Art & Perception

It is somewhat rare to show framed pictures on the internet. Perhaps this is because the internet is something of a frame in itself. We are here following Hanneke van Oosterhout’s still-life painting, from the drawing to (hopefully) the gallery-sold work; in real life her work benefits from the real type of frame.

Choosing a good frame is difficult. Compared to painting the painting, choosing the frame is highly constrained by one factor in particular: cost. The ideal frame can raise the market value of a painting, but before an exhibition, one does not know what will sell. Investing in the frame is therefore a sort of speculation. For the painting above, Hanneke felt she made a satisfactory choice. The physical texture of the frame complements that painted in the shells. The frame is made from pre-fabricated profile stock and was not inordinately expensive. In the photo it looks pretty good. But in real life the frame screams, “second rate quality!” The reason for this is simple. The physical texture of the profile stock, prefabricated rather than hand crafted for this frame, does not “mesh” at the corners where the profile was cut and joined together. This subtle aspect is important in real life. It undercuts the value of the frame (and the painting) for the discerning collector. I suppose the really discerning collector would buy the painting and invest in a new frame.

In the work above, the frame is hand-crafted. That is to say, someone did some work decorating the frame after the corners were joined. In the photo, this is not obvious, but in real life, it makes a big difference in the feeling of the frame, its feeling of worth. Of course, this type of frame is somewhat more expensive. But if a painting is good, a certain quality (and expense) of frame is called for, otherwise the frame drags the painting down. A good frame helps, but better no frame than the wrong frame.

The frame depicted above (sorry about the quality of the photo) is made from pre-fabricated stock, the type of frame you can buy at a normal frame-making shop. Although not “hand finished” it does not have a “cheap” feel to it. The reason is clear: the profile “meshes” at the corners, because of its simple form. A handcrafted frame of a similar profile would appear more sophisticated, but the frame above does quite well. Or does it? You comments, as always, are appreciated.

Here is an example of a painting by Hanneke van Oosterhout that is good, but still needs something. The painting is well developed for all but the fruit. I think some well-chosen highlights could bring them alive.

Another question has to do with the way the foot of the bowl is reflected in the bowl itself. In the painting it seems as though there is something wrong, but the real bowl looks like this. Should Hanneke leave it as it is, or soften it somehow, departing from reality? [Poll]

This painting fascinates me. Hanneke van Oosterhout has painted figs with personality. This is almost a group portrait. I sometimes wonder, “Does the world really need more still-life paintings?” This picture answers, “Yes!” Hanneke is pushing the limits of this genre.

Some time ago Hanneke van Oosterhout showed me an old cup that she had bought at an antique market. I thought to myself, “what a piece of junk.”

Hanneke took the cup to her studio and made this drawing. She then transferred it to a panel and painted it. Initially, there was a cloth under the cup (as in the drawing), but she was not satisfied with this, so she painted it over with white and light grays, adding a bit of raw sienna to the grey for warmth in the foreground (a color effect to bring the front part of the table/base forward).

Lately, Hanneke van Oosterhout’s still-life paintings have affected the way I look at things. I notice myself observing fruit and ordinary objects like ceramics in a different way. I see the beauty in them. Hanneke says, “That’s the way it is for me all the time. That’s why I am so eager to paint everything I see!”

This painting by Hanneke van Oosterhout is in an interesting state (click painting to enlarge it). Originally it had a black background, but Hanneke found this an ugly combination with the orange colors. For this reason, she painted the background white, in order to make a new start with it. However, she painted the white thinly, and the background is not really white now, but has an interesting cloudy quality. Although not planned, this is a perfect example of the type of optical effect that can be achieved by painting in layers. The cloudy quality that results gives a feeling of mystery to the still-life which would not be there if the background were pure white.

I don’t know what Hanneke’s plans are for this picture. It will be interesting to follow how it develops, and if she decides to keep some of this accidental background quality, or make something different. I like the cool background grays that contrast nicely with the warm grays in the objects. What do you think?

Here is a drawing of witte aalbessen that Hanneke van Oosterhout made this June (click the images to enlarge). The same day she transferred the drawing to a panel using tracing paper. Then she made an underpainting with acrylic.

The next day she over-painted all the berries with oil paint, a tiring day’s work. Why did she paint them all in one day? “Yes, the berries go away quickly,” says Hanneke. She wanted to capture the fresh, ripe quality of the fruit before the berries dried.

Some weeks later she over-painted the cup and the background in about half a day, again with oils. The result is shown here.

A detail shows the spontaneous but refined brushwork used to paint the berries — the shiny transparent skin and translucent interior. “That is the magic of these white berries, that you can look inside,” says Hanneke. “That’s why I worked so hard to paint them when they were fresh.” On the panel each berry is about 7 mm wide.

Two and a half days work is fast for a detailed painting like this. But is the picture in finished? You decide.

Posted by Alice Brasser