Reduction not only makes a more intensely flavored sauce in the kitchen, it also makes a more intense experience in all the arts, especially painting. Reduction is editing. Editing is not just changing the product primarily, it is removing whatever is inessential. Recently, in the New York Times Book Review there was a critique of two books offering advice to prospective writers. Strong emphasis was placed on being succinct and concise as fundamental to success. Those qualities are found through reduction and simplification. I have a couple of examples of the process here. In example 1, I begin with an aerial view. I judged that it lacked coherence. I deduced that a simplifying, unifying design would provide that coherence. I tried timidly at first as you see in example 2. By example 3 I am bolder but, the overlaying red color created too much diversion. The color required further simplification through a value and color marriage to the rest of the painting. Furthermore in example 3 I have too many horizons. One horizon lived at the edges of the red perspective grid and the other above at a softer horizon. Example 4 simplifies the color, values, and reduces the horizons to one. It unites through quiet and thorough simplification.
example 1.
example 2.
example 3.
example 4.
In my final examples (5 and 6) , You can follow my sequence of distillation and reduction. In example 5, I saw too much confusing texture which needed subduing and a better union with the tone/texture of the water areas as you see in example 6. In example 5 I saw there were too many light areas of similar size. I needed to prune the number of reflecting water patches as you see I did in example 6. In example 6 I applied a unifying dark blue semi-translucent glaze which helped simplify and unify the various separate components of example 5. The work is 24×48″ and painted on anodized aluminum.
example 5.
example 6.
Gail Ingis
Hi David, it is true, “less is more” works well in all aspects of design, in life, in fact. I do agree with the concept. Image 5 is warm, and image 6, is cool. So although #6 has been simplified, I miss that warmth that you had in #5. But I suppose you are emphasizing simplicity in design, rather than in color. Can’t wait for the lecture tomorrow where you will most likely discuss your POV here in your blog. Thanks for a great blog.
gary r
I like the landscape in example 1. I like the strong geometry of the field and orchard rows in the foreground. The dark brown does not receded and optically; the river at the back seems to stand up. (The clouds, the blue haze, brown middle and green foreground seems to give it a horizontal striped feel.) In example 2. you toned down the brown extending the yellow and green and bring the haze forward which make the perspective stronger and the river lay down. But in example 2. you are really going someplace else. Example 4. is a great abstract with the dynamic geometry, (reminds me of some scenes from 2001). I enjoyed your PBS series, and your blog. Thanks gary.
K Halcrow
I really liked #1 and #2 north of the red lines – there was a sort of mystery and intrique about the distant place, which became almost dreamlike in #2. I see your point on #5 and #6 though both have their appeal.
Fredric Neuwirth
Yesterday at MoMA I went to the Boetti exhibit and was struct at the similarities between his conceptual art and your current blog. Being an artist, not only means the ability to risk but also to think & evaluate. I am still stuck in how to render a tree rather than how to evaluate an image. Your “Simplication” blog is an eye opener for me; thank you.
William Child
You are truly a master at presenting different and mind opening ways of looking at the world and canvas, while teaching in a very “down to Earth” way how all can revisit their talents and views of things when approaching a new canvas or idea.
My favorite original works look a lot like example 5 and 6 and the lesson here will greatly help me in kind. Thanks David, once again, with your insights, knowledge and beautifully created examples!