Coke vs. Pepsi, Prego vs. Ragu, Dogs vs. Cats. Pick your pick, and pick your fight. It’s all a matter of where you stand. Me? Fresca, cream sauce, sea monkeys, and a loose watercolor wash.
That’s right, when it come to painting, I like the loose style of watercolor. I don’t like to see watercolor used to make something look photo realistic. It’s those loose washes of color that can say so much. There is an expression, “that if a word is worth one dollar, then silence is worth two.” And that is how I view a good watercolor. I guess that is why I gravitate more towards the Impressionist painters. James Whistler is one of my favorites. Guess why!
What is my point of this discussion? Actually, it is about my latest project “The Ginkgo Box.” After I finished the marquetry, I noticed something about it. It lacks a crispness, sharp detail, it is not photo realistic. Why? It was a prototype, and a photo realistic look would be easier for me if it were larger. (I am not a “true master” at the scroll saw yet.) But nevertheless, what the marquetry lacks in photo realism, it more that makes up for in a watercolor look. I did not intend that, but it turns out to be one of those stumbled upon gems. The finish will make the wood “pop” and “glow” and add crispness, but I just could not bring myself to adding loads of detail. Why? I’m a watercolor man, and that just the type of guy I am.
Comments from the peanut gallery?