Citizen Sketcher

Ah, overconfidence. Thy name is watercolorist.

Or something.

I mean, if we weren’t unreasonably optimistic, would we even be trying Direct Watercolor?

I had three false starts today! Which made me quite annoyed, as I was trying to paint our city hall – which I’ve painted many times before, and thought would be a piece of cake. But just couldn’t get it this time.

This is Fail #2. I won’t show you Fail #1.

I suppose this isn’t the worst thing ever made – but it’s cluttered, monochromatic, poorly proportioned, and far too pale! This is what happens when you try to draw nitpicky details – almost like a line drawing with the brush – instead of seeing shapes.

This is Fail #3. At this point, I just gave up. This initial shape was monochrome and way way too watery. It’s like a ghost! Someone suggested ice cream and I promptly gave up.

Out of desperation, we relocated behind the Gare Viger. Our old train station, which is now – I think, a convention center? – and shops.

There’s a pedestrian overpass that gives you a great view of the back side of the building. We’re looking over the parking lot in the unfinished foreground. It’s amazing that this old building is just as detailed on the back as the front. No budget-cutting in those days.

This view works for me, as it’s straight-on. No perspective problems! Much easier for my pea-brain.

My second rule of solving perspective. Move! Til you don’t see any :)

And, when I talk about false starts here – honestly – refusing to do a line-drawing before painting – insisting on going directly in with a brush – this is only being obstinate.

Some subjects really should have a bit of a drawing. These buildings are fantastically complicated.

I think, back when I was doing finished drawings underneath everything, these subjects attracted me, because of the complexity. All the cupolas and towers and clocks – something to sink your teeth into. Now that I’m doing Direct Watercolor – I’m getting more interested in painting the wider view. The city skyline, instead of a portrait of a fancy building.

But – struggling with the lack of drawing aside. When I *do* finally get one of these – there’s something about this spontaneous, calligraphic brushwork that I really love! It makes the torn up paintings (on expensive paper today! <oh, the pain!) just the price of achieving success.

At the end of the day, I know I could get better and better at tinting drawings. I probably should have stuck with that. I still might go back! But doing this stuff is taking one step back from draftsmanship in order to take two steps forward toward painting.

Driving up Dr. Penfield, behind the McTavish Reservoir. I love the fact that a water tank in Montreal comes with a chateau. Isn’t this the best city for an urban sketcher?

I suppose the elegant roof-line makes this not quite a Nothing View. It’s halfway toward my old-fashioned architectural portrait. But you could call it a kind of action-shot of a building?

You really can see St. Joseph’s from everywhere on the island.

See it in the distance there? There’s supposedly a city by-law that no structure can be taller than the top of the mountain – just to keep this view intact.

Confession: this was painted, once again, from a drive-by-photo. In fact, I did it yesterday, right after the water tower. That’s how we’re getting 30 paintings in 30 days! By using every free moment! Even if it means doing three in one night to get ahead :)

What went right?

I’m super happy with the adaptation – the simplification, and stylization of negative space, turning what is otherwise a Nothing View, into a painting. I’m slowly realizing what has been working for me with these.

If the view is about nothing – you’re free to change anything.

When you’re painting an architectural portrait of a well-known landmark – maybe you feel, you have to get it right? But with this kind of casual snapshot, I can do whatever I want! Haha!

What went wrong?

You know – right now, I’m ready to say – nothing!

At this stage, after so many false starts this week, I’m pretty much in love with this painting.

It’s not perfect, but it’s in the spirit of what Direct Watercolor is for me.

Painting by instinct, making silhouettes, and letting the pigment move freely inside shapes.

Quick tip: These last few days with rainy skies – I’ve been doing these by pre-wetting the sky shape with clear water, then charging into the damp paper with a milky mix of grey-of-grey, indigo, and touches of turquoise. While I’m painting the sky, it’s the only wet shape. The blue hill for instance, is dry. So the water can go crazy in the wet sky, and won’t enter the dry land.

~m

Another Nothing View!

I’m having too much fun with these. They are so against-type for me. It’s almost a joke among my friends – any Gothic church or over-the-top opera house is a ‘Marc Sketch’. I would never paint something like this water tower! But here it is, and it was fun to do :)

This is a slice of Highway15 Sud that we end up crawling past due to our eternal bridge construction. It’s painted from another drive-by photo – another example of Bad Photos make Good Paintings. We’ll see if, by the end of 30×30, that can become an official rule around here.

I was going to take progress shots, but I got distracted and only have the one. Anyway, here’s how I started – right into the water tower. It’s such a prominent figure in this painting, I guess I couldn’t start anywhere else.

