Tuesday, February 19, 2013

Floating objects

Here is another candidate for a small framed piece.  This was done awhile back and is one of four floating objects I did. I dubbed it the skittles series because it was so contrived.  But singularly it doesn't look so bad.

I'll let you be the judge.  Here is the painting I separated this from.

5 comments:

  1. Shades of Chagall's floating objects? I like this and find it fun, interesting and creative - gosh, maybe I don't know what contrived means??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess what I meant by contrived is that it looked a little too planned and sugary or whimsical as a group. It just looked like I was saying..."Heres a tomato in the sky...now heres and Orange! Heres a banana!. And the color drips started to remind me of those "taste the rainbow" skittles commercials awhile back. It just seemed like too much in one painting. But like I said it kind of works when they're taken one at a time. I don't know. Every time I look at it, it just doesn't work for me as one painting.

      Delete
  2. Well, as a grouping, I see what you mean. Besides, a banana would never fly like that - it's not aerodynamically correct! ha ha I do like the tomato, though - perhaps just two and call the other two experimentation. You know, Ted Nuttall has made a good living out of those rainbow skittles blobs in his portraits! If it works for him, maybe you can get it to work for you :) Don't know why I'm teasing you this morning - need more coffee!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I like those Kevin. Incongruity makes you pay attention. Nice technique too!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Randall, just saw your comment so sorry so late to reply. I can do incongruity with my eyes closed....

      Delete