Featured New game: Yea or Nay?

More than she bargained for!!!

 

Pair #6

Painting A -- Not much time to write but wanted to say at least a little. A lot has been said about Painting A, and I agree with what has been said. It is strong, the light/ dark contrast is interesting. One thing that just struck me is that it also looks like a farm house, with silos to the left. (I can't account for the smokestacks in this scenario, though.) Thinking of it as a farmhouse, the back lighting could be the sunrise. Most of the smoke could just as well be fog rising from the ground. This dichotomy (agricultural/industrial) leads to thoughts of changes in the American landscape and economy throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.

Painting B -- Industry has taken over... the pastoral landscape has died and turned brown and murky. There is no more farmhouse. The sky is polluted. Yet, we are seeing this from a distance, with water and land between the viewer and the main focus of the picture. Whether this was to show the landscape devastation a little better, with focus on devastation, or whether it shows a remoteness and detachment from the activities being depicted, I don't know.

Oh, and... I like both of them but find the second one a little more dreary. Still some interesting things in it.

 

Quite a few have mentioned how painting A overshadows painting B. Would painting B compare more favorably with this one?

Here is painting B again for comparison.

 

To me, very similar to each other, except now, painting B appears "stronger" than THIS painting A.....THIS Painting A is much more pastoral.......to me.....

 

The new one you posted seems very orderly and neatly arranged compared to Painting B. The colors, while still pale, are less murky.

 

Have kind of thrown a curve ball at you all with this last painting offered in comparison with painting B. It is by the famous impressionist Camille Pissarro. Was hoping to generate more discussion ..... but alas.......

Might as well throw this one out there for comparison with painting A. I promise that it is not by anyone famous. It is 24" x 30". For conversation sake, let's call this painting C.


Here is painting A again for comparison (16" x 20").


.... and with its frame.

 

Painting C still doesn't stand up to Painting A, for me...
A's flaming inferno backlight is just so mesmerizing and powerful. Paintings B and C are a nice pair, I suppose. Again, I might suggest them for a great loft in a former industrial part of a city, especially one with mountains or mines nearby.

 

being Canadian I like C

Terribly ghastly frame on A

 

Painting C, having been done in daylight, is more "descriptive" than dramatic. It shows the buildings in the context of their surroundings. No "punch."

I agree with Komo about the frame on A. Yuck.

 

Ditto Komo and Gma on that A frame. Since I really liked the impression A presented but also used the word "ominous" I will say the frame multiplied ominous a hundred fold. Hint - trash the frame.

Brad, you captured me with Pissarro's. I was almost going to ask how much, please, planning to replace one or two currently on display at home. I'll withdraw that now that you have revealed it is his.

C surpasses B in every aspect, but has no chance of competing with (unframed) A.

 

Before giving Painting A to my friend with the fabulous loft downtown by the old steel mills... I would take the frame off and suggest he hang it on a nail, letting whatever shabby or unfinished edges show. If he insisted on a frame, I would grudgingly agree to a simple, thin metal one, dark, scratchy or matte, no shine.

 

In the spirit of the thread's exploration of differing reactions, here's something else we could explore. The images below show four possible approaches to a frame for Painting A.

They're all photoshop renditions, so not exactly what a real frame would look like, but I think they at least give an indication.

Frame 1...



Frame 2...



Frame 3...



Frame 4...

 

I like #3... but I'd still hang it on a nail, unframed, letting the unfinished or shabby edges show. I think it would enhance the gruffness and drama.

But of course, I hate almost frames... to me it's like buying a CD of worthy music, and then taking it home and adding some extra sound effects or harmony.

But 3 is pretty much in line with what I wrote just above you, Pat.

 

Pat, thanks.

I wish I could photo-shop.
I, too, would take 3 as best of offerings, but curiosity (my middle name) would keep me up all night looking further.

 

BRAD, re-reading my post ---- "Brad, you captured me with Pissarro's. I was almost going to ask how much, please, planning to replace one or two currently on display at home. I'll withdraw that now that you have revealed it is his."

Could be taken wrong. The only reason is because it is not currently in the budget.

 

For what it's worth, I understood what you meant.

 

Interesting how many of these paintings are so dark and 'bold', full of energy, maybe 'tension'..........and then you put up a contrasting lighter one!!!! Just an observation!!! Keep 'em coming Brad!!!!

 

And once you added 'C', that would be my preference in this group......it's just less........."disturbing" to me............have enough remaining angst and stress....just want mellow at this stage....

 

I like the heavy black frame. I think it focuses attention on the painting in a hard and industrial fashion. It restrains the image.

 

Have been off-line for a couple days. Appreciate the comments. Keep them coming.

For what it is worth, the frame on A is original to the painting and I really like it other than the damage.