Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
RE: Ravi Shankar & Ali Akbar Khan in concert 1972
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login | |
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
RE: Ravi Shankar & Ali Akbar Khan in... (in reply to Piwin)
|
|
|
Thank you, Erik. It looks as if from the same cast, yet less perfect somehow. (Maybe a plagiat.) Thank you also for the hindsight about fimo. I had already heard of it (and that it is not most suiting). That picture of your dad; if it is not traced from a photo projection, means killer eye, understanding of rules of perspective and of handcrafting skills! But even in case of a traced drawing still without doubt an incredible example of precision and utmost consistency. He must have been quite a contemplating spirit. I got a pencil drawing from my old man somewhere, showing some traditional guy sitting before his sword. Not bad as a capturing, but not nearly demanding as much of patience and accuracy. In respect of famous Chinese inventions, I remember an article that claimed much of those to actually originate in India and to have made their way to China from there. Regarding black powder for first fireworks and toys possibly not too unlikely, with open sources of salpet in Eastern India. Regarding paper print, maybe not too far off either, seeing India´s initial printing methods with cloth. And wu shu (kung fu) originates from Indian limbering-up exercises against stiffening after meditation (of which in India itself as well there was developed kind of martial arts). But maybe I am biased, with my considering ancient India as more intelligent and ingenious than China. Me estimates that a whole lot spread from old India over the whole of Asia, more so than from anywhere else. - My father used to have a little cast-iron figure of the three monkeys in his book shelves. At age of maybe 3 or four years I asked him about those and he in a way explained that they stood for unwillingness to perceive (worldly) truth (and to stand to that). That is how I personally like to look at them, even if it be different from the original aim. That bit about Gandhi, if true, would be a pity (the more as he used to give such a platonic impression in his dealings with his female western company). Such would also question his intellectual background. It almost looks as if there have to be unsightly items about any of the greats. (Hopefully at least not about guys like Bartholomeo or Albert Schweitzer, though. ... but you never know.) Ruphus
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Apr. 24 2017 15:13:33
|
|
Erik van Goch
Posts: 1787
Joined: Jul. 17 2012
From: Netherlands
|
RE: Ravi Shankar & Ali Akbar Khan in... (in reply to Ruphus)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ruphus Thank you, Erik. It looks as if from the same cast, yet less perfect somehow. (Maybe a plagiat.) Thank you also for the hindsight about fimo. I had already heard of it (and that it is not most suiting). That picture of your dad; if it is not traced from a photo projection, means killer eye, understanding of rules of perspective and of handcrafting skills! But even in case of a traced drawing still without doubt an incredible example of precision and utmost consistency. He must have been quite a contemplating spirit. With a beautiful object like those apes many copies are made by many different people in often strongly varying qualities. eBay offers another one that is quite similar but not as similar as the one i showed. It is very hard to judge an artwork from a picture. I've seen numerous paintings being sold at auction houses and since a couple of years those paintings are not only shown for real during the auction but also as a projected photograph. 99 times out of a 100 the photograph looks way better as the original in color and contrast. The Chinese panel and the wedding basked show on top of this page are less appealing in real life. Some statues look better on the photo, others seem impossible to "catch". So if your photograph of the apes is your only source it's hard to tell how the original looks in detail and color. As far as my fathers paintings are concerned, he starts with having an idea/composition in his head. Then he studies the location thoroughly making dozens of photographs helping him to construct that composition. Next he makes a drawing based on those photographs. Parts are based on copying a projection but quite often he has to insert/re calculate the perspectives of photographs taken from different angles. In general lots of questions remain when studying these photographs so he frequently returns to the crime spot to study details and make additional photographs. So the end result is a drawing combining the info of many photographs and field studies and involving lots of re calculations concerning the perspectives. Sometimes he moves objects to his needs or make them bigger, smaller or less crooked as they would be on a photograph simply because on a photograph people will accept that crooked building but on a painting it will raise many eyebrows. On top sometimes you have to "ly" to tell the "truth". The end result is a detailed drawing of the complete composition which then is transferred to aquarel. Then it's a matter of adding the corresponding colors which is quite a craftsmanship in it's own. First of all you have to know the order of events, second of all everything you do changes everything else (so dark suddenly becomes light when an even darker object is added and even the perception of color can totally change depending on what colors surround it), correcting errors is pretty difficult in aquarel and on top if you have an endless line of houses/doors/doorposts/windows viewed alongside while disappearing in the distance it is incredible difficult to see which line belongs to which house etc. On top many things in this picture are a no go for the average aquarelist in the sense of "no way, that's way to difficult" like painting the shoes of passing people, the straw chairs etc. The detail is incredible. The window above the pup reflects another building who's windows reflect yet another building, you can see the other half of the street pop up in the motor helmets reflection and if a building expert looks at it he can see details only an expert of electric cables, bricks, sinks etc. will spot like "o, thats from the 30ties and this part is from the 50ties. Speaking about the fifties, in the early fifties my father was a apprentice painter at an art studio that was located only a few meters from this spot and the other site of the street has shops from that period still using the kind of window calligraphy's my father introduced back then. This is quite a famous part of Rotterdam known as "de brandgrens" being the part of Rotterdam were the bombardment and the resulting fire destroyed the heart of Rotterdam. This spot is the exact border of old and new and the pup shown is the oldest one of Rotterdam, just surviving the flames. In the distance we see the beginning of "de lijnbaan", a shopping street that was quite revolutionary in it's time (1953). It's a complete car-free zone and being the fist of it's kind has been a testcase for numerous car-free shopping streets around the world. Here are some of the working stages of above aquarel.
