Today I completed framing a series of pieces all different interpretations of the same scene. I'm staging for a number of shows. These pieces are all about to go off their separate ways to different venues and it struck me they are interesting as a series. I figured I could publish them here as a grouping as well as talking about the process. Here goes ...
This is a photo of the original scene.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4af4/c4af4174f23d1f611a5dfce55633dcd47361973b" alt=""
Not a great photo - is it? It's actually hard to discern the main tree that I choose as my subject and I find the photo somewhat uninspiring. If someone had handed me the photo I never would have chosen it as a subject for a painting. This is not an uncommon experience as often photos can't capture the beauty of a scene.
Here's the first 9x12 painting I did on location:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/52e2f/52e2f634b45e7268cbcb6180e05e94db8314360d" alt=""
"Softly Lit Afternoon"
Pastel
9x12
A few months later I returned and did another painting on location of the same scene:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0acaa/0acaaf6581836d12d351d88046e6ceff7903fa64" alt=""
"Arching for Sun"
12x16
pastel
Then recently I did a larger 18x24 in the studio using these two plein air pieces and my memory as the only source material (if I had looked at the photo I probably would have lost all my inspiration to paint :-).
"Basking in the Sun"
Pastel
18x24
I didn't even think about the evolution of the the paintings or the extent they incrementally deviated from the photo reference until I saw them all together today. I guess you'd call it natural evolution?