More Moku Hanga and 'The Natural Eye'

Yellow-belled Sapsuckers at Houston Meadow moku hanga. Copyright 2024 by Ken Januski.

Yellow-bellied Sapsuckers, White-throated Sparrow at Houston Meadow and new shorebirds moku hanga. Copyright 2024 by Ken Januski.

 

It's been so long since I finished my last moku hanga that I've already started a new one. That is only because, as I said in the last post, I didn't want to post anything more about moku hanga until I'd also posted about how important drawing from life and portraying birds especially, but really all of nature is to me. It is the other pole of my artistic interests.

At the top is my newest completed moku hanga, Yellow-bellied Sapsuckers at Houston Meadow. I am still trying to find my way in moku hanga but I think this is the most successful yet because I'm able to both be true to the birds but also be true to art. And it doesn't look like a photo. For whatever reason that has always been very important to me. Given the rich history of art why limit yourself to imitating photos. And of course why limit nature to looking like a photo  as well. Nature is far richer than that.

For somewhere near 15 years I have applied to 'The Natural Eye,' the annual exhibition of the Society of Wildlife Artists held at the Mall Galleries in London. My very first attempt was about 15 years ago and was done because many of my favorite bird artists showed in it. I had no hope of getting in, not the slightest. I really only applied because I admired the work of members of the SWLA so much. So imagine my surprise when I found out that I had gotten in. There was then a mad scramble to figure out how to package and ship it there. And then the deadline for delivery to Mall Galleries had come and gone and it was still in Customs, something I was absolutely unfamiliar with. Soon my elation changed to despair as I realized it would probably not make it out of Customs in time for the show. And then I was informed that it had and was even emailed photos by Mall Galleries on my work on the wall, to counter I guess my disbelief!!!

In any case I've applied almost every year since except when a VAT number was first required. That's why I can't remember exactly how long I've been applying. If I'm correct the two works in second photo will be entrants for the 11th time in the exhibition. It is a cliche because I say it each year, but I am thrilled once again to be in!

Why is that? It is the quality of the work of course but what is it that I see in it? I see artistic adventurousness and a love of nature as well as a familiarity with nature. On top of that I see artists that don't settle for cliched views of wildlife subjects, or cliched methods of representation. So much of the work seems to exhibit a real attempt to portray wildlife freshly, to get some sense of the life, beauty, vitality of the wildlife and its environment. This is not easy. It is hard enough to even attempt it, but even moreso to become successful at it. Most wildlife exhibitions I see don't really even attempt it, in my humble opinion. It is so refreshing to see an exhibition of many, many artists trying and succeeding. I say most of this based on viewing the exhibitions each year online but also on having attended the 2018 show on almost every day of the 5-6 days that we were there. It was thrilling.

Above the two entries that were accepted into the show is my newest moku hanga. It shows the very first proof of the very first block. So there is much that will change. But I am trying to keep this one a bit simpler and a bit more quickly done. We shall see if that happens.

Ambition in Art

Brant and Black-bellied Plover on Nummy Island. Moku hanga print by Ken Januski, Copyright 2022.

One of the hazards of writing anything online is that eventually someone will read it. Of course the purpose of a blog, much more than social media I'd say, is to have people read it, not just like it but read it. The problem, at least if you're a person somewhat like me, and have some sense of conscientiousness, is that I may find that I disagree with what I've written, sometimes almost immediately after writing it.

What got me started on this was mentioning "ambition" in my last post. I mean exactly what I said. I missed the ambitiousness of much of my abstract work once I switched to more naturalist work. I also missed it in printmaking, especially moku hanga, at least my own moku hanga. One of the rewards of the International Moku Hanga Conference was seeing ambitious work by others. The same could also be said for the work at the annual exhibitions of the Society of Wildlife Artists, in which I've often been fortunate enough to exhibit.  Both have examples of ambitious art.

So what's the problem? Well the problem is that there is a lot of art that I like and admire that is not particularly ambitious. And there's also the problem, which I'll spare you showing visual examples of from my own work, where ambition just leads to constipation. It can become very stilted!

Leaping Eastern Cottontail at SCEE. Sumi brush pen and water brush painting from memory by Ken Januski. Copyright 2022.

The very quickly done(3-5 minutes) drawing from memory above is very exciting to me. It tries to capture, and does I think at least to me, the living leaping rabbit in front of me. I saw this rabbit at the Schuylkill Center for Environmental Education last week where it was here and gone in less than 30 seconds.  But is this drawingt ambitious as the term is usually used in art? Probably not. But what could be more ambitious than trying to get a feel for the actual encounter with an animal, or a person for that matter? But I didn't consider it ambitious when I did it. It was just something that I wanted to do. And I think that there is a lot of similar art, though probably much more 'realistic' than mine, which couldn't care less about ambition but just wants to capture something of what it sees, and perhaps feels.

On the other hand I think that there is a large audience for art that mainly values the subject, in my case animals most of the time, but has little or no reaction to how it is portrayed except perhaps by a photographic yardstick. "OMG I thought it was a photo!!" Though this is an honest expression of appreciation most times, or so I'd guess since I've never used it myself, it probably is not exactly welcome to the ears of the artist, unless he or she is trying to imitate a photo.

