do people look at their hands more than they look in the mirror?

(i suppose it depends on who you're talking about?)

another image from kenya.

taken on the last day of the visit, from the road.

whilst painting 'makongeni boy' i used my mobile phone to take a couple of shots to record the development of the piece.

i've developed this a little further and used a 'proper' digital camera to record the development.

you can view it here.

each session was about four hours of work.

the source image for this painting was taken whilst visiting kenya.

specifically a bike trip to makongeni village. this turned into an unspoken challenge to see who could cycle the fastest. advice : ''don't challenge kenyan's to physical competitions. they do press-ups for breakfast''

i selected this image out of the many i took, as it had a interesting contrast to it.

the attempt at shaping the head out of the dark background, only defined by the light and the change of the skin tone seemed like an interesting challenge. development.

i took a lot of photographs. and somebody said:
"if you photograph everything then eventually your memories become the photographs."

socrates discussed the same principle.
if we write our knowledge down, we trust the writing rather than using our memories. our knowledge from writing becomes diluted, translated from the original intent. sketchbooks become translations of an idea, or image, not the idea or image in it's original intended form.

my memories of kenya aren't limited to my photos, the photos remind me of where i was before and after i took the shot. they spur memories i have. however to you they might well present a diluted image of kenya, compared to me describing my memories.

i liked the idea of painting the movement of a figure painting a large canvas.

filming myself on a camcorder i painted a large oblong canvas prussian blue, similar to a rothko.

back on to the same canvas i painted my movements in painting the rothko background. (from the video)

i wanted to create a paradox about the subject matter of the image. it's a painting about it's own creation.

this didn't work. i simplified the idea slightly. i defined a movement in front of the canvas, that would work well compositionally and filmed myself moving.

i watched the same two minute sequence again and again, painting it in a loose paint in one tone. after certain rhythms were made out in the sequence i began to single out figures with the background tone and other colours, shapes that appeared to be the strongest.

i painted 'moth' mainly at night, and the light often attracted moths. one unfortunate moth was stunned by the heat of the light and it spiraled into my palette.

'moth' seemed like the correct title for the piece.

see this link for the work in progress

sketchbook

these images were executed quickly by painting in white onto blank laser photocopies, so the image starts black and is constructed mainly from the application of white paint onto the black surface.

the source images are from a video of a figure moving around in front of a strobe light. they were initially created to construct into a multi layered painting but unfortunately the outlines were too solid so they ended up as quick studies.

however I did compile all the singular studies into one image as can be seen here.

sketchbook

another one of the trm series.

sketchbook

in my opinion (!) paintings that work have just enough information for the viewer to put the image together. the work shouldn't over state the subject. an economy.

sometimes this can be the least satisfying to paint. unless the picture presents a struggle to complete it feels like nothing has been gained.

like going on holiday and everything is plain sailing: it's relaxing and easy but you don't really feel like you've experienced anything. (i'm prepared to put this to scientific test, so please email your holiday donations here.)

of course this depends on what you are painting and what it calls for, sometimes there is no choice to overstate. the only choice to be made is how well you paint the minimum of information.

i've tried to put too much into a painting before as can be see here

"where's the colour"?

sketchbook

frankenstein as a film icon represents the form of evil and something horrific of human creation. a mistake that comes back to haunt you. (usually in the form of robert de niro)

i liked this image as neither is applicable here. The actors sit round having a cup of tea still in costume.

hence 'frankenstein's (not a) monster.'

this painting was created for an exhibition in a cinema gallery as was 'composition'

sketchbook

investment bond brochure, corporate soul?

sketchbook

a painting based on two separate images, matched together as they have the same curved shape and angular line.

there's a small border on the bottom of the painting, similar to the letterbox shape of a wide screen camera, tv or cinema.

i wanted this to be a deliberate painting about film and composition. i took certain liberties with both images to try and match them together.

this can be seen in: the curved composition of the car window (left half) and the arm and shoulder (right) and the diagonal of the window (left) and the diagonal of the phone (right).

the black and white image, composition and the letterbox canvas are hopefully reminiscent of a dramatic cinema scene.... one involving car driving and phone call making.

sketchbook

waving not drowning.

sketchbook

'life room' is from a day spent in the life room. painting the figure from life usually requires focus, it's when you focus so intently on something that you capture that which is beyond what you intended. or thought you could.

the figure was painted into a loose life room structure, the focus of the construct being on the face. with black compositional spray paint added later as an after thought in the studio.

sketchbook

another day in the life room, painted onto a photo that had been transferred to canvas.

the figure on the left is painted from life, the background has also been painted over to provide a balance between the painted figure and the photographic background.

i had thought of a problem in representing the space a figure occupies. the space around us is stationary and we move through it. if we represent figures as they are in that space, shouldn't they be less solid than the space around them?

the focus and title for this piece is 'ear', as this was the only solid piece of the figure represented....and the closest to the viewer.

sketchbook

this is a detail of an early painting. The rest of the picture was confused.

sometimes you try to put too much into a painting and after all those ideas all you are left with is the painting, as the ideas fail to come through.

some ideas are suited to painting, some are not. i would like to be proficient in all mediums so that i could render in the medium most suited to the idea.

what i was trying to say in this piece could have worked better as a short film.

sketchbook