Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

You can send an email to [email protected] if you have questions about how to use this forum.

'When the Time Stood Still...'. 18X24, oil on canvas

edited October 2017 in Post Your Paintings
I posted this sketch earlier. This was done on the spot in watercolor (opaque manner with Chinese white). Now, I am planning to convert this into a good landscape. I am not positing the reference photo so that the viewers can have an unbiased view. i will prepare the canvas (18X24) and start soon.

ForgivenessSummer[Deleted User]FilurenWeatherfordRenoir


  • edited October 2017
    I look forward to seeing another landscape of yours, @kaustav.  But don't hurry it.  I agree about the reference photo. I, too, prefer not to post them for landscapes. :) 

  • @tassieguy thanks. I am gonna take my time for sure and do an oil sketch to master the composition.
  • I like the round nature of the forms of the trees. This appears different than other work I've seen by yourself.

    I think the 3 little blades of grass(?) below and to the left of the trees on the left and the whitish line below the last tree pull my eyes away from the trees as a focal point.

    Some areas like in the foreground and the horizon have smoothly transitioning values and other areas (such as the brown on the trees and their outline) do not. For the trees that sharp focus does work, but maybe then the foreground grass on the bottom left and some of the grounds should be smoother?

    Just some thoughts :)
  • @Richard_P Yeah... the main painting will be a lot different from what you see in this sketch. I did it in five minutes because I was with family members. This was to capture the correct colors and then took a photo for the 'things' in the painting; I don't rely much on photos for color. A lot of things aren't there in the sketch! :o
  • Kaustav said:
    Initial blocking in. Actually a lot of sections are done. 
    Indeed - it is mighty fine as it is.I look forward to seeing where it goes from here.
  • Roxy said:
    Kaustav said:
    Initial blocking in. Actually a lot of sections are done. 
    Indeed - it is mighty fine as it is.I look forward to seeing where it goes from here.
    @Roxy ; yeah! I need to do the crops in the water. Then I'll do those trees. These need some careful attention from my end. I thinking of using my fan brush and then add some details. This painting is totally about mood so, I am not going to do too much anywhere. Approach will be similar to doing a watercolor.
  • I love the softness of this one, @Kaustav. Will you try to retain this effect?
  • tassieguy said:
    I love the softness of this one, @Kaustav. Will you try to retain this effect?
    I am intending it to paint it very soft. But there will be some detail in the foreground. I am not sure how to paint those trees. I need to study the source a little. Probably the right color and random strokes will do the work.
  • edited October 2017
    Just paint the trees in your normal style, @Kaustav, and they'll look great. Because it looks like a cloudy day with diffuse light the contrasts are pretty low and I imagine that will be the case with the trees, too. I like the low key, impressionistic feel you have achieved in what you've done so far.
  • edited October 2017
    @tassieguy Thanks! :)

    I don't know if you follow cricket or not but I am just quoting it anyway! In an TV commentary  Virender Sehwag said that Tendulkar wanted to play like his idol Viv Richards, but failed; Sehwag wanted to play like Tendulkar, his idol, but failed. They played the way they were themselves. =)

    Constable could not paint the way Claude Lorraine or Gainsborough did. I always wanted to paint like Constable, but eventually I will also fail in doing that :/ I will end up painting like the way I am (I hate the idea though).
  • edited October 2017
    I like your cricket analogy, @Kaustav. Cricket is pretty big down here in OZ. And I agree, there's no point in trying to paint exactly like another artist. We can't. To do so we'd need to transplant their brain into our heads. Sure, we can learn from others but, in the end, we are forced to be ourselves. That's all we can do. And yet, if Brahman = Atman, then, in the end, we paint as one. :)

    I'm glad you are keeping the softness in this landscape. Don't touch the horizon. It's perfect.
  • One of the most difficult tasks we face is just being ourselves, through appreciating ourselves even more than ever.
  • its a beautiful scene Kaustav.... misty, dreamy... the time of the day is so elusive which is another thing that I am loving in this painting... it may be early morning or overcast afternoon... no sun and so no hint of time... this is also what i love about overcast, cloudy days.. no evening sun and no tiring feel of the day ending... the grey shades in the grass, are you planning to draw "kaash phool" there? what a treat it will be...!

  • Classic Kaustav landscape painting! :)
  • michalis said:
    Classic Kaustav landscape painting! :)
    Yes , absolutely!! 
  • I love looking at this one.
  • That's beautiful, @Kaustav! The trees came out great. 
  • Gorgeous!!!  I wouldn't change a single thing about it.  Love the trees especially.
  • SummerSummer -
    edited October 2017
    To be honest, and therefore vulnerable, you have four complete paintings here.  I looked at all of these views separately and each one seemed complete at the time.  What do you do when this happens when you realize that you could have had four paintings instead of one?  Just something to contemplate.   :)  
  • Those trees are really delicate @Kaustav. Perfect. 

  • Very pleasant to look at.
  • This painting is beautiful and stayed beautiful all during the process. You could have stopped anywhere and got an awesome. Summer mentions that you could have had 4 paintings and i agree because each step is rendered very nicely. Your style is a gift and work it so well to each type of painting.

    I am not a critic and would not critique the rendering of this painting. This is only advice if you would like to try it in the future is not split your horizon. You could go either way with this painting because it is so dramatic. 2/3 sky and 1/3 field would draw my attention to the path to the tree and than hold me in the sky expecially with the hints or red in the distant clouds. I would be stuck there really enjoying the scene. You could have also went 2/3 field and 1/3 sky. This would still pull my eyes down the light trail and would be fixated on the trees and background horizon and skyline and back to the field. 