Many artists, and I'm sure also musicians, actors, and also craftsmen of whatever sort, can get bored with the language/tools they've been given to. work with. Almost as soon as they put pen to paper, chisel to stone, tomato sauce in pan, etc., etc. they fear that they're creating a cliche. I'm sure this doesn't affect all artists and craftsmen but I think it does affect a lot. Those artists want to refresh their art. What they do is first disliked my most, even their peers, eventually accepted by their peers, then by the general public, then appears on shopping bags and in commercials, where it is not even truly seen or heard anymore and some new artist will try once again to freshen the medium he uses. This is what I would call the good side of ambition in art. It really is a passion to express something that the language of the art currently doesn't seem to be able to say. (As and aside I most recently read about this in an explanation of Charlie Parker and his music. He wanted to play what he heard in his head but wasn't being played by anyone else). That is ambition born of passion.

There's also ambition I'm afraid born of the academy, and every age has its academy, though it may not know what it is. The Impressionists were the enfant terribles of their day, reacting against salon painters. But every age has an academy and many artists are ambitious within the constraints and goals, spoken or unspoken, of it. This to me is a bad type of ambition because it really is just art that tries to mimic other 'successful' art of its time. I'm sure most artists can think of examples of artists they know, sometimes successful ones, who seem more to be copying more or less someone who is currently successful, rather than developing their own artistic voice.

I haven't been to art school in ages so who knows what is taught today. But I wouldn't be completely surprised to hear at least some teachers suggesting that artists develop their own voice. This is something I'm pretty sympathetic to but I'm not sure every artist will fare well with that goal. "Uh, oh, is this really me? Am I copying someone else? Is it slightly derivative? Etc., etc." I did spend some years in graduate school where such questions seem to turn artists into deer in headlights, sometimes including myself. I don't want to go to far afield but I would say that this can be another example of ambition in art being bad for some artists.

Perhaps some artists should just do what they love and go from there. The Society of Wildlife Artists mentions something about 'encouraging appreciation and delight in the natural world' on their web site. I think this means to highlight nature rather than art, though I could be wrong. And in some ways I think I must be because much of the art shown there is delightful, and that delight I think is created by a collaboration between artist and nature. The artist has to notice what is delightful AND find a way of expressing that. This is another form of ambition in art, but one like ones I mentioned earlier that stems from passion.

And on that SWLA note I should add that I'm quite happy to have had two of my works chosen for the annual show in London in mid-October. My new moku hanga of the Brant and Black-bellied Plover at top of this post is one of the works. The other is my next to last moku hanga: Bobolink at Dixon Meadow shown below. I was tempted to submit my more recent Nashville Warbler on Bean Trellis in Winter, which I still really, really like! But it doesn't seem to have been particularly popular  and the costs involved with shipping and couriers have made me limit my entries to just two.

Bobolink At Dixon Meadow Preserver. Moku hanga by Ken Januski, copyright 2021.

Off to London and The Society of Wildlife Artists Annual Show

Two Moku Hanga Prints and One Acrylic Painting About  To Be Shipped to the Mall Galleries

With the pandemic I assumed that the Mall Galleries in London and the Society of Wildlife Artists would have to call off their annual show. So it was a pleasant surprise to get an email in the summer indicating  that the show was on and entries could be submitted.

I always love this show, though I've only seen it in person once, two years ago. I think my work has been in it  between 6 and 8  times. As I'm somewhat rushed today, mainly with trying to get the entries shipped, I'm not going to write much  more at the moment. Suffice it  to say  that it is the one show I am excited about applying  for and  getting into. Even when I  don't get in it's both thrilling and inspiring to see much of  the show online.

But this  year three of my works  will be in: two moku hanga prints, A Frenzy of Golden-crowned Kinglets and Three Shorebirds; along with an acrylic  painting, Common Buckeye  and American Lady. The photo shows them just before I  get ready to pack them up and send  them off.

More later..................

 

Continuing with Moku Hanga

Avocet and Moorhen at Minsmere.  Moku Hanga by Ken Januski. 6"x4", 2019.

I don't think that there are any excuses for the huge gaps between my blog postings. Suffice it to say that the lack of  comments, overabundance of  spam, and other online outlets all took their toll. Nonetheless I  hate to let  this  blog  just die, especially as it's sort  of  become a  blog about  my progress  with moku hanga. So with that said  here are  my two newest prints.

Above  is a  6x4 inch print of  an Avocet and Eurasian Moorhen  that we saw at Minsmere RSPB  last year on our trip  to England for  'The Natural Eye' show  of  the Society of Wildlife Artists. Below is  the newest print,  a  4x6 inch print  of a Great Crested Flycatcher, motivated as you might expect by seeing  some of  the first  returning birds  of  spring.

Great Crested Flycatcher against Blue Sky.  Moku  Hanga by Ken Januski. 6"x8", 2019.

Technically speaking I'm not sure why anyone would take up moku  hanga. There are so  many things  to consider  and so many things that can go  wrong: paper  that is  too wet or  too dry, bad paper, paper with too little or too much,  paint  that is  too  wet  or  too dry, too splotchy or  too saturated, smudging  everywhere, colors that don't print the way I think that they will,  wood  that  is drier than I'd like  and  breaks  as I'm  carving a  crucial  line, etc.,  etc.,  etc.

