Featured New game: Yea or Nay?

The first one looks like someone spilled their cocoa all over it. The brown doesn't attract me at all.

 

The first one has a good amount of artist experimentation and it appears to me to be more successful than the dragonfly one, although I do like the dragonfly part of B. Could these both be student works?

 

Painting A - I like the crumbling arches, because I like architecture. But it's an odd scene - more like a fairy tale illustration. There's something weird going on in the lower right. I enlarged and sharpened it, but still can't post attachments. So maybe someone else can do that. There's a creature with shifty eyes, something that looks sort of like a pear, a jug with a spout and something that looks like a sheriff's badge (no, really).

Painting B - I first saw a swirling dancer, but on second look, I see that it's a hand coming up through those "threads". It's not really my cup of tea. I do like the color choices. It's just okay

 

Painting B - for some reason, all I looked at was the left and lower right of the painting.

 

@Virginia

Looks like you are commenting on pair #1? I think if you read the entire thread you will find out a lot more about these paintings. We are currently on pair #10 so you have a lot of catching up to do. Thanks for joining in.

 

Here are the pair from #10 with their frames... or in the case of painting B, no frame at all. It is painted on a thick plywood with filled edges, painted black. I don't think it was ever framed. Painting A is on card stock and pasted to the textured background of the frame interior.

Painting #10A

Painting #10B

 

The framing on painting A definitely improves it.

 

I've been away for a long while, so yes ... I'm way behind. I also have to "re-register" in order to participate fully. So I'll be mostly lurking until I'm "legal".

 

A - I sort of like it, I like soft colors and birds are always a fav. It doesn't quite have anything to draw me to it overall.
B - Nope, like the colors. Just too busy with all the lines.
I know these are basic, but I know very little about art except what I like. Thanks for these, I'll learn a lot.

 

@alynnfin

You are commenting on pair #1 posted Jan. 2016. We are now on pair #10. It is fine to post on previous pairs but hope you would use the pair number when doing so. Otherwise, it will become confusing very quickly. Thanks for participating.

 

Any more comments for pair #10? I chose these due to their common semi-abstract nature and chaotic sensibility. I get a sense of movement from both of these. Will leave this pair be for awhile to give more opportunity for discourse before posting closing comments.

 

It took me a while to recognise the subject matter in the second one (even though it's literally written there...) beyond the blur of colours. Then I started to understand the depth of the image. The first one is more immediately striking, but more on the surface.

 

Sorry it took me so long to get back to this. Will wrap pair #10 up with a few comments. As indicated above, I chose these two works due to their chaotic nature. While on the surface, dissimilar, both works are dynamic in their execution. Neither are literal in subject matter but are recocognizeable. Consequently, while seemingly abstract at first glance, neither would be considered abstract.

#10A is by listed NC artist Pat Bowers (b. 1937). There is a small body of work documented for her and most sell in the low to mid hundreds of dollars. This particular work is mixed media on card stock or illustration board. It appears to be watercolor and guoache, or possibly acrylic. It is varnished. Based on the style and framing, I would place this to the 60s or so.

I picked this up at a local thrift store and probably paid less than $10.00 for it. I have owned it a number of years and have offered it for sale locally on at least 3 occasions. Each time it was offered in the $200.00 range but there was apparently no interest. I personally like this work and have occasionally displayed it at home. It is not currently on display.

#10B is signed Brian Bruson, as near as I can make out. I have not been able to attribute this to any known artist and suspect it is a talented student's work. It is acrylic on plywood and intended to be displayed unframed. I doubt if this is older than 50 years, and probably considerably newer. The style is vibrant and impressionistic as far as the background goes. The painting is more literal when it comes to the execution of the dragonfly, though there is a fleeting ephemeral sense to it. The painting becomes even more literal with the portion of a lizard seen at the top of the painting and the inclusion of the words, fly dragon fly.

This painting was given to me as a gift from a friend. I was with this friend in a local shop and happened to admire the painting. A week later, she showed up with the painting at my house. I believe the painting was priced $65.00 at the shop and suspect she was able to buy it for less. I like this painting and display it at home. I do not particularly like the more literal aspects of it and find the inclusion of the words distracting and unecessary. Overall, I think the painting well executed. There is a certain sense of freedom to the style and the use of color is wonderful. I wish I could paint like this.