Very limited palette

[Marvin Mattelson]

Wilma, I teach students of all levels from those who have never painted to national award winners. I think that there is a tremendous amount of validity in the teaching of Frank Reilly. I have had far better results since I eliminated the cadmiums and switched to the earth colors.

Tim, I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Wilma Hill]

Mr. Mattelson I am very sorry if my bad choice of words when asking my questions inferred I was trying to tell you what to do. I was just very happy that you were familiar with the method I had chosen and since from your experience you had made changes on paints connected with it I was naturally wondering if you had made any changes from that same experience with the method of approach for a beginner. A person like me has to begin somewhere and it gets confusing since there are so many approaches to consider. But there comes a time when you have to make a choice and I made mine. Thanks again for all your constructive help.

Wilma

[Marvin Mattelson]

Wilma, There was nothing wrong with your choice of words so there is nothing to be sorry about. I understood exactly what you were asking and tried to respond appropriately.

The Reilly palette arrangement, which is based on seeing value first and considering hue relative to value, followed the basic approach used for artists' academic training which was taught for centuries. That is until the Impressionists put color first and things spiraled downward from there. Fortunately, through the efforts of Reilly, and others like him, the basic tenants of this tradition were kept alive and have survived. Now there is a real momentum back to a more logical approach.

I find it quite ironic that the very colors that were championed by the impressionists, the cadmiums, are now embraced by many of those who claim to teach a traditional approach. My hero, Paxton, was an artist, who though academically trained, was able to marry the concept of impressionist color observation into the academic credo of seeing form first. My innovation was to transpose Reilly's palette arrangement over Paxton's choice of colors. Another marriage made in heaven, the way I see it. This of course eliminated using all cadmiums in the flesh. A move I've never even given a second thought.

Reilly studied with George Bridgeman and Frank Vincent DuMond who were students of Gerome. He was also an apprentice to Dean Cornwell the great illustrator and muralist. Reilly's teaching incorporates a tremendous amount of insight garnered from the above sources. The only thing I find questionable is the use of cadmiums in the flesh. Like all things in life, we need to sort through the options afforded us and cobble the best solution based on our own judgment. My only allegiance is to the effectiveness of what I employ. Show me a better way and I'm there.

[Timothy C. Tyler]

Originally Posted by Marvin Mattelson

Reilly studied with George Bridgeman and Frank Vincent DuMond who were students of Gerome. He was also an apprentice to Dean Cornwell the great illustrator and muralist. Reilly's teaching incorporates a tremendous amount of insight garnered from the above sources. The only thing I find questionable is the use of cadmiums in the flesh. Like all things in life, we need to sort through the options afforded us and cobble the best solution based on our own judgment. My only allegiance is to the effectiveness of what I employ. Show me a better way and I'm there.

Marvin, this whole section on color and another on palettes mentions several "better ways" as espoused many many of the members here. Many of the books featured here on SOG (in the ad section) mention better ways. You keep listing a hand full of painters that use your palette (or rather) you list the lineage of your teachers. You do realize that for every painter you list there are 200 world famous artists that don't?

As for the Impressionist's palette they were but one group in the entire world that began using the "new colors" (along with metal paint tubes) as these were introduced to the world at that time. Some of these people were Sargent, Sorolla and Waterhouse. It will be helpful the the young artists here to read the facts. There are entire books written about artists' palettes and the evolution of the art of painting. I only mention that here as a reminder.

The one truth one is left with from researching art history is that the are many ways to great painting. Most artists prefer having all the best new materials from which to choose so they can make the best work available. In the last 20 years all sort of new improved colors have been introduced to the market. None of these were used by Rembrandt or Raphael but theses painters would have loved these new tools.

[Marvin Mattelson]

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.

[Allan Rahbek]

Hi all,

I have had tremendous help from using the earth color based palette combined with deliberate use of the value system. I find that it is easier to hit the right color when using basic colors that are close to what I actually need.

Some weeks ago I went to the National Gallery in London where Rembrandt, among others, is represented with several of his best paintings. It was obvious that he went from using strong bright colors in his youth to more quiet colors as he grow as an artist. The later portraits was less colorful but more glowing from emotion. That was obviously a result of his mastering of the values AND the colors.

I have no objections against using Cadmiums or other new paints, but find that is

[Minh Thong]

So, are we saying that a beginning student should or should not use the Reilly Palette?

I don't know about using it for an actual painting, or using the whole palette arrangement after you're painting at an advanced level (I'm not there yet ) but when I first started painting, the Faragasso book mentioned, and all the associated color exercises, was absolutely invaluable in fully understanding how to use color. Being self-taught, I'd have bounced around for years without that book. I literally painted hundreds of color charts from the Reilly pallete, including the charts Faragasso used to illustrate 'vibrating' a color with cool mixtures. Even before my drawing reached a decent student level, I had color down cold.

That said, however, I have since gone back to using two colors plus white and the various three color plus white and black mixtures outlines in Parramon's 'Big Book of Oil painting'. What I can today with just a couple colors is still kind of amazing to me.

Minh

[Timothy C. Tyler]

Marvin, since you posted this image here as part of this discussion on color, I assume you welcome a critique of it?

[Timothy C. Tyler]

Originally Posted by Timothy C. Tyler

Marvin, since you posted this image here as part of this discussion on color, I assume you welcome a critique of it?

I would welcome a side by side comparison of several of your works next to mine if you like. Here are three you may use;

As a matter of comparison, I've put mine next to William Bouguereau. I'd invite you to do this. Bouguereau is of course much better, but it is fun to compare.

[Timothy C. Tyler]

Originally Posted by Marvin Mattelson

Tim, I fully agree that there are many ways to achieve a great painting.

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.

As far as what most artists do or don't do is also conjecture, unless you have taken a poll.

In fact, I believe that the best solution lies in what most people don't do.

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.

My my, it see we disagree on much. A poll is great idea. Maybe we could bring in thousands by introducing this on cowdisley and goodart maybe ARC. Maybe I could buy an add in American Artist and see where the votes fall... maybe the paint companies could share the sales numbers for cadmiums. But you're right, the results on the canvas are what matter. And the results directly result from the ability of the painter.

If you don't wish to be critiqued here or compared to my paintings as I invite , maybe you could compare your work with the people you listed as I did. That might impress me to your way of thinking.