Some love  moku hanga I'd guess because  of  the  great moku hanga art  that was done in Japan during  its heyday. I admire  it, both artistically with hardly a  thought of the technical difficulties, but  also for  the incredible technical craftsmanship.  I understand why artists want to continue that noble  tradition.

Others  today love  it  for a variety of other reasons  but I suspect  one  of the top ones  is  that it  is largely non-toxic, i.e. safe,  and because  it  is  so  connected  to  nature.  The paper is made  from plants, the baren  often  is  made  largely from bamboo. Only perhaps  the watercolors  and/or  gouache  used by many might have some  man-made ingredients.

For me  the safety is  important. When I switched,  to a  large  extent, from painting to  printmaking  around 10 years ago I was thrilled by printmaking, all done without a press. But  I was bothered by the toxic fumes of  the paint/ink solvents. Did I  really want to use  them?

I also  found that I much admired  some  contemporary moku hanga, used as a means of modern expression.  I'd guess that the last two, safety and exciting  examples, are what got me started.

But what kept me going, especially after the trials  and tribulations  of  the first  couple of  prints,  was  my understanding  that I  was beginning to get  control  of  the medium. It was  starting  to be a  useful  tool. At some point  your  artistic medium has  to start seeming like  a useful  tool, one that helps  you  do  what you  want, rather than  a constant  opponent, one that you wonder  if  you  can ever best. Oddly enough that happened  with me.

There are  still  numerous  technical mistakes  and difficulties  with my moku  hanga prints. But I'm comfortable  enough with it, and also  know what rich possibilities it has that I've come to feel  somewhat comfortable with it.

Too much of my experience  with printmaking has been reminiscent of  battles. I'm often happy with the results  but never relish the process  and regret how  many prints have blemishes which necessitate  discarding them. That seems to be, finally, less the case with moku hanga.

I'm not going to say too much about these two prints themselves. In both of them I'm trying  to  find a  contemporary artistic  vocabulary to express what I  want, and also to use  the subject  of birds, insects, nature and the environment. Even with perfect mastery of a medium that is still a  large  task. How  do you  take  traditional,  some might  say ancient, subjects and make them fresh? I find that moku hanga  has helped  me to do that.

Back in the SWLA Again

Ruby-throated Hummingbird and Turkey Vulture. Two-block Reduction Woodcut by Ken Januski.

I'm quite happy to be able to once again entitle a post with the words 'back in the SWLA.' For those of you who don't know it refers to the annual exhibition of The Society of Wildlife Artists at The Mall Galleries in London, Great Britain.

Anyone who follows this blog knows that I have a real love/hate relationship with wildlife art. The love part of it can be seen very reliably in the work of the SWLA and in their annual exhibit.

I've never seen it in person and once again this year, mainly due to lack of proper planning on my part, will miss it. And each time I see an online gallery of some of the work I realize what a great opportunity I'm missing.

But for anyone else you can, if you're not near London, take a look at The Natural Eye - 2016. Each year it again gives me hope for wildlife art! My print is for sale on page 5 of the online gallery.

Ending the Proofing, Previewing 'The Natural Eye'

Ruby-throated Hummingbird and Turkey Vulture. Late Stage Proof of Two-block Reduction Woodcut by Ken Januski.

I'm down to two proofs now. That is the number of test proofs I have left in order to continue to proof as I finish off this two-block reduction woodcut of the Ruby-throated Hummingbird and Turkey Vulture along the Manayunk Canal, seen about a month ago.

For anyone unfamiliar with reduction prints the photo below might be illuminating. As I print each color I either carve it away so that it can't be printed or proofed again, or I cover it with another color. In any case once a color is done it is completely done. So above I printed the yellow first. But at this point there is no way to print it again. If you look below, at the left side since it prints in reverse, you can see that there is almost no wood left. It's all been carved away. You can see the few raised aras where I printed the newest rose color.

When I start such a print I begin by printing numerous proofs. So for instance I started off with between 16 and 24 proofs of the yellow. As I experimented with other colors I proofed them, When I printed a configuration I was happy with I proofed the remaining proofs in the new configuration. But each failed experiment, or experiment I decided against, is a proof that can't be continued since it no longer looks like the print. The number of proofs gets smaller and smaller as I go on. Now I'm down to just two!! That means that if I decide to keep the rose color above and print as is I'll still only have two proofs left to test the final black color and any other last minute changes I'd like to add. Those will be minimal at best because as you see below there's almost no wood left to print on the color block below.

Color Woodblock of Two-block Woodcut Blocks. Photo by Ken Januski.

Nonetheless I'm happy with this. It will change a bit from the proof at top in that I'll print black on top of the new rose color rather than the opposite as I did at top. I only did that because I'm so low on proofs and I knew that the rose area was so small that I could proof this way and still get a good idea of the final results.

In many ways the rose is the most important area of print. All along, ages ago when I started this I hoped that the rose of vulture's head and honeysuckle would unite the print. And yet I couldn't print them until near the end since they were such small areas. So all along I haven't been able to test what they might look like. I just had to hope they'd look okay when I finally got to this stage. And I think that they do.

Something else looks okay, maybe even better than okay. That is the online gallery of much of the work, including my own of the 52nd annual exhibit of the Society of Wildlife Artists, The Natural Eye -2015. If you scroll down to middle of page to the 'Featured Artwork' section you can see 10 pages worth of fantastic art that will be in the show. My own work is on the fourth page.

