mcleay's highlanders

**saxandpipes** · 12th July 11, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by creagdhubh

Greetings,

Very intriguing topic! Kenneth MacLeay, RSA (1802-1878), and his wonderfully painted watercolour portraits of the Highlanders of Scotland (most prominent clans at the time) and several Royal Retainers such as, John Brown and his wee brother Archibald Brown, are not out of proportion in any way, but I can easily see how people arrive at that point. Take it from me, an art educator with a Bachelor's of Fine Art in Anatomy Drawing & Oil Painting, and a Master's of Art in Education. Not attempting to show any pretense here, but I have studied under brilliant, exhibiting artists and professors of art such as, Victor Wang, Tim Liddy, Jim Dine, Hank Knickmeyer, Chuck Close, and several others, throughout my professional tenure as an art student and educator. I was classically trained in the 'old master's' style and approach to visual/studio art, which was extremely strict and regimented - an aspect I am sure MacLeay was quite accustomed to during his tenure as an art student in Scotland, England, France, and Italy.

Typically, when either painting or drawing (basically, drafting on paper or canvas) the human figure, the height is around eight human heads tall - naturally, this isn't always the case, since people come in a variety of shapes and sizes (subjective to the artist), but this is an age-old formula that most figurative artists follow, to include the 'old masters' a term I mentioned earlier; these were famous artists such as Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Vermeer, Titian, Caravaggio, Van Eyck, etc. I think to the 'untrained' eye, many of MacLeay's Highland sitters may appear to be disproportioned, but if one looks very closely and has knowledge of human anatomy, they are most definitely not.

I think this illusion of the heads being too small, the feet and hands looking a bit strange, is created by, in my opinion, the distinctive Highland garb and all of the varied accessories in which a good majority of the Highlanders are wearing -these highly detailed areas distract the eye as it moves across each portrait and appears to distort the proportions of the head and extremities in relation to the core components of the body. This is my area of expertise and visual art is truly a life-long pasion of mine, so please trust in my credentials and experience as an artist and art educator. Kenneth MacLeay's portraits are indeed proportioned correctly and expertly painted, yet let me also say this, every artist, whether a painter, sculptor, or draftsman, uses their own, unique and individual approach to creating their art - with much of this determined by their educational background and how they were instructed. It is factual, that Kenneth MacLeay attended very prestigious art schools that had curriculums based in the 'old masters' approach.

In addtion, I find it interesting that the actual size of each individual portrait was not very big, making it even more difficult and challenging for MacLeay to paint in watercolour. I believe each portrait was around the size of a sheet of 8X11" paper...small brushes required...wow!

Slainte mhath,

Hey Kyle,

I didn't know you were an artist! I am also.

What do you think:

Sorry, I know it's completely off-topic.

Cheers!

Michael

**saxandpipes** · 12th July 11, 09:14 AM

Also, they are master-copies. Just to clarify.

Cheers,

Michael

**creagdhubh** · 12th July 11, 10:41 AM

Michael,

Simply beautiful piece mate! Well done! I assume the painting is done in oils? What is the technique? To me, it appears the painting was done on a stretched canvas, either cotton duck or linen, painted in a glazing technique - layer upon layer for depth and that 'glowing' quality (think Rembrandt, Vermeer, Van Eyck...etc), good quality (artists grade) oil paint, linseed oil as the medium, an array of brushes - good quality brushes for portrait work, and a matte varnish? I may be way off, as it is so hard to tell when looking at art through a computer screen, versus in person. I absolutely love your softness and detail, though the detail isn't superfluous. I understand the subject matter is not originally yours, but that is what artists do, specifically painters, copy other artists in order to become better painters! I have copied plenty of 'old masters' paintings! Your location in the world is superb for viewing immaculate works of art as well, the Early Northern Renaissance painters and not to forget, Rembrandt!

Thanks for sharing mate,

Kyle

**madmacs** · 12th July 11, 01:26 PM

Off topic too...

Do scribbles count?

**saxandpipes** · 12th July 11, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by creagdhubh

Michael,

Simply beautiful piece mate! Well done! I assume the painting is done in oils? What is the technique? To me, it appears the painting was done on a stretched canvas, either cotton duck or linen, painted in a glazing technique - layer upon layer for depth and that 'glowing' quality (think Rembrandt, Vermeer, Van Eyck...etc), good quality (artists grade) oil paint, linseed oil as the medium, an array of brushes - good quality brushes for portrait work, and a matte varnish? I may be way off, as it is so hard to tell when looking at art through a computer screen, versus in person. I absolutely love your softness and detail, though the detail isn't superfluous. I understand the subject matter is not originally yours, but that is what artists do, specifically painters, copy other artists in order to become better painters! I have copied plenty of 'old masters' paintings! Your location in the world is superb for viewing immaculate works of art as well, the Early Northern Renaissance painters and not to forget, Rembrandt!

Thanks for sharing mate,

Kyle

Well, Kyle, you are pretty much spot on!

The whole thing was more than a year of work. It's oil on canvas, and indeed fairly high quality stuff, all from here in Holland where they've been making the best painting supplies for centuries.

I would like to say that I bought my paints and canvas from the same shop as Vermeer (I live within a 15 minute bike-ride from the centre of Delft), but I can't say for certain that I did. What I can say is that I buy from one shop, which is the oldest paint (maker) shop in Delft, and one of, if not the oldest in the country.

I have quite a few brushes, all of the flats are synthetic, which I actually prefer for that purpose, and huge selection of various hair brushes, my favourites being squirrel (for very subtle softening and blending) and sable for fine detail work. These brushes are not cheap, although I think the most expensive one I have might have been around 40 euro. All up, I'd hate to think... but I do take care of them, and they do last with some careful hand-washing.

It was a study in the old-masters' technique, and indeed is composed of several layers all building on top of the previous to produce the greatest possible depth of tone. I've found it impossible to get a decent photo of the painting, and it definitely isn't done justice on the computer screen.

The original was by a well-known and extremely talented New Zealand artist Charles Goldie, who is highly appreciated (now) and whose paintings fetch extreme prices. The picture now hangs in my parents home in New Zealand- you should have seen the look on the framer's face when I put it on the counter ;)

I am very close to some of the great works here, and I was actually at a museum this past weekend with friends- admiring Breitner, Breughel, Monet and even this:

http://www.rijksmuseumtwenthe.nl/ven...the_museum.htm

Definitely spoiled for choice!

Cheers,

Michael