[Jason Manley]

hi

I wanted to start a thread that deals with the emotional part of art that concerns us all as much as the technical and creative aspects.

I am counting on all of you to really give some input so that we can dig deep on this one.

I will start by asking some questions and providing some image samples with a large range of color and shape.

I will include more contemporary images a bit later to illustrate my points as well.

here are three images.

1.this one is by franz von stuck a german symbolist. this piece is titled "sin"
http://sunsite.dk/cgfa/stuck/p-stuck1.htm

while ignoring the subject matter of the painting (snake and nude woman) ....what are some things that the artist did to communicate the concept of "sin"? what are some things that the artist did with his use of values to suggest the subject matter? What is the dominant value in the image?

what color scheme is used symbolically?

What do you feel when you see this image?

2. here is a painting by jean delville ..also a symbolist painter. the painting is titled satans treasures.
http://sunsite.dk/cgfa/d/p-delville2.htm

what do you notice about his use of shapes?

how would you describe the shapes in this image?

How does the artist use shapes according to the subject matter that is around the shapes used?

3. here is a painting by ingres..a nineteenth century artist and a great draftsman. it is titled "odalesque".
http://sunsite.dk/cgfa/ingres/p-ingres20.htm

in contrast to the other images, how does this artist use his shapes to suggest the mood of the piece?

how does he use abstract shape to tell the story of what the subject is?

what do you notice about the value range?

Does the color scheme contribute to the mood of this image?

.....

I look forward to seeing what you all think.


jason manley

[ October 23, 2001: Message edited by: Jason Manley ]

[Frost]

IMHO: (proof that I'm a lousy artist)

1. The bright forthcoming values are the skin, the nudity... the nudity without a face (in shadows). Sexuality without personal attachment to the subject. Darkness, dark act done in secrecy (back in the olden days at least). Cold hues, impersonal, superficial and cold. The only warmth being the slightly warm-hued skin. The orange background has no meaning/feeling to me, although valuewise is does balance the pic.

2. I make no sense of this. Looks like an underwater scene, algea, "fish" ... Satan's Treasures... sunken treasures, painted gold... I don't recgonize any shapes in that painting (aside from the bodys). Agressive hue differences all in values of the same range... I find it a shame that such a painting fails to communicate with me (and who's fault is this? mine? or his?). Tentacles and naked girls... perhaps the grandfather of Japanese Manga with girls molested by tentacles? Nah, that's just me trying to be funny. =)

3. Shapes are mostly cloth, and a naked body... soft, soothing. Almost looks like a hospital, which doesn't give me a sense of warmth in the least. A generally warm palette, but still overall cool (no face, no relation to the scene, a rather neutral). The entire value range is covered, pretty much in equal amounts I'd say, making it easy on the eyes and easy readability. Excellent rendering and detail, but again, this painting evokes no emotion from me, other than looking away after seeing the craftsmanship.

blah.

If I'd be in an art school, I'd be kicked in the nuts, THEN kicked out of the school. (that's nice to know).

[Jason Manley]

nice responses guys...

frost: all three of these pieces hold keys to becoming a much better artist...both technical and in mood...not to mention more technical advice than we could possibly ingest in one day. (ingres has the best spacial and focal edges of anyone in the business hehehe)

I offer some input in regards to the
pieces which you did not find much appreciation.

the satan piece has movements like fire (placement and poses of the figures intertwined)...the shapes are jagged, sharp, agressive and forceful...in contrast to the softer winding figures.

the key word here is "contrast"...I am not speaking in terms of value..but in terms of symbolic shape to support ideas. would the sharps of the demon seem sharp if it were not for the soft figures?? use of opposites help us all as artists to communicate ideas.

notice the flow of the figures and their rounded shapes and how they begin to flow up and into the rougher shapes of the devil. notice how they come so close to the dangers of the sharper shapes within his environment.

I do not necissarily think the scene is one of an underwater adventure...but of a mystical one...and he ties the feeling of energies and spaces of his realm to the underwater feel you suggest...but also to fire..control...power...etc..

I actually find this piece to be successful for what it is. the symbolists heavily explored shape for symbolism..and the abstract feel of value and color.

the trick is to look within the image and see if you can see what he is trying to communicate. if you do not feel it ..it can be that you are not open at the time or he fails to communicate his ideas. usually a bit more time spent looking at the image will reveal the answers you seek. many old paintings take time to ingest..they do not smack of mtv short attention span imagery...patience helps to understand what it is that the artist is doing.

I would say that this piece communicates on an intellectual level more than mood... intellectual understanding can lead to a mood within...and that is successful to me.

for the Ingres piece...notice how the piece is about a beautiful woman...soft..clean..elegant...appealing...pure..decent...etc...now take a look at the shapes in the piece...how do the shapes and edges and rendering support these ideas?

also notice how the value range is very light and middle with only a few darks...you see..this is almost the opposite of the first piece "sin" in the sense that it is high key...soft...smooth...etc..

take a look at fashion photography of women today...notice how many of the images are high key..soft...smooth...clean... I wonder where they got that from???

what do you all think?

jason

[egerie]

I may not be one of the big kahunas on the board but I am aware of acute feelings that rise within when watching a piece of art, being a simple doodle or a masterpiece.

Here's my little contribution and I'm pretty sure it would echo some of other ppl.

1. Disgust. At first glance I was a little taken aback by the color scheme used to depict the flesh tone. Mind you my monitor may not be the best calibrated thing around but the female figure there feels cold and dead.
I have nothing against snakes (in fact I like them) but this emphasized my feeling when I realised there was a snake there..!
All I'm describing above are what raced trough my mind within a second from first viewing the picture.
And of course the temptation vibes it sends by the touch of rose on the nipples.
I'm still a bit intruigued by the upper right orange um.. inferno ?
Her features are very unique too. I would probably try to get a closer look at her face if I had the painting in front of me. And yet feeling a bit uneasy to draw closer... which leads me to the second painting ..