I'm sure any readers that continue to read this blog realize that I often spend time flogging the dead horse of much wildlife art, especially that based on photos. As a positive answer to those who disagree I always point to this show, a fine example of vibrant, lively wildlife art!

Thrilled to Be Back in the SWLA

American Goldfinch Eating Thistle. Multi-block Reduction Woodcut by Ken Januski.

Mergansers and Grebes on the Schuylkill River. Multi-block Reduction Woodcut by Ken Januski.
 

It's been two years since I applied to the Society of Wildlife Artist's annual exhibition, The Natural Eye. This was for financial reasons and nothing else. It had just cost too much money between entrance fees, shipping, courier fees and import tax in 2012 when I exhibited three works I believe.

So foolishly I didn't apply the next year, which just happened to be the 50th anniversary, though I didn't realize it. To make a long and oft repeated story short I applied again this year. And I'm happy to say that the two reduction woodcuts above will be shown in the The Natural Eye - 2015.

I believe it was also in 2013 that SWLA and Mall Galleries started showing many of the works in the show online. It's the type of wildlife art I really like and it made my absence all the more bothersome. I'm not sure if the works will be available online this year but I expect they probably will and I'll post something when I do.

I don't buy too many books on wildlife art, partially because there's so much of it I don't like. But I'd guess 50% of the books that I do have are by artists who are members of the SWLA. I always have to tell myself I'm not dreaming when I realize that I'm exhibiting with many of the wildlife artists I most admire.

This is particularly hard to believe when I happen to look back at my very first bird art, done in late 2006. It was startlingly bad, though that is probably true for most people when they start to learn anything. Still I have to feel, even if only briefly, a sense of accomplishment nine years later, most especially for exhibiting with SWLA.

Marbled Godwit and Lesser Yellowlegs. Watercolor by Ken Januski.

It should have come as no surprise to me that as soon as I posted the last post about not working from photos that I'd experience a bird that I wanted to take a photo of, and that I wanted to portray using the photo. Such was the case with the Marbled Godwit above, our first one seen in Philadelphia, seen at Heinz NWR about a week ago. There were numerous yellowlegs around him and I've included a Lesser Yellowlegs in the foreground.

I also started a sumi brush pen field sketch of the Marbled Godwit but no sooner had I started on it than some people stood in front of my scope in order to see the bird themselves. I'm sure that they didn't realize it so since we'd been there awhile taking up space that other observers might have wanted to us we moved on. But I was happy to get as much down as I did. Below him are some House Sparrows seen outside my studio window.

Marbled Godwit and House Sparrows. Sumi Brush Pen Field Sketch by Ken Januski.

I'm trying to be a bit better about field sketches in my new sketchbook. Below are two sumi brush pen field sketches from today and last weekend: a Gray Catbird eating berries from Hercules Club today, and the first Palm Warbler of the year, western race, seen at Dixon Meadow Preserve. I had to do the warbler from memory since he flew moments after I sat down and pulled out my sketchbook.

Palm Warbler(western race) and Gray Catbird Eating Berries of Hercules Club. Sumi Brush Pen Field Sketch by Ken Januski.

I have had a chance to use my new camera recently and so, in a very rare post, am showing some photos that I've taken. They should all be identified in the captions.

Upside down Northern Parula, seen along Wissahickon. Photo by Ken Januski.

Osprey with Fish at Morris Arboretum. Photo by Ken Januski.

Palm Warbler(western race) at Dixon Meadow Preserve. Photo by Ken Januski.

Rose-breasted Grosbeak at Morris Arboretum. Photo by Ken Januski.

Eastern Bluebird Eating Berries of Hercules Club at Houston Meadows. Photo  by Ken Januski.

To Neither Paint Nor Print Nor Bird

Juvenile Baltimore Orioles at Houston Meadows. Sumi Brush Pen and Watercolor by Ken Januski.

Last Friday I learned that the work I submitted for Society of Wildlife Artists 52nd Annual Exhibition had passed the first stage. That meant they had to pass the second judging in London to get into the show. That in turn meant a whole lot of logistics: finishing matting and framing, finding supplies with which to ship, contacting an art courier in the UK, etc., etc., and then getting everything off, without breaking the bank, on a very short deadline.

That coupled with a vet appointment and then a cat emergency have made the last week or so incredibly hectic. There's been no time for birding, painting, printing or much of anything.

But I got the works shipped off on Wednesday and Jerene and I made some progress on the cat emergency later that day. That of course is when the car AC starting overflowing liquid into the front of the car but that emergency was taken care of yesterday.

So FINALLY, this morning I birded Houston Meadows. There were three juvenile Baltimore Orioles feeding quite openly in one area, mainly on insects on some saplings. I got a kick out of them, and not finding anything more visually compelling, I decided to do this quick 12x16 painting sumi brush pen and watercolor.

I knew that given the scale of the birds that they wouldn't get much attention or detail. But my plan was to make their bright color help them to stand out. This isn't a very developed piece. I probably only spent about 2 hours on it. And I may do a bit more. But basically it's just a quick piece to celebrate my life getting back to normal again.

