View Full Version : Critique please

10-18-2010, 07:31 AM
I would like input from the group. So often I cannot see what is obvious.

My idea here is a moonlit sky with the focus to be the clouds. I'm ok with some canvas texture coming through.

How do I lead the eye through the paininting in this one?

What works here? what doesn't?

Composition comments anyone? - really I'm looking for help so please critique. (You all seem so kind you might have to overcome some of your kindness. LOL):D:rolleyes:

10-18-2010, 07:38 AM
I am an amateur here so not really qualified to give expert advice...the first thing i noticed in your painting were the clouds but had you not said that's what they were i would have thought they were mountains...hope this helps...good luck

10-18-2010, 08:27 AM
Janet, I have to agree with semd, the clouds do look more like mountains, clouds are very soft and does not take up so much of the sky, try something on softer canvas (less grain) please dont give up I am looking forward to seeing your next painting, I hope this will help you......Pat;);)

10-18-2010, 08:31 AM
Janet, I have looked at your other paintings and they are beautiful, you have a great eye for color, so keep posting ;););)

Peter Pinckney
10-18-2010, 08:45 AM
Hi Janet,

firstly please excuse me for taking a copy of your painting but I find it the easiest way to explain what I want to say...............................all the colours you have are great

10-18-2010, 08:49 AM
thank you both. Great feedback.

Here's the next attempt. Anyother feedback, all?

10-18-2010, 09:00 AM
Great idea for drawing eye in Mr. P., ....though I have more trouble getting the right look to those highlighted clouds in the back ground.

I love that you wrote on my painting........that's exactly what I would do.

Thanks all for help and positive comments. This is very helpful,so the tips are most welcome.

Hmmmm ........after a while we could call this WikiArt because the talents of the several are greater than the talents of one.

10-19-2010, 01:58 AM
the second one look more beautiful. Good.:):):)

10-19-2010, 02:47 AM
Janet, the second one is certainly better.
It's just my amateurish opinion, but I think the clouds still need to be lightened up a little more.
Just an idea, but I would try and do something at the horizon level, perhaps some definite hills/mountains in order to accent the clouds? Perhaps not, but I'd add a layer and see what it looks like. If you don't like it - just delete the layer.

10-19-2010, 04:51 AM
Lovely colors. As most everyone else has suggested, I would also agree. The second one is definitely the step in the right direction.

A defined horizon line could help out, as Barn suggested. Using a tree line or a hilly line would help you. You could use those as ways of pulling people upward into the sky. Peter's skys are among some of the very best I've ever seen, so I would try to work on what he suggested in his post too and then make it in your style. Both of these fellahs do tremedous landscapes in their own way.

Clouds are more difficult than I thought, when I tried a couple it took a while to get them decent. Don't be afraid to look at references to help you out.

You'll get it down and it will be lovely.

Mairzie Dotes
10-19-2010, 07:13 PM
It seems to be a confusing endeavor to choose which painting might
be best because each piece might represent a different emotion to the
artist who creates it. The first has a tangible, emotional strength about
it and the second, more aerial. Both seem to evoke subtle and interesting
creative differences ... in other words, I can and do appreciate the
expressive beauty and intent of both pieces. :)

10-19-2010, 08:38 PM
There's too much rain to judge ... :D Kidding. An absolutely intriguing and interesting style and painting!
What about a ray beam through the clouds down to the enlightened relief to lead the eye and link the sky to the ground?