English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://www.artmajeur.com/?go=artworks/display_mini_gallery&image_id=1786245&login=piotrwolodkowicz&serie=6&artist_id=36837&mini_gallery_id=1040973&disp_m=normal

2007-06-13 07:34:09 · 1 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities Visual Arts Painting

1 answers

Piotr, your paintings are very interesting to me for many reasons. But I really find it interesting how you artistically approach the landscapes you've done compared to the other styles, like the portraits.

Some of your portraits, like 'Girl With A Cigarette', 'The Ballet Dancer Sophia' and 'Krysia' are first rate, top notch works of art. It's like you've reached a masters level with those portraits.

Then there are the other paintings, like the landscapes, where you seem to have some strong points and some shortcomings. You're skies and their clouds, with their vibrate light and dark shadows, like in 'Sunrise 2006' and the one you posted here, are fine. But when you drop below the horizon your land seems to lack as much character and definition. It's like you haven't yet mastered the art of giving depth and life to the earth or you're trying to tone down, even perhaps de-emphasize, the ground as anything other than a murky backdrop. It's as if the sun may be shinning brightly but it doesn't reach down to brighten and highlight the ground.

Is there a reason why your landscapes are always so dark compared to the vibrate, warm glowing colors of such wonderful paintings as 'Lady In The Red Hat'?

The thing is I'm not sure what you're wanting to say with the landscapes. Whereas with those impressive and powerful portraits you've done this isn't a problem.

2007-06-13 15:58:04 · answer #1 · answered by Doc Watson 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers