Learning Impasto Painting from Matisse. Flowers, 1907.

Van Gogh is said to be the first painter to use impasto painting extensively. Some have even credited him with "inventing" the technique where paint is laid on swiftly, thickly, softly, only blending at the edges where one layer rests on another with assured brushstrokes riding the surface. Impasto gives paintings a 3D feel, casting different shadows off the stroke ridges as the light changes during a day. 

I suppose impasto does not fit well with the resurgence of fine art realism that dominates painting in the early 21st century and therefore might be dismissed as a gimmick or hobbyists' refuge. However, I'll note that treating the painting itself as an object by manipulating the smooth surface is as old as painting. Impasto is a cousin to the ancient practice of mixing mediums in a painting, for example, knifing plaster onto a canvas before applying oil. 

In any case, one of my favorite masters using Impasto, and seldom a favorite of strict constructionist realists, is Matisse-- especially his early works predating the Fauve years. Those works (post impressionist or expressionist?) are beautiful to my eyes and well worth studying. 

A prime example is "Flowers" painted by Matisse in 1907 and currently held by San Francisco's SFMOMA Henri Matisse, Flowers, 1907 · SFMOMA. The great thing about the museum's presentation of this painting on the web is that you can zoom into a brush stroke without loss of resolution. They'd throw you out of the museum if you pushed your eyeball that close in person.

As we all know, the type of light and distance from a painting can greatly effect our perception, emotional reaction, and understanding. Sticking your eyeball onto a painting may be fun but it usually means you are missing the point. It can also be incredibly frustrating as you look at some magnificent almost microscopic details in a stroke and wonder how did they do that; did they mean to, is this serendipitous, blah blah. However, for this painting, getting close serves a useful purpose-- the study of his Impasto technique. 

Most of the Impasto in Flowers is creamy tinted whites building up the pitcher with some goopy blobs and some sure strokes of deliberate speed. I especially like the way the pitcher's handle is built from the top of the curve down. Thick stroke up, move down; thick stroke up, move down; thick stroke up, move down. (Stop it, I know what you are thinking.) These overlayed motions are so clear in close observation and it is hard to miss they are the source of life in the handle. 

One flower at the center of the painting also receives the impasto, this time in light rose/violet, highlighting its pride of place while the other flowers play supporting roles with lighter single strokes. There's much more to say about the painting, especially use of color, and sureness of sparse coverage in some areas letting the beige background show through. I'll leave the rest to you. 

Inspired by this painting I thought I'd rescue an old castoff painting of mine, one I had worked on over the years like Baron Frankenstein and his monster. I like to keep my old stuff around and play with it.  Sometimes, there's a happy accident when I return a few years later. 

 Maybe its just the odds. If a monkey can type King Lear with enough time and donuts, maybe I, with enough marking on a canvas, can produce something serviceable? 

This is the old rescue painting. A mess. It had already been through 5 or 6 versions up to this point. Flowers, faces, mystery? Nope. This could be in the dictionary under "Artists have to experiment and fail to succeed." I had the first part of that equation down cold.

Anyhow, I rotated right for a vertical approach and started over. Thought about scraping... something a youtuber I follow talks about a lot... scraping old canvas for reuse... he hires specialists... I suppose it makes sense when you have a huge canvas, but otherwise?  His repeated rambling on this subject sounded like humble bragging to me:  "I fail, yes I do, but its epic and after all I paint so big... its worth it to have a stable of scrapers at my beck and call."  Ok, I get it. 

I thought about painting over the whole mess with a thick white but I didn't-- I always like to let something peak through from the past when I'm doing a rescue painting. Here's what I ended up with--

I think its pretty and I like the multilayers, energy and impasto. Its not as elegant as Matisse. Well, duh. But it has something going on. What did I learn? Scumbling can be a cool way to contrast Impasto, letting many flatter layers peep through... see right hand side especially moving upwards.  Also in the penultimate version of this painting, none of the flowers had impasto and I realized this was jarring and put too much eye on the pitcher. So, I added impasto to some of the flowers. I'm not quite sure what to call the correction. It isn't adding value to the flowers, is it? Chroma intensity? Probably best to just call it adding impasto.   Anyhow, I like the flowers forward with the pitcher and the balance overall. And the ultimate test for me... it looks good from thirty feet or one.

Thanks, and happy painting!

Herb

 

To view listing for Flowers in a Pitcher on Etsy.