Hi guys,

Hot off the easel ... this will be the final version of my upcoming P-38 painting. The final 24 x 32 canvas will have a couple of distant Lightnings added.

A Moment's Peace
Oil on panel
11 x 14
(Study for Twin-tailed Dragons)

That's a beauty Wade, my late Grandmother built P-38's during the war so they have a special place in my heart.

Hi Wade!

Very nice painting! I like the composition and the details.

I have one question about the right snake artwork. Shouldn't it have dotted lines either, like on the left side? Or was it like that on the real one?

Anyway, the paintig is "Superbe"!

Jean-Luc

Good eyes!

While these markings are quite striking, I've found surprisingly little reference material on the Twin Dragons" ... maybe only a few back then carried a camera!

Anyway, most of the pics I have show a definite "trend" towards the dashed lines being only on the "outer" surfaces. Walter Duke's famous "Miss V" was later modified with dashes all over the place, outlining everything ... gaudy!

I have one shot (only one) taken from above. It shows a plane flying and at least for that P-38 it appears that the green dragon head comes to a 'point' at the very top. Hard to tell in my art, probably, but that's how I depicted this bird.

It also appears that some planes didn't even have the green dragon tail along the insides of the booms, but the few shots I have seen of the inside of the booms shows (again) no dashes outlining the green dragon on the inner surfaces.

Can't wait to get to it ... I'm currently working on the final 48" wide "The Debden Kidd" ... better get back to it!

Wade

Hi Wade

great start, but I have a nit pick (which is maybe something with my own lack of sight or something)

to me the gun nose looks somehow wrong. I can't explain why but it looks narrow and strange in profile ... maybe it's only because it is a sketch and thus the 3D effect (lights and shadows) is not fully worked out ... or is it me?

I know you are a true artist and your finished painting will be as fabulous as all others I have seen since "Chico the gunfighter" some years ago (I always liked your site because of the historical background behind your artwork)

best wishes

Steffen

I love it

It may be a little off - don't measure anything else lest you find more mistakes!




Wade

Wade,
Beautiful! I Love the twin 38's....such an awsome plane. I think what Steffen is alluding to is: far right gun(?) looks longer than the near left gun...angle of far right gun versus lower center gun appears "kiltered." Meaning, if you draw a line along each of these two towards the front of the painting, they will intersect just off the painting.

Sweet man!!!

Mike (++) (++)

The '38's guns did stick out of the nose at different "lengths", if that's what you're talking about.




If you're referring to the "boresight" line up of the gun barrels, they look pretty "straight" looking at the original. At this small size, they're just 'blobs' or 'lines' of paint on your screen ...

But the essence is there, in any case. I'm digressing, but unlike scale modeling, microscopic detailing of each and every aspect of the canvas is UNdesireable in representational painting. Why? Without launching into a lecture, It's called 'overworking' the painting, and, actually, is the mark of an amateur. Where is the center of interest? Where is the focus? What's superfluous and what's important according to the artist, and how do we know?

"The ability to indicate, rather than render", as the saying goes, "is one hallmark of the professional."

Along those lines, there is (or was) a "school" of painting that aims to display a slick, literally "photographic realism". By that I mean no brushstrokes are apparent and the painting could fool most people into thinking that it's a photograph (The goal of art? I don't think so.). The big secret is that it's not harder than "looser" painting, indeed it's much easier - it only takes longer. And then there's the question: You have accomplished what, exactly, with "photorealism"?

That being said, I do believe there are times and places for obsessing over detail. Art, for example, rendered specifically to show or display material for modeling (or aviation art) reference: cockpits, engine compartment, structure, etc, etc. In that case, yes, I agree that every rivet should be slaved over until the artist goes blind! Another 'reason' to go anal on one's art would be, again, specifically to show features of the subject matter, as in box top art. In that case, you of course want to show off the "detail" you are trying to sell.

Now, can you imagine a Sargent portrait rendered in photorealistic style? No way! Look at those brushstrokes in any Sargent. Oh yes, ol' JSS's work looks quite realistic - till you step a bit closer!

Give me gun barrels a degree or two off any time, or edges that disappear into nothing ... a certain amount of "dither" (imperfect line ups, impasto paint application) is necessary to show the hand of the artist ... that 'bond' with the viewer is why oil painting hasn't gone out of style - even after we long ago perfected the miracle of the camera.

Wade

Love it!
The P-38 is probably my favourite fighter of all time. There's something about it that I just really like about it.

Hi Wade

many thanks for the insight into art! As I already stated I am confident that your finished panting will be as good looking as ever. I was not after some brush strokes or the "misangled guns" just the look of the nose was puzzleing me.

As always : Beauty (truth, ... whatever) is in the eye of the beholder! If it suits you (and most of the visitors here) you are perfectly right and I am too :-) :-) :-) :-)

I do and did not want to criticise your art!! Besides, that is impossible because it is art!! I just wanted to express my view of the artwork.

keep up posting your beautiful artwork it is advertisement for you and enjoyment for us... ... even if some philistines (I looked that on up ) like me start nagging from time to time

cheers and

Steffen

I think its great!

I'd like to welcome you to the Big Armorama. Your join date says May 2006. First of all, your painting rocks, you've got more talent in your pinky than I have in my whole body.

Secondly, I don't think there's a person on the Big A that wants to offend anyone by criticizing someone's work, but honestly, that's what this community is all about right? We can always learn when we see something through someone elses eyes. Keep on posting your work here Wade, please! Its such a treat for those like me that are trying to see the spirit of the men and women of war through art.

(Laugh) I hope that makes sense.

I'm only getting a red X

and from the comments from fellow posters it looks like I'm missing a real treat.

Cheers
Peter

Wow, that is a realy good painting...Good job!

Heh heh ... I wasn't saying "don't you dare criticize my work" - seeking criticism is what got me where I am today (wherever that is).

As I purposefully qualified, I was "digressing" into my position on hyper-realism as it relates to artwork images, using your "observations" as a springboard, not in reaction to them (and they are all valid).

One of the largest hurdles military artists face is pleasing an audience which is mainly concerned with realism only - I stopped taking 'cold' commissions a while back because not only would a client specify basic details (as they should, of course) of their "project", but they would second-guess me at almost every step of the way ("More detail here!" - and this was in a plane 500 feet away!). You see what I mean.

Figuring that I actually did know what I am doing, I decided with the advice of a well-known artist friend that I will, for lack of a better term, entertain "suggestions" for future works and/or decide what I want to do myself, and if somebody *then* wants to purchase a specific work, we'll both be happy.

That doesn't mean I'm immune to criticism, or "observations" - that's something that goes along with the job. In the specific case of this thread, I was taking the opportunity to 'sound off' a bit, not shut anybody up ...

Cheers!

Wade

P.S. And yes - pls keep hammering away at me, especially now that you know where *I'm* coming from.

Looks great Wade.....

At last
I saw it last night on the PC at home and it was worth the wait. Really nice piece of work Wade.

I think it worth mentioning that "oils" are not the easiest medium for detail work and Wade has pulled it off nicely.

Cheers
Peter
:-)

Wow! Really nice,Wade! Keep 'em comin'!
cheers!