ArtRage 5 Product PageArtRage Lite Product PageArtRage for iPad Product PageArtRage for Android Product PageArtRage  Android Oil Painter Free Product PageArtRage  Free Demos Page

Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: AR chalk to traditional pastel

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Easton, PA
    Posts
    937

    AR chalk to traditional pastel

    I dusted off my old set of pastels and tried to render a recent AR chalk piece into a physical work. (Been YEARS since I've used pastel seriously -- my chops are truly choppy).

    I think could get closer to the AR original by using some acrylic inks to paint an undercoating and then do pastel on top. The pock marks created by the paper texture are quite distracting (to my eye) in the physical as is. AR allows you a smoothly smeared base to work on.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	bassistcomp.jpg 
Views:	84 
Size:	419.9 KB 
ID:	43067  

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    480
    Nice! Interesting technique there allkratzer.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    14,335

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,282
    Al, i like the second one, for its showing texture. But that's me... actually both are quite interesting in technique and color....

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Huntsville, On., Canada
    Posts
    5,356
    I like your pastel work, gives great body to the painting

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro
    Posts
    5,897
    Great Al I like both images.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,198
    Another great exploration and an awesome final product! Love the look and texture on this! Fantastic!!!
    "The significance is hiding in the insignificant. Appreciate everything."
    — Eckhart Tolle

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    22,372
    Intriguing. When I got my first desktop computer, I was so inspired by what I could do on the monitor that I tried translating it to real world painting too. I felt the same let down and worked very hard to try to figure out why. Granted, on a monitor you're actually painting with light which gives tremendous luminosity. And nothing in the world is going to match that. Plus that was back in the day when programs were really primitive.

    My conclusion was that they were different, plain and simple. No reason to get frustrated (I told myself). The way it finally seemed to work best for my purposes was to start the work in the real world, scan it in and fiddle with it on the computer. The editability in the computer was beyond compare in the real world. But I was an old school painter. Nowadays, I see things done on the computer that just blow the socks off anything done by hand. So it's a matter of choice, I guess. How do you like working and are you doing it to hang or something else.

    I actually like the one on the right too. I LOVE the one on the left and think you're getting into an interesting area as a designed look. You're controlling your work more and the marks you include are far and away more on purpose. The colors and shapes play well together. It's smooth, with a tiny bit of tooth giving it an appearance of master craftsmanship as opposed to machine manufactured.

    On the right, you could easily do that in the computer and have more polish to it. You have the right idea for sure. It has a snappy pop design art from the 80s look (which is not dated and still works graphically well).

    My take on the left one is that it's certainly got a quality of pastel, but I've seen this look done in oil, if you can believe it. And the smoothness looks to me like it could be achieved by feathering, and a little bit of dry brush.

    Anyway, great stuff. You're growing your style really well.
    "Not a bit is wasted and the best is yet to come. . ." -- remembered from a dream

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Easton, PA
    Posts
    937
    yvan, Sandra, AT-TA, JJ, Oriane, Eddie -- Thanks ever so much for stopping to look and comment -- I appreciate it so much!

    D Akey -- Thanks for your perceptive insights and the benefit of your experience. But most of all, thanks for your encouragement!

    You are right, a big part of this quest to translate digital to physical is driven by what your end game is. Truth is I have never been as jazzed about the results I get printing giclees of digital pieces (why is it illegal for artists to call them what they are -- highend inkjet prints?) as I am about prints made from hi-rez photos shot of my physical paintings.

    I've experimented with papers, canvases and even hand embellishing and varnishing giclee works and -- for my tastes -- digital just doesn't seem to carry as well overall.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cape Coral, Florida
    Posts
    6
    I may be a party of one, but I prefer the one on the right. I find the one on the left to be too smooth and too perfect. One of the beauties of a piece of art are the slight imperfections which make it unique.

    Having said that, with the right canvas texture, I'll bet you could get a close approximation of the one on the right using AR. The AR chalks react wonderfully to some of the canvas textures.

    Btw, I adore the colors you used!
    Elaina/aka
    Nightshadow
    http://www.nightshadowfx.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •