Featured New game: Yea or Nay?

I do think they are both shots at being surrealist.

 

I can go along with that. Makes 'em an even better pair. They redeem each other, I tell ya.

 

I think they are a great pair for this exercise. I wouldn't want to hang them together since the styles are different. I could see them being in different parts of the same house.

 

I could see them side by side... opposites attracting/battling/fighting-making-up...

 

Picture A
A long journey ahead. Head down, hands in pocket, - Determined, alone.

I see a hand beckoning to come back - Turn your right hand palm upward and curl your fingers. Do you see it?


Menacing faces in the clouds

There is a lot going on here. I like it.

Picture B
I don't like.
Red and green are opposites on the color wheel. I find them fighting each other.
And in the center is the symbol of death.
Not a picture I would like to look at very often.

 

I can go there with you, dear closet...
Although I can still PAIR them... opposites, conflicts and all.
Maybe reminds me of my experience as a Mexican/American chick.

 

I had not seen those things in Painting A, cluttered. I'm really glad you pointed them out!

 

I hadn't noticed that. Very cool.

 

Between the site being down and other irons in the fire, it has taken me awhile to get back to this.

Painting A is signed CUMIL. I have not been able to attribute this to any artist. I imagine it dates to the 50s or 60s. The painting is filthy so I think this contributes to the overall grey look to this. The vertical-ish streaking in the sky is definitely dirt. I probably would not have presented it but wanted something to compare to the other painting. What some of you saw as a hole or portal in the sky, I believe to be a dripping moon. A very dirty dripping moon. The painting style is interesting with bare canvas showing in places. I bought this painting off ebay many years ago and am sure I paid less than $50.00 for it. I still have it but it is promised to a friend once I get it cleaned.

Painting B has been shown here before. Good memory Bakersgma! It is by American artist, Kermit Shafer and is dated 1950. Here is the link to the previous thread where this was shown.

https://www.antiquers.com/threads/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again.2605/page-2#post-36648

As indicated in that thread, Shafer was the subject of a documentary done in 1970 that can now be found in that thread and on youtube. My painting is featured prominently at the beginning of the film along with another similar painting. Shafer's work shown after these two is more expressionistic or abstract in nature. Here is the film if anyone is interested.



The technique used on this painting is very much in the manner of Dali. Thin layers of paint give it a luminous appearance and there are few brushstrokes to be seen. It would have been laborious to paint. I can see why Shafer moved on to other painting styles. I figure he must have been in his 20s when he painted this since he appears to be in his 40s some twenty years later in the documentary.

I purchased this painting on ebay in 2009. I don't remember exactly what I paid for it but it was not a lot. The companion painting shown in the film was also listed at the same time. I bid on both but only won this one. It was listed as having some flaking varnish in the sky area and I believe it sold for less than the other one. I preferred this one so was happy on winning it. The sales are documented on worthpoint so maybe someone with a subscription could tell what they sold for.

http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/1950-original-surrealist-painting-77543972

http://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/1950-original-surrealist-painting-77543809

I still own this painting. It is not currently displayed as I have never gotten it framed. At one point I did display it without frame but packaged it away several years ago when I moved. The varnish in the sky area is still flaked and I have come to appreciate this detail as adding to the image.

It is almost as if the flaking was intentional based on where it occurs. There are no other areas where this occurs and the varnish, even in this area, is stable. The painting doesn't show up as having flaking in the documentary, so it must not be intentional. Either way, I think I will probably keep the painting as-is. I have no plans to divest myself of it at this time.

 

Thanks for bringing this one back up, Brad. I knew I had seen that before! (I have a visually oriented memory - not always perfect on the words that accompanied the visual. )

 

Brad, I realize I'm hitting an older thread, but are you saying you use either distilled water or saliva on old varnish on the Q-tip???

 

Hi Aquitaine,
When I was restoring the historical church in Brooklyn, we were shown how to restore the paintings in the Lady Chapel. The Met of NYC sent several curators to help us in the restoration. We were taught to use saliva on Q-tips to clean the seven foot paintings. We kept jars in the refrige with our salvia and other peoples who "saved" it for us. We would place an one inch square with the salvia and wait five minutes before "washing" it off. It worked like magic on removing 100 years of smoke from incense and fire damage. There were 10 paintings. It took us several months to finish but the difference was incredible. Remember no water just plain old spit. After we cleaned about six inches then we would wipe the clean area with a barely damp white soft cloth.
greg

 

I generally don't use saliva but, as Greg suggests, it is an old proven method. I do use distilled water and move up the scale of solvents from there. Water based solvents will not remove varnish so, if that is your goal, you would need to use something else.

 

You should not use water on an old painting. If it has a rabbit skin glue base, the water will soften it and as it dries, it will cause cracking. Spit is all about the ph and proteins which the water does not have.