Painting composition is
all about ruthless editing. It’s a creative process, and it’s based on seeing.
![]() |
Bill's Yellow (with Admiration), 2005, Cornelia Foss, Houston Museum of Fine Art
|
Sometimes I hand out little plastic viewfinders to my
students. Mine are made of Plexiglas, roughly along the lines of this
one. But they are for beginners, to help them start to break down the
vastness of the landscape into palatable bites. I don’t encourage reliance on
viewfinders, any more than I like working from photos. Art is based on seeing. Seeing isn’t a mechanical process; it’s a
learned art.
Artwork Essential’s viewfinder is based on the Rule of Thirds.
When I was in school, I was taught to divide canvases using the Golden Mean. It’s
imprinted in my aesthetic, so I still see it as the most graceful compositional
device. Later, I learned about Dynamic Symmetry. All of
these are good working systems, and all of them are based on mathematics.
![]() |
| The Golden Mean is closely related to the Fibonacci Sequence. |
The human mind, in receiving mode, likes to tarry on puzzles.
That’s why we use these complex mathematical systems to compose our paintings. In
sending and processing mode, however, the mind ruthlessly regularizes thoughts.
If you’ve ever tried to paint a screen of branches as in the Klimt painting below, you know this to be true. You
must fight to keep them honest. Left to its own devices, your subconscious mind
will line them up like little soldiers.
We “know” compositional rules, and then we see a painting
like Cornelia Foss’ Bill’s Yellow (with Admiration) and we
realize that all such rules can be set on their heads. Ms. Foss isn’t ignorant
of design systems; in fact she knows them so well that she can play with them. Bill’s Yellow wouldn’t have been nearly
the painting had she offset the brush and tree in a conventional way. It is
monumental because she centered and overlaid them.
![]() |
Beech Grove I, 1902, Gustav
Klimt, New Masters Gallery, Dresden.
|
Compositions designed with mechanical devices are ‘safer,’
but they eliminate the space needed to make creative discoveries. I greatly admire the work of painter Mary Byrom. Having now known her personally
for several years, I know she endlessly experiments with composition and form. She
isn’t getting those arresting compositions by setting up with a viewfinder; she
gets them by slogging through damp marshes at twilight, and endlessly tinkering.
![]() |
Early Dusk, Mary Byrom
|
“Plein air painting is like a test you take in class,” Brad Marshall told me. “You have to use
your knowledge and finish by the end of the class period. There’s no credit for
incomplete answers.
“Studio paintings are like essays. You have enough time to
do your research, write and rewrite until the work is good enough to turn in.”
There’s room for both in professional painting, but for
learning and growth, working from life is critical. That’s why I strongly
discourage working from photos in my studio classes. Photos have already done
the most important job for the painter: flat-packing the scene.
Confronted with the vastness of reality, all artists must
relentlessly, ruthlessly edit what they see into a working design. With photographs,
that is already done. And there’s no guarantee that it has been done well.
Come paint with me in
my studio in Rockport, ME or my
workshop at Acadia National Park.




3 comments:
We are like the blind examining the tail of an elephant in a dark room, trying to extrapolate the shape and form of the thing that is the universe. Of course you can only do it with intuition and mathematics...
And art, dude...
Great description...." Plein air painting like a test in class. Studio painting is like writing essay."
For me "Editing photo for painting is a good learning experience". However I also strongly believe painting "live subject " is most important and essential.
Post a Comment