Post Script: Here’s a couple false starts, trying to get in a quick one of this scooter. For some reason, I’m obsessed with failing at drawing motorcycles!

I wasn’t going to show these, but I was feeling guilty. I mean, there was some big talk at the beginning about showing everything, success or failure :) I dunno, about these. They’re a bit rushed. I might try again later.

What went wrong?

Nothing!

This is my favorite so far!

I had one false start this AM, but I quit before wasting too much time and relocated to this spot – which has been on my mental ‘to sketch’ list for a while now.

Well OK, one cheat here. I chose to leave out the cars on the freeway.

I might have been braver and tried to get them in? Even though they’re moving fast, they do just keep coming. I could draw them ‘En-Passant‘, the same way I draw moving people on a busy street.

So maybe I get to try another of these with the cars as the focus.

What went right?

Everything!

It’s another take on a Nothing View. A painting that’s not about anything. No statue of an angel, no Siberian tiger, no cute farmhouse. Just a freeway. But this time the perspective is good, the complexity of the street is well simplified, and the details are nice and sharp. Most people probably don’t want a painting of a freeway – but I’m very happy with this sketch.

Post Script: Here’s today’s false start. Before I remembered this freeway bridge, I tried this cute house over on Ponsard. I think the drawing here – the brush drawing that is – just isn’t up to snuff. For whatever reason it’s disorganized, and a bit blobby. Doesn’t make the cut!

What went wrong?

I’m trying something here, which I’m tentatively calling: Nothing Views.

That is – you should be able to make a painting of any street. Even if there’s no obvious subject. This is from the intersection of Queen Mary and Côte-des-Neiges.

My working theory is: any view, no matter how ‘boring’ – a painter should be able to make something of it.

Why is this an issue for me? I’m wondering if it’s a kind of cheating, or mental laziness if every painting you make has to have an idyllic view.

It’s a kind of burgeoning problem for me.

If I’m ONLY a travel sketcher, galivanting around the world painting ancient ruins or epic landscapes – what am I supposed to do with myself at home? What’s a sustainable kind of image you can engage with on an everyday basis? <This is an open question].

What went right?

The upper right-hand corner.

What went wrong?

Rushed out in the morning for a sketch – choose another view (not this one) based on shelter from the rain. I thought I had something workable, but two terrible attempts on location and I was out of time.

So – took a snapshot from the car, and used that for a sketch in the studio.

I’m developing a theory of painting from reference which is: Bad Photos make Good Paintings.

This is obviously me being Mary-Mary-Quite-Contrary. But my point is, a great photo has too much information. You end up being dominated by the image, slavishly painting what the photographer gave you.

A terrible photo doesn’t own you like that.

Incidentally, even back home in the studio, it’s not always easier. Here are two examples of a false start.

If I don’t come out of the blocks right, I might as well give up. I feel like the sooner you can sense the need to bail-out, the better. Save your energy for the re-do! If there’s a fundamental flaw – like too much chroma in the base color – the painting is doomed. (At least in watercolor).  As well, there’s no saving bad proportions or improper placement on the page.

This is something I see far too often with students or beginners. Trying to beat a dead horse, instead of giving up and just starting again.

If the placement on the page is poor – spending time finishing that is not going to help! You’re just going to feel worse having used your whole time on that painting! Once you produce that dud, it’s as if we don’t have the energy to do it again. Or – more likely – we’re feeling a (false) sense of failure.

Think of every re-do as a victory over a bad painting! Not a failure – a necessary sacrifice.

So – what went right? 

I’m remembering how to draw with the brush. What precision feels like. And remembering to pre-visualize the shape I want to draw – then draw it completely. All in one go. One shape at a time, not jumping around.

Keep edges sharp, and avoid holes in the silhouette, or any false hard-edges inside what should be a clean, simplified shape.

Also, I’m getting a good base value finally.

When a value is perfect the moment you place it – it will dry TOO LIGHT.

It has to look too dark initially so it will dry upwards to a proper value.

Watercolor generally shifts up in value – the wetter the wash, the more the shift as it dries.

Also, I feel like on day three, I’m judging paint consistency more accurately. It’s Tea in the stone walls, but Milk in the clouds, and juicy Honey in the dark trees.

Ok, that’s day three! See you tomorrow!

~m

One thing for sure about Saint Joseph’s Oratory – you can see the thing from almost everywhere on the island of Montreal.

I was told when I moved here it’s the third largest domed church in the world. Though – I can’t find any proof of that one way or the other.

