Annunciation 09#3
Acrylic/Oil on Canvas
I haven’t put the size on this because one of the things this work is experimenting with is perceptions of scale – I’d be really interested to know how big you think it is!
detail
Annunciation 09#3 belongs to the following groups:
Painters In Modern Times - TWO PER DAY and THE SISTERHOOD
nathanw08
Wonderful sense of depth. The texture and dark shadow lines beneath the red really exentuate this. Has the real feel of large scale view of the ocean floor but then some of the fine detail really draws you in. I’m facinated by the name of this series, the act of announcing or the obvious links to christianity. The more I look at it the more I get a feeling of decay and that something is almost shrouded, possibly a skull and bones.
Probably way off, but I love it anyway, fantastic stuff. Size wise I reckon actually rather small despite the feeling of scale, maybe 24” x 18”.
kafka replied
Thank you Nathan – I won’t say too much here about the name of this series because it would take up too much space! – and i’m writing a journal entry about it that i will post soon – these early works are trying out some ideas in isolated images that i will bring together later. They all contain components of human anatomy – #1 & #2 were ‘unshrouded’ colour preps where the anatomical structures were clear – this one has further layers and some glazing intended to explore the scale/spatial components, which has veiled/obscured the underlying bones – which are…a human foot!
Mariska
beautiful palette…fantastic artwork!!!
kafka replied
thank you Mariska for your lovely comment!...x
Fee Dickson
Hmm..I think smallish too! but mainly because of the paint texture. 12” X 8”?
Agree with much of what Nathan said..and it does look like a shroud, a geomorphic shroud. Wonderful work, Nigel
kafka replied
Hi Fee! – geomorphic shroud could be a good description of where these are heading – i have planned to include giant fossilised angels in parts of the later series!
Marilyn Brown
I’d love to think this is about 2m x 1.4m but Nathan is probably correct.
Doesn’t detract from the work which is stunning.
kafka replied
It will be M, it will be! ......x
Susan Grissom
12×16maybe… love it great texture and color palette.
kafka replied
And the prize goes to Susan!! (x) very rightly too, as I borrowed two of the greens from your latest!;-)
Here it is – all 12×16 of it
(this is a tiny painting for me)
Mufa ...
This is not totally facetious, because perception of scale is wholly contingent on contextual clues, and there aren’t any. The strokes/lines are not trustworthy because you could have ‘doctored’ those.
So once again – a lack of context inhibits the ability of the viewer to engage more fully with the art – although your question does introduce a more conceptual quality to the piece.
[c] I’m shocked – you are showing an interest in what the viewer perceives…......
[d] The series is building nicely.
Mufa ...
Having to do this again – half of the comment disapperared!
[a] Very nice picture….......
[b] It looks the same size as all the others [on my screen anyway]
This is not totally facetious, because perception of scale is wholly contingent on contextual clues, and there aren’t any. The strokes/lines are not trustworthy because you could have ‘doctored’ those.
So once again – a lack of context inhibits the ability of the viewer to engage more fully with the art – although your question does introduce a more conceptual quality to the piece.
[c] I’m shocked – you are showing an interest in what the viewer perceives……...
[d] The series is building nicely.
kafka replied
Just to add conceptual insult to injury, I’ve given it an especially shiny finish, so you the viewer can perceive themselves reflected in it :-))
You’re right about the red strokes – I used a very deliberate painterly trick (which Nathan noticed) to lift them off the surface by paintings shadows under them.
GloriaDK
Well Nigel I am a pretty straightforward sort of person, but am capable of a little conceptual thinking as well, so I thought that maybe the first two were of the pelvis and spine of the female form, birth being annunciation. Anyway I think your paintings are interesting and I love the blues and the touches of red and I would take a guess that it isn’t a huge painting but much smaller. Amazing what you can do with a high resolution, Cheers!
kafka replied
Hi Gloria! – ‘birth being annunciation’ – got it! the first two also being the birth of the series – #2 has a circular form that is supposed to suggest a womb and also an ultrasound scan image – you’ve pinpointed the ‘human’ component….....
whereas Marie has…......
Marie Magnusson
glorious colours! I went scuba diving quite far out on the Great Barrier Reef the other week and this is what it would like from above, shallow water over white coral sand, surrounded by crystal clear deep sea! the brillant red streaks almost look like they are suspended in front of the painting, really great sense of depth.
the more I look at it, the less I see a foot and the more I see a womans torso, head tilted back in surrender to the deep sea.
kafka replied
pinpointed the geographic (or the much nicer term coined by Fee – geomorphic) component – I wanted to suggest sandbanks and hidden structures beneath the surface – the red streaks in this context are con-trails of aircraft seen from high above them casting shadows on the surface of the water. (they are red because in the later paintings they will also be cuts and scourings on the body – spiritual and corporeal….......thats all along way off yet but I’m fixing the colour as red in these early works)
Susan Grissom
Bravo to me and of course to you. Love what you did with my colors..xo
mklau
You continue to visually delight and excite me with your creations. I consider you a Master of creation.Thank you
kafka replied
hi mk! – thank you for your very generous comment! – ‘master of creation’ is stretching it a bit for someone who spends his time splashing about with blue paint ;-) but thank you for the very kind thought!
Carmen Cilliers
Took me a while. Hello Kafka = long time, how are you bud? How big is it you ask… well, like I said – had to decide if it was a digi or painting but i went with painting, palette knives etc…. so I’m thinking size is around 90×120cm? Oh… and after having another look (third time round I see you have clearly stated it is a painting) :) Size wize, that was my guess, but I look forward to hearing the facts about it.
kafka replied
Hey Carmen! (x) – too long :-) never mind me, how are you? (I’m good)
Thanks for the comment – it’s a dinky little painting compared to the monsters I usually paint – I was trying to get a little painting to look like a big one (if you get what I mean)........x
Carmen Cilliers
I know what you mean… and I know how hard abstract is… and I know how hard it is to do small (dinky) abstracts – so well done! We really need to stay in contact a bit better. I haven’t uploaded much lately… sort of trying to build some work without releasing it out after each painting.
charliethetramp
love the colours i won`t mention blue
looks like fossilzed traces within the work
300miles in length by 200miles in diameter
am i way off?
a great conceptional piece of artwork
Jules Baldwin
I just love the feel and depth you have achieved….beautiful red touches x