HOME | DD
appalucie — Path to Murren 07
Published: 2007-03-11 14:55:54 +0000 UTC; Views: 1678; Favourites: 55; Downloads: 26
Redirect to original
Description
This was an experiment to see the difference between oil and watercolor. I first used this reference photo for Path to Murren, a watercolor I did years ago.[link]
So what did I learn? For one thing, if you do a successful painting, don't do it again -- you won't recapture the magic of the first time!
I took the reference photo in Gimmelwald, Switzerland.
Oil, 16" x 20".
Related content
Comments: 69
I think both versions are lovely. I don't agree, that you should never do the same subject again. I have done some of mine twice, for various reasons. Often the second one turned out better. I've seen many artists do the same subject in different media. Sometimes the first is better, but sometimes you can learn from the first painting, and the second one is more masterful.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Lucie,
I really like this composition and color.
Also the sense of vertigo.
Very fine!
Robert Tracy
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
thank you! It means a lot to get compliments from you, since I admire your work so much.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
This is amazing.
Gimmelwald is probably my favorite place on Earth and you captured its beauty wonderfully.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i actually think both are lovely 
the only thing i can envisage is that it would get boring to do it all over again but for an experiment it turned out great
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Beautiful landscape and you have done fine with the light. But the inclinated trees disturb me a little.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Beautiful, awesome work! Love the colors for this picture!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I agree with spookowl, The colours are slightly more vivid in this one, especially in the blue of the road,but both are great and beautiful anyway so congratulations
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I really like this version of it. The colors are so much richers and the grass just looks so cool and welcoming. Almost like its begging you to lay in it and gaze at the clouds. Well done!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I prefer the second one, so I quite note agree with you sentence! (even if, for myself, I would agree indeed...)
This landscape looks to me like a fantastic place, such as a Miyasaki's movie: wonderful!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
thank you so much! I'm suddenly getting a lot of hits on this painting. was it featured somewhere?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
my plesure!
its realy beautiful piece...lovely colors...just loved it...i still did not visit your gallery, and i hope to do it soon!
here where i sow your pic[link]
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I really quite like this version. More than the other actually but I understand what you mean about doing something a second time. I don't think I could ever do it even if I thought I could improve the original.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
WOW! this is beautiful! I like it a little bit better than than the other
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I remember your watercolor, it was so loveable, but also this oil well represent your awesome skill. I do not think we have to compare, but to accept two different beautiful works
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I like this ... I have been known to revisit the same subject ... the more I paint the same subject, the less I relied on a picture and more on what I've been "impressed" with. Of course, what I really go for is to see how much it doesn't resemble the original.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I agree that the watercolor version has more snap. I don't agree with your conclusion that you shouldn't do a successful painting over again. I have, and have had them come out better than the first one. Not always, of course.
I think it's great that you did the exercise. 
You can learn a lot by comparing the two side by side and looking for what's different and what works. Here's what I see: first, the formats are different. The oil is more square. That affects the composition. There is more contrast in the watercolor, and particularly the dark shadow coming down the hill to the left is darker and larger, which gives that side more weight. In the oil the trees to the right are darker than in the watercolor and also the path is darker to the right. The cabin is also lighter. So the whole painting is heavier on the right. You get pulled to the right and then there is no place to go. In the watercolor the balance is better and there are contrasting diagonals. There is even a diagonal in the line between the sky and the clouds (not there in the oil) that contrasts with the diagonals in the trees and shadows coming from the left. It gives the watercolor a lively feel, there is a lot of motion in the painting. I also like the colors better in the watercolor. There is a bluish cast to the oil, especially on the left, that is not as attractive to me as the wonderful rich greens in the watercolor. I wonder if that's in the photo of the oil. It looks like the color balance of the camera may have been set wrong. The greens in the watercolor are really great. When I paint greens I'm usually not happy with them, so I especially appreciate how you've done them.
Just my opinions. I hope they are useful. If not, press -delete-.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
thank you so much for your comments! I think a lot of the issue is the camera. I just tried some more shots and will upload them in a few minutes. The painting is definitely not as blue as it appears in the original photo, so I'll try to play with the balance.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I really really like this version! Soft and more up close and personal, and the sky is outstanding, like Jessica said maybe just a bit more contrast, but I love it
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
OK, I think I got a better shot of it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'm a sucker for watercolours, so of course I prefer the other version. This one though... I like the overall impression but I think its weak in the left frame. There is a lack of intensity IMHO. Or perhaps it's only a slight lack of definition in the shadow area?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yeah, I'm trying to work out if that's an artifact of photography or an issue with the original. will have to sit on it for a bit.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm sure you'll figure it out 
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I think it was a photo issue. This seems to look better, what do you think?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
wow, that's a wonderful photo! instant fav.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
| Next =>