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.
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??
ReplyDeleteI 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.
DeleteWell, 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!
ReplyDeleteI like those Kevin. Incongruity makes you pay attention. Nice technique too!
ReplyDeleteThanks Randall, just saw your comment so sorry so late to reply. I can do incongruity with my eyes closed....
Delete