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
Attachment (4)
_____________________________
The smaller the object of your focus the bigger the result.
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Apr. 24 2017 16:37:47
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
RE: Ravi Shankar & Ali Akbar Khan in... (in reply to Piwin)
|
|
|
I very much assume that your old man could be having a great time with my cousin, sharing on how to take corresponding shots, about perspective and painting. That cousin, whom I introduced once on the foro, is a former prof for architecture and art painting who since years now has settled in on fictive panoramas of ancient or future scenes, which are then being plotted on 30 m high and 100 m long rotundas that are installed in several cities´ old gasometers. (You get binoculars for spotting details, almost like in nature.) He does the painting digitally, buts it´s about similar skills as with analog means. Different from his past free paintings. Not always perfect, but I liked that time the most. Besides, as a kid he used to draw traditional motifs of women onto egg shells, with detail beyond belief. You know, with those super thin brushes. Your dad really knows how to handle colors. (And I have definitely never been able to apply ink that homogenously.) What you observe with photos of paintings ought to be interpolation in conjunction with reduced resolution. What adds is that each digital brand´s technicians have to determine how actual shades of grey ought to be translated into color. With many manufacturers (and to my personal impression especially canon [very similar to leica] and panasonic) colors on default / neutral setting appearing better than life. That´s so to say how worn surfaces come to appear like mint. Not that artsy stuff wouldn´t earn its bonus with me, it certainly will. But me can appreciate anything between art, craftsmanship, deco, photography and handy work on computers. Naturally each of the easier methods minus the lesser demand of skill and effort, yet anything beautiful may hold its own. And so, I do dig computerized morphing of photos into "paintings". Actually, every then and now there would be a shot, which I was wanting to turn it into a "painting". But digital tools and apps that I tried wouldn´t yield too well. Until I stumbled over that kind guy´s little app who shares his make. I have posted examples before on the forum with transformations from wedding sessions that do look like freaking paintings. If I hung such a pic on the wall, first thought would always be: "You didn´t paint it. ... It´s only an edited photography, dude", hehe; but having thought that, yours truly would then enjoy the optics still. Eye-candy has its base of visual cake, and the more of skill involved in the making the more icing there adds on top. ... My cousin, besides, used to agree into that. Not anymore, however. The ordinary profession-legitimating thingy obviously has left its traces. Now, ... while in fact about to going seriously broke ... You give me a job as photographer (or possibly if must be as photoshopper, which would be taking an intensive wetting of toes first, though. Not to underestimate the complexity of piloting such prog) and I will swear that photography is the most demanding form of all art. Maybe. ;O) - If that was Ghandi´s argument, it does remind me of similar blurb regarding child marriage and other questionable customs, stemming from a time when practice just took a bending of reality to desired nonsense. As I find, a method still widely in place, yet in times of particle physics and space exploration. One can buy a car and still ride the poor donkey with it. As style too frustratingly resistant to bear. Ruphus
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Apr. 24 2017 18:53:52
|
|
New Messages |
No New Messages |
Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
Locked w/ New Messages |
Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.078125 secs.
|