In what way did you simplify and select in your study? Were you able to focus on simple shapes and patterns amid all the visual information available to you?
In this study:
The first thing that heaped me to select was taking a view finder with me. Without this I think I would have been overwhelmed by the vast amount of visual information present. Viewing through the viewfinder also helped in terms of viewing the basic shapes of the composition relative to the edges of the paper. I have managed to simplify to quite a large extent in the background but feel that the foreground area is still a bit too busy and could have benefited from my being more selective. This is something I find very difficult. I do have a tendency to get distracted and overwhelmed when there is too much visual information. This needs more work. I specifically selected the overhanging tree on the left tend side in the foreground as a framing device but I think less detail on the right side riverbank would have made the composition stronger with a more direct line taking the eye towards the bridge not interrupted by shrubs and trees.
How did you create a sense of distance and form in your sketches?
I tried to create a sense of distance and form by making the line work in the foreground much more detailed than in the more distant areas. I also used colour to try to create a sense of distance. Using brighter bolder and warmer colours in the foreground with bolder tonal differences. As I moved back in the space of the pictures the colours got lighter - more purply ad less bold. However, I think this probably needed to be taken further. I have tried to dull the colour by working into it with graphite and soluble graphite but this wasn't entirely successful. I think perhaps a more blue hue might have receded better. I also tried to emphasise the detail in the foreground by working into it with drawing pen. This isn't entirely successful as although it does emphasise the detail it stops rather abruptly in a sort of arbitrary division between the fore and middle ground. On balance I think my demonstration of aerial perspective was more successful in the much simpler monochrome sketches for the 360 degree studies series. I think they communicate a sense of depth better and I have also managed to be more selective here because they were very rapidly executed in charcoal.
How did you use light and shade? Was it Successful?
I used light and shade to create form and substance in the objects in the composition. I also used it to help with the sense of depth. I tried to make the tonal value differences more exaggerated in the foreground and more subtle in the middle and background. The deepest areas of shadow are in the foreground. The tone gets lighter as we move back in space. It was almost successful but I think that the area that is the very furthest back should have been lighter in tone relative to the middle distance. It doesn't recede as well as I would have liked.
What additional preliminary work would have been helpful towards the larger study?
I think several more sketches of the same subject would have been useful - first of all more tonal studies trying to simplify and pare down the composition further. I also think that some rapid colour sketches would have been useful to try out the colours for showing the aerial perspective before committing to the larger study as the colours I have chosen for the background are not the best for showing aerial perspective but I was not confident to work back over them as I felt this would make the background relatively too dark.
No comments:
Post a Comment