Return to site

A CONTINUATION OF “Where Do Original Paintings Come From?"

We were last considering a diptych, two pieces connected by color, style, and content. In fact I did the companion piece, river, mountain and all. I didn’t like it. As my gallery owner pointed out,” It just doesn’t have depth or hold ones interest.”

I agreed and it became a “paint over”. Sandi, the gallery owner and art instructor took me up on using “A River Runs Through It, II” as the object of my lesson. She assumed I wanted to retain the river, mountain, etc, but I really didn’t. I did want it to be compatible with the first piece as far as color, but not necessarily a diptych, just a companion piece.
So we started by breaking up the lines of the river and mountain, adding contemporary elements, but maintaining the color scheme. Much later we had a contemporary piece with depth and interest. Additionally we added metallic gold, metallic green, and some white. It became very “movement oriented” with circles and circular lines. I began to better understand depth by layering lighter colors over darker one and letting a few colors “ peak through”, adding to the depth and interest.
I put in back in the huge gold frame and ended up with the favorite piece I’ve ever done. It’s also garnered the most attention and the most positive comments. I showed it to a real estate customer who is a known contemporary artist and she immediately said she loved it....sincerely loved it!
So, now the real test with the other piece, “A River Runs Through It, I”. I like the piece. I was reluctant to paint over it. Previously I thought it was pretty good. However, compared to the “paint over” it was weak. I considered just going out and buying a new 30”X40” canvass and saving “I”. The more I thought about it, the more I knew I could do better, so today it became a paint over. Just like II, I obscured the lines of the river, etc and added texture and background. Tomorrow the real work begins.
Sandi, my instructor/gallery owner liked my backgrounds and texture. The previous painting was completely obscured. Sandi was much more into hearing my ideas and thoughts than on “II”, so we went with my ideas and thinking. Along the way I was beginning to think maybe the “paint over” was a mistake and that “II” was way better than the current “I”.
Anyway, given no choice, I kept painting; keeping to the previous color scheme, but not trying to duplicate. At the end of day one it was looking good. The following day we added the finishing touches, and “voila”, something I really liked!
The test was to see what others thought of the two, and comparing the two...I&II. The jury is still out, but so far it’s 100% for the second painting, although at first glance they are more similar than I first thought. This one has a bit more movement and is a bit more rustic.
Nobody has asked how I price paintings, but the process, at least for me, is interesting. It seems most artists, artists that are professional, or at least paint to sell, usually price by the square inch. Many have suggested that and stressed the importance of pricing consistency.
Most of you who know me, know I’m not a good listener. I chose not to price that way, in spite of that advice.
I price based on how well I like the piece, with a little touch of what I think it might sell for in the gallery. The better I like it, and the larger the piece, the higher the price. Hence $2,500 for “Burnished Gold”, $1,700 for “Cosmic Attraction”, and now $1,800 each for “ A River Runs Through It I & II”, or $3,000 for the pair.
The real test is whether I’d prefer to keep a piece/take it home, or sell it for less. Those pieces, I’m very happy to take home if they don’t sell.
So, that’s where original art comes from, or at least, where these two came from.Add paragraph text here.