Now let's just hope for success with the SWLA. Due to the extraordinary expenses involved I didn't submit to the show in 2013 and 2014 after having been in the 2011 and 2012 shows(much to my happy surprise). But as time has gone on I've realized that there is only one place that I really want to show: SWLA. It's sad that this is the case. But it certainly is. There is an adventurousness and a familiarity with nature in the SWLA work that makes it extremely appealing. So I've decided that it is worth all the effort and expense. Now it's just a matter of waiting for the results to see if I'll be in this year's 'The Natural Eye' exhibit.

Not Loafing, and Not at SWLA Annual Exhibit 2014

Baltimore Oriole at Tent Caterpillar Nest and Black Skimmers. Thumbnail Pencil Sketches by Ken Januski

Black-throated Blue and Green Warblers and Bonaparte's and Laughing Gulls with Forsters Terns. Thumbnail Pencil Sketches by Ken Januski.

 

First things first: I'm never much bothered by not getting into the Birds in Art Show in Wisconsin each year. Sour grapes you might say but you'd be wrong. At this point it's hard to even want to get in. The catalog, which is all I've seen since the museum was closed the one day I tried to see the show, is so disappointing year after year after year that I've lost my enthusiasm for either applying or being accepted.

However I have been in two of the Society of Wildlife Artists Annual Exhibition in London, UK, in 2011 and 2012. Those shows I was excited to be in and would have been sorry not to have been in if I'd not been chosen. In fact I had no expectation whatever of actually being accepted. When I saw the video of last year's show, including the talk by David Attenborough I was doubly sorry that I hadn't applied for the 2013 show. There was only one reason that I didn't apply - the approximately $500 I paid in 2012 to have the works stored when they arrived in the UK until the official drop off days and then transported there and picked up again if they didn't sell. This did not include the shipping costs of about $100 each way that I decided I could live with. But a total bill nearing $1000 and no sales was just too much to pay for the prestige, and to me it surely was prestige, of showing at the annual exhibit.

But this year I decided to try again. The reason is simple: there is nowhere in the US that I know of where I'd like to show my work. Birds in Art unfortunately is not the place for me. I wish it well but my reaction to the catalog year after year tells me how foolish it is to apply. On the other hand every time I see works from SWLA members and from the annual exhibit it's like a breath of fresh air. This is a show worth getting rejected from. It is a show worth trying harder to produce work that will be accepted. I don't at all feel that about Birds in Art.

So to end this tangent I decided this year I would pay the extravagant prices to try to get in. That is until I learned that I now needed to have a Tax Representative in the UK in order to apply. I don't blame anyone for this. It is probably a necessary complexity of international trade and international exhibiting. But for someone like me it is just too much, in both monetary and bureaucratic costs.

Today I got an email from the Mall Galleries where the show takes place. That included two links to the upcoming show for this year. SWLA Browse and Buy shows work that can be bought online. In addition the SWLA 2014 Online Catalog can be seen at the second link. This is what wildlife art can and should be, at least to me. I wouldn't mind getting rejected from a show like this. The director of the Leigh Yawkey Woodson Art Museum, which inaugurated and has hosted Birds in Art for years, recently suggested that artists who didn't get in needed to just work and try harder. I think this advice was well meant but I think it's just wrong. Some types of art will never get in and I wouldn't be surprised if many of the artists who do show in Birds in Art would not be accepted into the SWLA or their annual exhibit. Unfortunately for me the type of show I aspire to be in is thousands of mile and thousands of dollars away, though I'm sure the reverse is also true and there are some European artists who'd be much more comfortable with Birds in Art than with the SWLA Annual Exhibit. It is a sad truth.

Now to my loafing. It might seem like I'm just not doing much artwork these days. I am spending a lot of time birding and in doing so looking for subjects for new prints and paintings. I've really enjoyed all the sparrows I've seen recently and in particular all the Purple Finches. But I've also been looking through photos and sketchbooks for new subjects. I always do this and it's a time-intensive process, one where even I think I might be loafing.

After you've done art for awhile I think that for many it is a constant change from contemplation and thought to work and back and forth again. Just working without much thought may work when you're younger but at some point I think that many artists don't want to repeat themselves and end up thinking about what they want to do next. But too much thought is bad as well, probably even worse, in that it can totally shut down an artist, like a deer in the headlights scared to go this way or that.

Recently I've realized that doing small thumbnail sketches of ideas that pop up as I look through my photos and sketches is a good way to not get lost in thinking, to work while also deliberating. That is what I'm showing at the top. None are finished works and weren't at all intended to be. But they are me working my way towards my next painting or print, the one that will be showing with SWLA in 2015. Well maybe........................

Faster Than a Speeding Skipper

Zabulon Skipper. Two-block woodcut with watercolor by Ken Januski

Zabulon Skipper. Two-block woodcut by KenJanuski

My reduction linocuts take a very long time to do and can be quite exhausting. Out of curiosity I checked on the hours spent on them and they average between 40 and 60, not counting the many hours spent trying to decide on a subject. After the last couple of reduction linocuts I vowed to do something simple but still ended up getting involved with complicated, time-consuming linos and/or woodcuts.

Not today. The two-block woodcut immediately above took 3.5 hours from the first cut in the block to the final cleanup. It's not exactly what I envisioned but I wanted to do something simple and I wanted to try a grab bag of Shina plywood cutoffs that I received a week or two ago.

