face #7 (2011)

face #7 (2011), a photo by kelise72 on Flickr.

size: variable
media: digital using Inspire Pro for ipad.

This is a painting over a photograph, which I then printed to transfer paper and fixed the image to a piece of canvas to be stretched over a small frame (approx 10 x 10 inches). The printed colours on the canvas are much brighter/more vibrant than seen here. I'm pretty pleased with the experiment; even though it looks like mass-produced "art" you'd find in Ikea (I sort of expected that result).

The mass-produced feel of this painting is still OK with me after seeing the finished piece...it's a "legitimate" painting in my view, even if I haven't used old-fashioned paint to create it. In this digital age, I fully anticipate digital artwork to be recognised as... well... artwork in its own right.

Sometimes with art, it's the IDEA that's important...art is not just about HOW you materialised that idea (see: Andy Warhol). i.e., Just because my painting was done on a computer doesn't make it something other than a painting... look past the screen print to see and think about the IMAGE, COLOUR, COMPOSITION and the FEELING/RESPONSE to see the ART. :)

more practice with the iPad

A. Degas, National Gallery #3 (2011), a photo by kelise72 on Flickr.

Size: variable
Media: digital (using Painting Pad for iPad)

Comparing Painting Pad vs Inspire Pro:

Painting Pad has quite a variety of mark-making implements (pencil, paint, felt-tip pen, marker, stickers) as well as different background papers.

Inspire Pro has only "paint" (no pencil or other marks) BUT you can change the size of the "brush", and can define the colour quite precisely on a colour wheel.

On both apps, you can select an image (e.g., jpg) to paint on (as a background).

Given the variety of marks, Painting Pad app is a bit more difficult to "paint" with than Inspire Pro...there is no blending feature in PP as there is in IP, so the painting feature really looks really "digital" and "singular". With IP the painting and the blending both are a little more painterly, while in PP the painting and drawing both are simply marks over top of another.

So for "painting", I prefer Inspire Pro and for "drawing" I prefer Painting Pad.

Digital. Art?

a. Monet, National Gallery #2 (2011), a photo by kelise72 on Flickr.

Yesterday I plonked myself in front of Monet's "water lillies" (Room 43, National Gallery, London), iPad and Nomad brush in hand, and had a go at copying a couple of the paintings...

First a word on the experience of painting with an electronic device -- not as easy as one might think to "get it just right". I mean, the app I used (inspire pro for iPad) *was* quite simple and easy to use...but it took a few tries to get the knack of desired mark-making, blending, loading the brush with colour, etc.

So above is my first try... I think it's not quite great, but then as with everything, painting with an iPad will just take practice.

The best thing about the afternoon though was the FUN of it, and the FUN of sharing this experience with the other museum-goers. More than one kid (and adult alike) paused to watch what I was doing, comment to each other and even ask questions (about the iPad, the app, the Nomad brush).

I think Apple might be missing out on a marketing/sponsorship opportunity here? ;) Especially since there's an Apple store in Covent Garden... hmm...

Anyway... I'm further convinced that technology is firmly a part of my art practice... either within the source material/images, the sketchbook work, or the finished piece...

Using technology to assist the artist...

venus (2011), a photo by kelise72 on Flickr.

Here is a painting (from a set of 5) that is slated for my year-end assessment. (60 x 60 cm, oil on canvas).

For all the readings that can be made of this piece (it's about emotion, colour, faces, self-portrait or what-have-you), I think there's something just a little more that can be said... and it's about HOW the painting arrived to THIS particular point that interests me the most...

First of all, it *is* a self-portrait, of sorts. I took a photo of my own face as seen pressed up against a pane of glass... then I worked out the shapes and colours I wanted in my sketchbook... and finally sketched the shapes on a primed canvas, mixed up oil colours, applied paint to canvas with various brushes. And away I went, pretty normal stuff so far.

But after a couple of days, something wasn't quite working with the colours yet I felt near to the "done"...

I wasn't sure what to do next so I stepped back and I took a photo of the progress of the painting with the same camera phone as used for the original source photo, loaded up the photo in a little phone app called "Scribble" and tried various combinations of colours and lines... until I found something that WORKED.

Back to the canvas, mix up the new colour and in one more session I was DONE.

I think I found a new way of working that really WORKS when I'm "stuck". The final piece will be more-or-less "traditional" painting on canvas but getting there with a technological short-cut or two.

Hooray for Sony Ericsson Satio and Scribble! Thanks for the helping hand!

study (light painting)

study (light painting)
Originally uploaded by kelise72

I made all these "scribbles" with a light pen, and then cut them up and here's the collage I made with them.

winter light - 2010

winter light - 2010
Originally uploaded by kelise72

This used to be "gray nude" or somesuch - that was before I expressed myself all over it with Payne's Grey... I thought "noisy" was much better than the very quietly deliberate previous version. However, my tutor deemed it immediately "a disaster" - and in an assessment, too - with 4 other people present.

I didn't take it badly (in fact, I only laughed) - I *did* state before showing it that the Autumn term for me was all about "experimentation" (so it's OK with me if some of my experiments fail horribly).

The only thing is - now I am looking more carefully at this image as I'm cropping it for Flickr... and I wonder to myself, *what* exactly makes this "a disaster"? My tutor has never said anything of the kind in the 4 tutorial sessions, and has only seemed to be encouraging and mentoring during the session - but then he's never given me REAL feedback during the tutorials - instead he has done two things: 1) point out what he thinks is "my way of working/thinking" and 2) suggests artists for me to look at and off I go to the internet or library to try and glean something useful by looking at someone else's artwork.

He's never ONCE said by looking at my projects and any of the 4 times we've met, "This works" or "that doesn't work" (for me, my way of working, for what I'm trying to do, etc.)

So, he's deemed my "expressive brush strokes don't work" (for me) and now I'm a little uncertain about experimenting further, doing things "out of character" (like trying to be LESS controlled, LESS planned, MORE spontaneous etc.) - because I sense he wants me to explore, go deeper in the analytical, logical side of me.

And frankly, I quit the IT biz because I'm *SICK* to death of analysing, being logical and planning ahead.

Hopefully, it's not too late for me, hopefully I can find a balance (and soon!) of free creativity alongside balanced and thoughtful work.

halfway through year 1

I survived my first formal assessment... even when my tutor (one of two in the room) took the session as a learning opportunity for me, confusing "tutorial" with "assessment" missing the point of the session entirely.

Not that feedback is a bad thing, I just felt under the microscope a bit while at the same time, sensing that I was Missing Something Important. There were two other students undergoing assessment at the same time, and so when my "turn" was up it was somewhat of a relief. Then he kept coming back to me with direct and significant comments, so the relief was short-lived.

E.g., the pieces that seemed to "hit the mark" artistically speaking were not paintings at all (a film and a fabric/quilt-y thing) while the painting experiments were deemed a "disaster" (his words, not mine), particularly awful apparently is the one where I tried large, expressive brush marks...

Yet what I *really* want is to be a painter... I don't see myself as a photographer, or a film maker or even one who makes installations... I am stubborn and I want to paint...

So the one helpful thing I took way from the assessment was the comment that the work that *worked* were pieces that I really analysed and followed through logically, maybe even methodically... i.e., made up some kind of *system* (can I say rules maybe?) and then followed the system....

I have to think more about this later, when the builders next door have stopped using loud machines :( :(