    Im a composition nut who spends way to much time in the galleries and reading reference books. I see this painting and realize this is why i love this forum because such diversity and skill.

    Why i really enjoyed viewing this composition. The path starts to lead me off the canvas but takes me to the trees. The trees allow me to see the light source and go from large tree  to small tree it guides me toward the horizon. I can almost see the mountains in the horizon and as i scan for more depth i see the foothills and dark bush on the left. and it repeats again. 

    thanks for the WIP and finished painting it is a pleasure to view. Please the split horizon doesn't need to apply in this case it is just an idea. Carlsons Guide to Landscape Painting is a wonderful scientific read from a great artist. If you haven't read it I think you would enjoy it.
  • edited October 2017
    Fantastic, so beautiful all around. It looks like a little sunlight reflected in the trees as well, I like the lighting throughout the entire painting. Also very interesting how it is that my eye doesn't want to leave the painting and is just held there to stay and take it in.
  • Thanks again @Forgiveness. I painted the sketch in five minutes and took a photo. It is probably one my best photos of my life.  B) my feelings for a landscape scene is the result of a connection made within a second. That's how a I paint...never lose sight of that vision.
    Julianna[Deleted User]Forgiveness
  • @Kaustav   lovely.  Simply, lovely.
  • @werby I do like theory of composition though; employ them in almost every painting, but I don't take them very seriously. I made a doc about a year ago with historic examples of various theories but found out 50% of them are vague.
  • edited November 2017
    Wow, works beautifully in B&W, too!  That tells me you got the values right. Well done!
  • @Kingston thanks for letting me know about tonalists! :)
  • edited November 2017
    @Kaustav i'm surprised you haven't been dabbling with tonalism -  I am finding them to be great fun.  Here is a guy who does one small painting every day - I learned a ton about Innes and m. francis Murphy (my favorite) -    If that link doesn't work, search "Tonalist Minute" with Michael McCarthy  

    as per my previous comment - I really love your painting but isn't it interesting how @Kingston has an eye for such matter to perhaps bring a great painting to another level.  
  • @Julianna I agree with you! Unfortunately the painting is complete.
    I know about tonalism and posted some similar paintings here on DMP earlier. I thanked @Kingston for bringing a reference to that style, which has similarity thematically to this painting. But my goal was achieved here and moved to my future ones.
  • @tassieguy thank you. I have been posting black and whites of my paintings for some time so that I could also compare whether the distance has been created or not. Atmospheric perspective is very important to me you know to avoid that 'you painted from photos?' tag.
  • @Kaustav I hardly think it is "unfortunate" that you are done - it is a beautiful painting.  I didn't realize you were posting the black and white for the reasons you stated.  It is done and you will paint many more - onwards and upwards!  I love how much you love to paint and you try so many things - I enjoy your updates.
  • edited April 26
    I just did something to my painting by acting upon @werby ; suggestion of following golden mean. I want to hear everyone's opinion. I feel the second one is unappealing but rest have some value too. I guess none of them are totally wrong.

  • I like the upper left as a composition but it needs a little something in the foreground. If nothing is to be changed, I would  choose the middle one on the bottom row. Just for compositional reasons.
  • SummerSummer -
    edited April 27
    @Kaustav ;  If I can be emotional in answering your question, I choose the first one.  It seems like you have ignored the rule of thirds but there is something happening in the tree line on the right.  I can't tell if it is lightning or a young tree.  It is just enough to fulfill the thirds rule.  I saw the four trees in the middle and thought consciously:  Then why does it "feel" right.  When I looked close I saw the jagged vertical something that saved the day.  I hope you won't change a thing because it works on a conscious and subconscious level.  The clouds are perfect.  The grasses are also.  There is good continuity in this one.  Each section is perfect therefore it is perfect as a whole.  In the others, something is wrong in one or more sections and therefore they don't work as a whole.  My gut instinct agrees with me.  There are aspects about the others that make me nervous.  Probably the clouds.  The first one has the best cloud formation and is soothing and calming.  I hope this wasn't a trick question--haha.  Summer 
  • I just had to show this one again:

    I didn't expect to have so many favorites of your paintings.  This is certainly one of them.  :)
  • Great work Kaustav, love it! 
  • edited April 28
    I think your original works best, @Kaustav. It's a beautiful landscape. The rule of thirds and the golden mean and so on are just rules of thumb but are no guarantee a comp will work. And a composition can work without conforming to any of these rules as your picture proves. And Mark himself says that some great masterpieces fit some rule, but just as many don't, and I'm inclined to agree with him. It is possible to create a monumentally boring picture that conforms to one or other of these rules. Maybe it's best to keep these rules in mind but to go with what feels right according to your own artistic/aesthetic sensibility. :)
  • Yeah @tassieguy @Summer and @BOB73

    I am happy with my composition. I wanted to show that there are other possibilities too. But one thing Bob is right that the foreground needs to have something. It looks empty because I forgot to put some elements in the foreground.  :#
  • I like the 'emptiness' of the foreground.  I think there is enough interest in the texture and tonal variations there. To clutter that lovely expanse with details might spoil it. Just my thoughts.  :)
  • Maybe this will help show what I'm trying to get at.

    To me, it is the expanse of the foreground and the texture of the paint and the subtle tonal variation there that make this such a delightful painting. If you look closely there is just blobs and scratches of paint and yet it works beautifully as painting. I've seen the original and, as painting, it's even more impressive in life.
Sign In or Register to comment.