This print, done on leftover Rives Heavyweight paper, is about 4x5.5 inches. I printed and hand-colored it in an edition of 5.

Along with dragonflies Jerene and I have continued to develop our interest in butterflies. One that we see quite often is the Zabulon, pictured above. The colors really should be orange and brown not red and black. Still I think it gives an approximation of the butterfly.

When I started it I thought about just doing a one color print in black and then hand-coloring the prints with watercolors as I did with my Osprey at Cape May lino. But I just couldn't resist trying  to get the orange by carving the butterfly on the reverse side of the black woodcut. Of course that's not really very orange. But I might just try some watercolor and see what happens.

Printmaking can be both fun and work. By the time I'm finished with a complex reduction lino I think of it as work. This was fun.............

24 hours later and I realized that I just wasn't happy with the colors in this. So I added a touch of watercolor to one of the five prints I pulled. It's at top. It looks better but still not as good as I'd like. I may eventually redo this as a slightly more finished print. I will keep it slight though as I'd like it to stay fun.

Speaking of fun that is generally my experience in observing nature, especially birds. That's not always the case in situations where the weather might be miserable for instance. But normally it is fun and full of excitement.

When I turned to wildlife art for my own subject matter I was hesitant because that sense of excitement seemed missing most of the time in the work that I saw. That changed when I first read Drawing Birds by John Busby. I was reminded it of this again when I saw an announcement for some David Measures exhibitions at the Society of Wildlife Artists web site.

Other artists have suggested that I turn my love of dragonflies into work from life. But how? They seem even more active than birds. The David Measures work shown in the link gives the answer, and captures all the excitement of seeing dragonflies on a sunny day.

I wish I were showing in the Annual Exhibition of the  SWLA this year. Work was due for the jurying over a week ago. But I didn't apply. Much as I'd like to be in it the extra fees required to have a courier store it and deliver it to the Mall Galleries in London on a specific date was prohibitively expensive. That's not to mention the costs of shipping the work itself. I paid all of these fees last year but even if I'd sold everything I probably would have lost money. And I didn't sell anything. And then there is the morass of customs.

I'd resigned myself to not showing this year and wasn't going to write anything about it.  But seeing that announcement for the David Measures show reminded me of how appealing it is to show there with artists like the late David Measures.

Rescued by Rembrandt

Solitary Sandpiper at Morris Arboretum. Conte sketch by KenJanuski

I haven't been showing much here recently mainly because I'm of two minds about it, or more likely three or forur or five. In other words I've got too much thinking and second-guessing going on.

I first experienced this as a graduate student in studio art at the University of California at Berkeley. One advisor would come in, talk about my work, and often suggest certain changes. Within 24 hours another advisor would come in and do the same. Almost inevitably some of it was directly contradictory.

The end result was that I had to think for myself, sift through all the information and decide what I wanted to do. This wasn't too difficult because I've rarely painted to please others. I paint what I want. Still when you get opinions on your work they always continue to rattle around in  the back of your mind, like nagging little voices.

This isn't necessarily bad. It probably helps to confirm me or anyone else in their own decisions. Years ago I  think I startled some of my friends by saying that artists and CEOs were similar: they both had to listen to others but eventually  make their own decisions, and  live with the consequences. I'm not sure how many  CEOs would agree, thinking I assume that what they do is far more significant. But for good, serious art I think the decision making is similar.

In any  case I've had a lot of thoughts rattling around in my head recently. This was compounded when I got two emails within a 10 day period regarding  my work. One was from a well-known  artists organization. It offered a critique of my work,  very complimentary toward some of my linocuts, and fairly critical about others. All of this was done with the best of intentions and was overall quite complimentary. But the words hurried and pay more attention to anatomy still are in the forefront of my mind.

On the other hand I also received a completely unsolicited email from someone who'd seen my work online and very  much  liked it, especially the warbler portrayals. She normally didn't like wildlife art but to her my work seemed an exception. Since I entered the world of wildlife art with great foreboding, not liking much of it myself, this truly rang a bell. It was very appreciated.

Unfortunately now I think of both of these every time I touch pen,  pencil or brush to the surface. Should I worry about anatomy or not? When does anatomical accuracy, especially that of surface rather than underlying structure,  hurt rather than help the artisitic quality of the work?  Just as in graduate school both views are valid and valuable. I just have to decide what's true and what's important to me.

Another factor in my indecisiveness,  though to a lesser degree, was another rejection from Birds in Art. Yesterday I happened upon two blog posts alro regarding rejection in BIA: Sandra Blair and Susan Fox. I'm getting used to being rejected there. The one difference I think with me is that I expect it. And I also don't mind it all that much.

Why? Well unfortunately I'm never really all that thrilled with what I see in the catalogs. I know that it's heresy to say this. And I'd prefer not to say it. I've been included in the last two Society of Wildlife Artists shows in London. I won't this year because I just can't afford all of the costs involved. So I won't apply. But if I'd been rejected there I think it would bother me much more. Some of the artists I most admire are members of the SWLA. It would bother me not to be in. But I'd also see it as something to strive for, a prod to get my work good enough to show with artists I admire so much. Sadly this is never the case when I look through a BIA catalog. I never feel the same desire to work harder. Instead I feel it's best not to apply, that I'm wasting my time and money. Only working in a style not true to myself will ever have a chance of success there.

