry to paint a rainbow.
Posted
Oh yes, as I mentioned earlier, Constable painted some excellent rainbows.
One comes to mind with a fabulous representation of Salisbury cathedral.
I’ll see if I can find it…
Not the one I had I’m mind, but it’s obvious that both Turner and Constable approached them in a similar fashion!
Both of these are by Constable…
Edited
by Alan Bickley
Posted
I like the first picture of Constable, I am imagining it, with the bottom half of the rainbow not there and just the part over the spire, showing, that's what I mean, about the eye, first catching a glint of a rainbow. If the bottom half had not been there, this probably would have been the perfect painting and representation, of a rainbow, I have ever seen. That's only in my eyes of course and I would really like to try one at some point. I've been out with my 40x zoom camera today, looking for subjects to paint. I got some great photos of tunnels, lighthouse with a tug passing with some slight choppy waves with the cross wind. Seagulls in flight. A violinist busking under a Victorian glass shelter with benches, I got her permission to take photos. So plenty of painting material, no rainbows though.
Posted
Knew I'd seen a few Constable rainbows ... thanks for finding them, Alan, and isn't that painting of the cathedral a cracking piece of work? The second one is fine, too, especially given the thinness of the paint - he's painted just enough to make a powerful image, and not larded it with excessive, careful detail. That man was a genius!
Denise - your journey of discovery is, as always, fascinating and inspiring to follow.
Kay M
Posted
Surely a rainbow is such a joyful sight seen against a sun lit sky. There must be some great paintings out there that reflect this and yet most of shown so far are such drab depressing examples no matter how skilled their execution - sadly a quick search has revealed nothing. Must keep looking.
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2