Across the street from the oratory grounds is the College Notre-dame. If you walk up to Jean-Brillant, just north from the main street, Queen Mary, you’ll find yourself looking at the dome from across the school’s soccer field.

On a rainy day like today, you can ignore all the details in-between and imagine the dome as some hill top church in Tuscany.

What went wrong?

Today’s painting of the oratory is actually my fourth attempt. Here’s one of my false starts.

Sometimes you know the thing is beyond redemption and it’s best to just stop now, save your energy – and the piece of paper! If you don’t flog it to death you can still use the back of the page for another try.

This one’s a flop for A: poor placement on the page, the horizon is too low, the oratory too centered. B: Too much chroma. The colors in the foliage are much too bright, the darks too contrasty. It looks like a glorious fall day, not a rainy Montreal spring.

I’m sure the problem is, I’m rushing myself.

My whole plan for this 30×30 thing was to pop out first thing each morning, fresh as a daisy at sunrise, dash off a wonderful little sketch, and be home before breakfast. (Seriously! I imagined myself having breakfast out as a reward). Hah! In fact, I’ve been wasting time and paper all day!

Here’s another reject. This one is just out of control. The brushwork is sloppy, the reserved whites too coarse, and the building looks like it’s been through an earthquake.

This is probably normal for day two. It’s going to take a while to knock-off the rust from our long winter. I envy southerners who can paint outside all year round.

I don’t mind this tree. Maybe I should have just cropped it and called it my Day Two.

What went right?

This is something that happens to me fairly often. Getting frustrated, and having to mentally re-set. I try to recognize the feeling when it happens and just shut down the frustration.

Sometimes I rip up the bad sketches right on the spot, to get a little revenge. Then I end up deciding, I’m clearly a fraud, and I’m going to give up painting forever, so – I’m just going to have fun with one last sketch.

That’s when they turn out!

Any pressure on myself to succeed, (like, I’m going to launch an international painting event and show everyone how great I am! <hah!) and you’ll stiffen up, become afraid to take risks, and otherwise interfere in your own success.

It might not look like it in the snapshot – but this view is a better choice of subject than the Snowdon Theater. Certainly better than the failed attempt this morning. I tried to pick views based on cover from the rain, instead of holding out for a subject that grabbed my imagination. That never works. This is one case where drawing from a photo was useful. (I did the painting from this cell-shot). Bad weather makes for atmospheric views! But it’s no fun painting in the rain. (I mean, I’ve done it – but I need some external motivation – like being at a workshop, or on a once-of-a-lifetime trip.)

Also – I’m remembering my own advice from Muckross House: Get further away from the subject! If you can’t see the details, you’re not tricked into over-drawing.

~m

So! My day one begins on an overpass above a busy freeway, in high winds and direct sun – my first plein air painting day of the year.

Ed Note: I’m actually in Chicago right now at their 2018 USK Sketching Seminar. But! Luckily I planned ahead. I’ve started my #30×30 early. Don’t worry – I will absolutely do it in 30 consecutive days! I’m doing the same challenge as everyone, I’ve just shifted the time-window. 

This is a sketch of the Snowdon Theatre. Or, at least the block it’s in. It’s the tall streamline era sign in the middle there.

This abandoned neighborhood landmark has been disused for as long as I’ve been in Montreal. There was a sports camp for kids in there for a while, until the place fell so fully into neglect it wasn’t safe for habitation. I suspect the roof fell in or the pipes burst at some point, and that was the last straw.

OK so, what went right?

I picked a cluttered view, with no clear center of interest. I knew I wanted to draw the old theater sign – but otherwise, it’s just a jumble of boxy functional buildings and freeway-junk. Considering that – I’m quite happy with my version of this un-romantic reality. I think it’s succeeded despite itself. This is a slice of my everyday life, seen as a work of art.

What went wrong?

What didn’t! I’m so out of practice with street sketching it’s not even funny! Things were so awkward. Constantly searching around for where I put my binder clips, or digging for a brush in the very bottom of my bag, or what pocket has my spray bottle. I’m using too much mental energy on the basic functions of getting paint and paper together, and I think it shows in the painting.

There are no clear silhouettes. It’s broken up with patchy white spaces, making the forms dissolve. The flattened lack of perspective, and the strange tilt –  while it’s an artistic solution – is also kind of a reflex. A self-defense technique of style over substance.

The first solution to complicated perspective is – ignore it! If that was good enough for Cezanne, it should be good enough for me. But still – I feel the stylization is kind of a crutch. You can only get away with playing the artistic license card so many times in a row.

Anyway – that’s my day one! It can only get better from here :)

~m