Some of those SWLA members, and other artists I very much admire,  also show in Birds in Art. But for whatever reason the catalog just always leaves me cold, even though it's a very high quality production.  Every year I flip through the catalog, not reading anything, just looking at pictures  to see what strikes me. It's the same way that I view big museum shows. First I want to see my immediate reaction. Later I can see what my  reaction is after being filtered through the text, ancillary information, etc. Almost without exception I'm not moved by anything I see in the BIA catalog. Only afterwards as I look at it for the second, third, or fourth time,  perhaps after reading the text as well, do I see the worthiness of the work. And I really do. I can eventually find much to admire in most of what I see. But every year I wish it would just hit me the first time through. I'm afraid I'm just on the very periphery of the type of art shown in BIA. This in turn reminds me of the recent appreciative email about my warbler works. Perhaps I have a very, very small audience, one that also would often be left cold by the BIA catalog. (One day later there is something I should add about the catalog. I've always very much enjoyed the essays that introduce the catalog when there is a Master Artist that is featured for the year. Whether it's artists I already like or ones that I'm fairly lukewarm too I almost always end up with a greater appreciation for the artist and their work when I'm finished reading it. In some ways this makes the entire catalog worthwhile even when I'm disappointed in the work that is actually in the show.)

With all of this in the back of my mind I've done various studies recently, most for possible linocuts. And I've looked through my  photos and sketches,  over and over and over, looking for a new subject. None have led anywhere. Too many voices rattling around. How can I do the type of wildlife art I want to do? Should I continue to do what I want to do, or should I try to go more in the direction of what I think someone else wants? This always seems like a mistake to me to I continue to work towards doing what I want to do, towards what looks good and fresh to me.

Then for whatever reason, possibly this recent post at The Best Artists, I got out Volume One of The Drawings of Rembrandt by Seymour Slive.What a breath of fresh air!! Though I admire all of Rembrandt's sketches it was the animals that struck  me most this time. Who has done better sketches of lions? Who has captured the feeling of a lion like this? The same is true of people. If you  look at a Rembrandt sketch you often see that just one line functions as a nose. A hand might almost seem to be a blob. BUT it reads as though it is a hand,  with real weight, attached to a  real moving body. Sometimes that hand will seem heavy as a five pound sack of flour. At other times it will seem as light as a  feather,  ready to waft off in the breeze. This is what Rembrandt captures with just a few lines.

Out of curiosity I also got out the only other Rembrandt book  I own, called The World of Rembrandt, from  Time-Life books. Both of these are very old by the way. Though I've studied Art History at both Berkeley and Cornell Rembrandt always escaped my attention. I have no idea why especially  as  I bought both of these  books long before I attended  either school. I can only guess that I saw his drawings somewhere when I was  very  young and decided I needed to see more of them. In any case the Time-Life book also includes paintings and in them too  you can see his incredible ability to capture the life of what he paints. He seems to have a physical empathy for everything he sees.

I think what really  hit me over the head in  looking at his work was how different it was from  work based on photos, particularly that of so much wildlife art. I did find one sketch of a Bird of Paradise, the only bird in the book as far as I could tell. It's not my favorite but still I like it. Today though  most artists would render every  feather. They wouldn't capture the entire bird. So much wildlife art crops out the full figure of a bird and instead focuses on the surface details of just one part of the bird. I prefer to see the whole bird, to see it as a living thing. I can of course only make the wildest guess as to what a contemporary Rembrandt would look like. But my guess is that it would show the same sense of liveliness and empathy for the subject portrayed, not in a cute, endearing way, but in a way that seems to actually feel the physical pose of each subject portrayed.

Female Rose-breasted Grosbeak. Watercolor sketch by Ken Januski

To make a long story short, well more or less at this late stage of the game, I've tried a couple of broader works since looking at Rembrandt. One is a female Rose-breasted Grosbeak, done from a photo of a bird seen at Magee Marsh about a month ago. I deliberately avoided using a pencil sketch and forced myself to work  more broadly, more like Rembrandt. I also tried the large Conte drawing of a Solitary Sandpiper at top of post, also based on a photo of a bird seen at Morris Arboretum earlier this year. It was incredibly refreshing to force myself to avoid sketching in all the information that was shown in the photo.

Great Blue Heron and Singing Acadian Flycatcher. Field sketch by Ken Januski

It has been non-stop rain here for the last few days so I've done little outside work outside of this sketch of a Great Blue Heron and singing Acadian Flycatcher, done in between storms. But when I next head out I think my Conte crayons will be with me, and Rembrandt rattling around in the back of my head.

Wild at Art - Here and Abroad

'Linnets Feeding on Sorrell Seed(detail)' by Kim Atkinson - 2012 SWLA Announcement


Late this week, after returning from our trip to Cape May, I was pleased to find a small package of five announcements for the Private Opening of the Society of Wildlife Artist's 'The Natural Eye' Exhibition at the Mall Galleries in London during the last week of October. Only fear of some sort of copyright infringement prevents me from putting up a photo here. Suffice it to say that an annoucement that includes the work of Tim Wootton, Chris Rose, Michael Warren, John Paige, Harriet Mead and Nik Pollard is a thing of beauty. It also explains why I'm thrilled to be in the show. After posting this I noticed another site that used the photo above from the Mall Galleries web site. This seems to be the official announcement. Kim is another artist I greatly admire who is a member of SWLA.

