Plein-Air or Something Else? A Taste of Italy
Published June 07, 2006 by L. Diane Johnson | E-mail this post
I AM FREQUENTLY ASKED when a plein-air painting is no longer considered to be a plein-air painting?
There are two pieces I recently created at Epcot Center in Florida. Both are loose and more impressionistic than some of my works. But where do you draw the line between a "pure plein-air" painting and one started on location; then finished in the studio? I’ll leave that decision up to you.
This first picture is of one painting straight from the easel. Compare it to the next photo for differences. At first, I was going to leave this painting as is, but saw that it had some vital weaknesses. However, as you’ll see, I made minor adjustments. Are they enough to still call this a plein-air painting? It surely cannot be considered to be "alla-prima" because I worked on it in two sessions...

Following is the completed piece I finished today. What did I paint that's new? The major issue was with the lamp. It was skewed and not straight. This is always something all painters have to be alert to while painting. Everyone has a tendency to favor one way or another even if facing the painting head-on. So I merely adjusted the alignment to make the correction.
Other adjustments were the cast shadow of the lamp, tree trunks (which needed more definition), a touch in the clouds, background tree, the forground flowering treetop (needed final highlights) and tiny touches to the potted flowers below. I left everything else alone. I think in this case, it was wise to make these corrections. The painting is stronger for it, without losing the original freshness or intent. I’ll present another example like this in my next post.
A Taste of Italy
0 Responses to “Plein-Air or Something Else? A Taste of Italy”
Leave a Reply