|
Tim, I fully agree that there are many ways to achieve a great painting. The use of an earth pigment based palette has been proved time and again, to be one of them. The artists I singled out as having used such a palette, Raeburn, Paxton, Bougureau, Lawrence, Rembrandt and Velasquez, are in my opinion at the pantheon of great figurative painters.
Of these, Paxton and Bouguereau did indeed have the choice of using cadmiums but chose not to. Again, in my opinion, Sargent, Waterhouse and Sorolla were second tier, at best, so being the logical thinker that I am I've chosen to explore the earth toned palette. I painted with cadmiums for over twenty five years and have no desire to revisit them.
I refer to certain painters on occasion to give some historical relevance to the points I want to make. This is the basis of logical debate, to make a point and prove it. To offer conjecture, such as you do, as to what Rembrandt or Rafael would have used if they were alive today, has no relevance in a debate.
As far as what most artists do or don't do is also conjecture, unless you have taken a poll. Personally, I am of the opinion that because most people choose to do something it doesn't necessarily make it the best way at all. In fact, I believe that the best solution lies in what most people don't do.
You counseled Wilma to look t the works of contemporary award winning artists and explore exactly what their palette choices are. Good advice, in principle. Since I myself happen to be an award winning contemporary artist, I would encourage Wilma or anyone interested in luminosity and depth to look at my work and see what they think. If my work appeals to them then perhaps there is validity in what I have to offer.
|