Tuesday, March 30, 2010

3.30.10 L.White

Hey, not sure if I would call this a sketch or not. It's not for anything in particular and it took about 3 and a half hours (watercolor). Is this a "sketch" or a "painting"?


  1. Is there a difference Mr. Dulac?
    Go you. :)

  2. I dunno, I guess I consider this piece "finished" so it's not really a sketch anymore. I never wanted this blog to be about posting finished work, I wanted more process stuff...

  3. I agree, as much as possible, we should keep this blog focused on the process more than the finished work. If only to keep the tone of the blog light and the pressure down.

    I know I jabbed you a bit in the comments for your Feb 26th posting but on reflection I think that the smiley texture face you created is very much what this blog should be about. Something quick, fun, self-motivated, and presented in a way that you can stand back and realize that, "Hey, there might be something to this."

    As for whether this is a "sketch" or a "finished" piece really is only in the eye of the beholder.
    I know that you recently did a piece that involved 20 some "sketches" that I would have called "finished", while for this piece my own instinct would be to "finish" the fox a bit further (probably to the detriment of the piece BTW).

    I guess that's all a long winded way of saying that I agree with Lee M. -- I'm not sure there's a meaningful difference.

    And Lee M is right -- there is a distinct Edmund Dulac-ian quality to the way you handle watercolor.

  4. I get what you kids are saying about roughness vs. finish, but it seems silly to stop the progress on anything that looks this nice in 3.5 hours.

    Sometimes a piece is finished quickly, and sometimes it seems to take forever. I need to be more open to the former which too-often doesn't feel like "real" work to me....

  5. just looked up Dulac (thanks google!). Nice! If I can get anywhere close to as good as that guy was I'll be happy...

  6. If, as this suggests, you were getting there by accident, you are truly cooking with gas. It's his (and to an extent Rene Bull's) moody bkgds that still inspire far lesser artists like Michael Hague. I've a book or 2 of Dulac's if you'd care to borrow one, but I suspect a purchase might be in order...

  7. Strangely enough I've never heard of this dude. I guess he was a contemporary of Rackhams. I was never interested in watercolor before, so I guess that's why I didn't see him. I'm really digging it though. I'm going to check out a few books from the library.

    My "technique" in watercolor is basically stress—paint—panic—paint some more—panic–try to fix errors. I can't say that I'm particularly going for a look yet because the medium is kinda tough to figure out. I do feel more comfortable with them lately though.

  8. I think the technique is working very well for you indeed. And since no one else I can think of is doing it well today, I'd encourage you to keep at it. :)

  9. I'm going to keep beating this dead horse, but I think it's OK to post this type of work. I know it looks like a finished painting, but when it was started it was an experiment. You spend a half hour on it and start to like it, next thing you know you've spent 3.5 hours on it. I think the important thing is that it's not a piece for a client but practicing a new style and media.
    That's my two cents.