Shown here is a selection from among the numerous pieces made in preparation for the creation of my submitted work. None was made as an independent piece. They are ordered chronologically to illustrate the emergence of the final work from the process of practical research.
At the start, my long-established prejudice against the use of photographic source material had been weakened by the successful use of video stills in a previously assessed work.
I entertained the idea that I'd found a working method that could be applied to different contexts so made several small, paintings, in a similar way, from low quality photographs. These were disappointing.
In reaction I made several large, freely worked charcoal drawings, one of which I also sketched in watercolour and developed in oils. Twice.
Sensing my impatience to find an effective working method - and failing - I deliberately slowed down and spent a while systematically making colour swatches from my usual choice of paints, to better understand their possibilities. I applied some of the insight gained in three small paintings made with a restricted palette of just two primary colours and black and white. These were based on closely cropped photographs of local scenes.
Disenchanted (again) by the way my source images encouraged little more than copying, I veered (again) towards freer sketching on a larger scale.
I found a way to paint over a photographic reproduction of this drawing and used printed versions of the same motif as the basis for a series of experiments in oil colour. I made a sequence of small pictures over six different coloured grounds (not shown), plus a series of four more paintings, slightly larger, each made with a single brush of various widths (below). The rudimentary scientific nature of these trials was not lost on me, and I made a supposed poster to illustrate this, imagining that I might continue further with this idea.
The experiment entitled 'Size ISN'T Everything' was to have been a series of paintings of varying dimensions, the largest of which I managed to complete before concluding that the joke was wearing thin. This larger painting proved challenging as I struggled to paint background, mid-ground and foreground successfully. A single, canvas-wide approach felt inappropriate to the disparate needs of these several areas. (This is obvious in the foreground, where I have reworked the original painted surface using oil bars and pastels in a desperate bid to solve the problem.)
More drawing from direct observation furnished me with the motif that has become my exhibited work. An initial graphite sketch of the wide view encompassing countryside and town was completed on three sheets of paper, and from this the three panels were born. The idea of making the whole image from disparate pieces, chosen to capture each element in my own best way, is a legacy of the frustrations inherent in the painting above.
The mock up (below) is an early version pieced together from photos, drawings and digitally produced elements.
The mock up (below) is an early version pieced together from photos, drawings and digitally produced elements.
All three panels went through the same drawn out process of alteration and refinement. Some of the stages in this process for the left-hand panel are illustrated below.
With the design firming up I made trial pieces of the elements. A plein air oil sketch, a watercolour, numerous drawings in charcoal and graphite. Cutting and pasting, digitally and physically, established more clearly how each panel was to be assembled.
The technical challenge of incorporating a printed component necessitated a trial run on a comparable scale to the finished piece, since working at scale was itself the principal challenge. The etching below is that trial, and the closest thing to an independent work made during the process documented here.