2. I saw the flames right away with the color scheme and the flowing of bodies. Like mentionned before, softness, warm, etc. Almost like a bed of post-orgasmic chill.
And frost, I also thought about Hentai when realising those were octopus like tentacles... *eek*
The devil (I assume) seems to be feeding off those "flames". He's a lot greener than the other figures, as not part of the living. He also seems like he's in a completely dominant position, about to strike but there's something paradoxal in his pose and attitude I can't quite put my finger on yet.
About the surounding decorum ; I thought about "ouch, this would be painfull if I was to be trown buck nacked in that place. Scrapes and bruises assured."
So there, my danger sense went off with a certain ambivalence toward the dozing figures.

3. Ahaha a veil in forefront .. that had to be Ingres
This picture leaves me flabbergasted. I don't know how to interpret it. I feel shyness from the figure. She's going to bathe, is sitting on what seems to be fresh linen (hence the clean meaning?) and is half in the shadows. I'm just thinking about intruding privacy and admiring a woman in all her simplicity. Am I totally off ?
Somewhat rejoining what Mr.T mentionned, I'm a bit suprised by the perspective seeming a little tweaked and her foot/leg not seeming quite right.
Another thing : fertility. Her hips made me think about this.
On form : I think the drapery has something to say about this. Everything in that little private place seems to be soft (also rendered with the colors being warm) and curvey. If you look at the overlaying green piece of cloth, it seems more chaotic and slightly colder in contrast.
One last thing (I promise ) is that there is no blunt sexual insinuation in there. Not compared to the others at least. This one is peace and quiet and still. It's not provocative it's reserved. Pure.

This reminds me of some old phylosophy communion where thoughts just spill out..
Didn't meant to write an essay, but I feel.

*ducks the airborn objects for sounding like a long winded heretic*

Edit: I forgot, where can I find good reference about extensive symbolism besides studying the masters ?
And Jason.. High Key ?

[ October 23, 2001: Message edited by: egerie ]

[Ahcri]

1. The woman bites her lip and looking at you guilty, I think it's the symbol that the artist uses to communicate the theme. Also the face of the woman is darkened, possibly because she wears a veil, it means she is hiding some sort of secret.

2. All the shapes look very round, smooth, and soft, and they blend into background easily, but their textures are shiny. But the object on the top-center is a bit more sharp than any other objects in this painting. Sharp usually means sinister and pain, and soft means innocence, and in this picture, foolishness.

3. The lady looks round, therefore there is no sense of danger. Because this is a painting about Turkish bath, the cloth looks exotic. So even if the viewer haven't seen any artwork from this period, they'll still know what it's about. The color scheme is very lifelike, with natural lighting. Kind of like the lighting you get around 10:00 in the morning, it's not too warm, and not too cold, gives you a sense of comfort.

[Jason Manley]

nicely said everyone....

the questions to ask...now that you have analyzed your feelings are...HOW DID THE ARTISTS DO THAT?? What was done to communicate the response that was obviously intended??

watching film and paying attention to how you feel and then asking why you feel it can be of great help when learning color and shape symbolism.

High key is a way of describing a value system that is mostly light and some middle with only a few dark accents. Low key would be the opposite..mostly dark and some middle with few light accents.

Often you will find (in old master works before 1900) that there are only three value systems used in paintings...one will contain a gallon of light,a quart of middle value and a pint of dark. the same goes for a gallon of dark, quart of middle, pint of light...or gallon of dark etc...(I learned this from listening to a great teacher Marshall Vandruff.)

take a look...you will see what I mean...measure the value shapes.

Mood is often set by the value range of the image...any good horror film will illustrate that. How you balance that value range is a challenging issue that can be used to communicate your feelings.

jason

[ October 23, 2001: Message edited by: Jason Manley ]

[Mr. T]

Okay... i'll give it a shot

First pic: The woman's body is emphasized using lighter colors, pale and bright. The face is in the shadow (like hiding), so is the snake. The forms around the body make a contrast with the body itself. There is lots of green and blue here, also (in my opinion) adding to the feeling of coldness. The fire(?) on the right keeps the balance of the pic, again, contrast, but this time in spectre position. It is everything opposite of the left side - warm, and the fire itself sometimes means the ultimate purity.

Second pic: Shapes are all smoothed, shadows are marked with tones of green and blue (cold), but the people practically have no shadow. They seem translucent and clean - unreal in some way. On the other hand, the texture of the bush in the middle left is quite sharp, a lot of color variation, dark shadows. Emphasizing the souls'(?) purity, this pic is much alike the first one, tho they don't appear the same when you first compare them.

and the third pic : heh, scool was helpful here; this pic obviously focuses on showing the imperfections of the body, soul, mind. While the first two pics are completely "black and white", with sharp feeling boundaries, this one makes me think more. It shows a whole myriad of different feelings - sadness, imperfection... and on the other hand uniqueness(sp?). My conclusion here - everything is unique, and everything is art in some way.

There . I focused mostly on the feelings, not that much on the techniques, but my English isn't any good, so expressing my thoughts is pretty hard. I hope you understood my lines here.

This way of looking at art is really helpful, btw, you really learn a lot.


cheers.

[edit] when i look at this post now, it looks ... clumsy [/edit]

[ October 23, 2001: Message edited by: Mr. T ]

[Ahcri]

Before 1900, painters usually use lighting to create mood. But after the beginning of modernism, there became so many different ways to express mood. The Fauvists use colours, and the Expressionists uses brush strokes. Personally, I think in modern art, the expression of mood is more raw, primitive, and powerful. As opposed to the subtleness of older works.