Then just yesterday the announcements for the 'Wild at Art' show at Manayunk Roxborugh Art Center arrived. This show opens three days after the London show. A photo is at top. I'm showing with other Pennsylvania artists Lynnette Shelley and Melanie Fisher. All of us use wildlife in one way or another in our art. It should be a very good show and I encourage anyone who is in the area to come to the opening from noon to 3 p.m. on Sunday, November 4, 2012.

With all the sketches of unusual birds I was able to do in and around Cape May recently I always wonder if local birding and sketching will be disappointing. Today gave the answer: no. We really didn't see any unusual birds but it was such a beautiful day, leaves and vegetation in full autumn splendor against a pure blue sky. Above are some of the birds I saw: Ruby-crowned Kinglet, Eastern Phoebe, female Common Yellowthroat, Belted Kingfisher and Cedar Waxwing. Most of thsee look fine in black and white but the Yellowthroat's brilliant throat loses something without color.

One of the things I like about so many SWLA artists is that they TRANSLATE natural experience. They don't try to produce a photo. If you're unfamiliar with the artists I mentioned above I'd suggested researching them. Additionally I think my best work is when I also try to translate my experience. Above is one of many trial sketches of Red Saddlebags dragonfly, pumpkins in field, Savannah Sparrow and deep purple Amaranth. As soon as I saw the dragonfly with it's deep burgundy wing patches in the pumpkin field I started thinking about a painting. This isn't it. Hopefully though it will be one step along the way to a successful painting.

Showing with SWLA Again

About a month ago I hurriedly finished off the framing, glass cleaning and packing of three prints to send them off to the Society of Wildlife Art's 49th Annual Exhbition at The Mall Galleries in London, UK. Above is a photo of the three prints I sent. I still hadn't switched  plexiglass for glass in the one on lower right so that's why it looks somewhat matte.

 Last year I had the great adventure of sending two prints off to the competition and having them sit in customs for weeks. I completely gave up on them being in the show because they were still in customs on the day of final judiging. Then I got an email a week or two afterwards that they  had arrived at the gallery and would be in the show after all. What a thrilling email that was!

I couldn't afford to have them sit in customs for weeks this year because they  needed to be at the gallery for final judging in about two weeks. And they  had to be delivered on one of two specific dates. That meant that I had to find a courier to recieve the shipment then bring them to the gallery on one of the two specific dates. I couldn't just have them delivered by a specific date. I really debated whether I should just forget about it. Again I was thrilled to be pre-selected, but pre-selection seemed to make it less certain of final acceptance than last year when it was only offered to overseas applicatnts. It was only thanks to a courier, PicturePost, in Britain that I decided to gamble on the expense, possible delay in customs and then possible rejection after all of that.

I mentioned this to a doctor a few days afterwards and she said: why bother? Well it's a good question. It's answered in part by this review at Making a Mark . Among the other things it mentions are 'a masterly approach to the printmaking', 'an exhibition which puts a very strong emphasis on the quality of the art and the creative process', and 'the standard of the art in the exhibition is exceptionally good.'

More than that though is the work of the members of The Society of Wildife Artists . I just really like so much of the art of its members. I really  can't think of a group of artists I'd rather exhibit with. As I've mentioned many times I've always been somewhat reluctant to call myself a 'wildlife artist.' Why? Because I found that I didn't like so much of the wildlife art that I saw, especially that which looked like it was based on photographs. The longer I've been at it though the more artists I've come to admire. And many of the ones I most admire belong to the SWLA. It is still hard to believe that last year I exhibited with artists that I  greatly  admire, including some whose books I own. Since I didn't get to London to see the show though,  it still seems a bit unreal to me. The line is on my resume but not the experience.

It's very unlikely I'll get to London to see the show this year, especially as I'm in a three-person show here at the Manayunk Roxborough Art  Center at the same time. But again I can't say how thrilling it was to find out at the end of last week that I'll again be showing at this exhibition. Of course once I found out I was in all the tribulations about cost, customs, possible rejection, etc. quickly faded away.. You just can't beat showing with the artists you most admire.

Kinglets and Cattails

One thing I forgot to mention, and it's kept nagging at me, is the emphasis on field work in much of the art of the Society of Wildlife Artists. I'm so used to it now that I forget that I take it for granted. But I just wanted to add that I think that's an essential ingredient to the liveliness of the art, at least wildlife and nature art.

The ink and watercolor sketch above reminded me of this principle. Ever since I saw and sketched the Ruby-crowned Kinglet on some cattails at Morris Arboretum in sketch below last week I've toyed with the idea of making a more finished work from it.

As I've mentioned for probably four years now Kinglets are very hard to draw in the field. They just don't sit still, at all!!! Almost as though they get paid by the flit. So the sketch above is really more from memory than from looking at the bird. I had just seen the bird but it was gone before I could put it down. So this is drawn from a mental image. That in turn is partially formed by all I've learned over the years in sketching Ruby-crowned Kinglets. I have to keep reminding myself that the wingbars start further back than I expect them to, etc., etc. The pose on the cattail was also from memory. Most cattails stand straight so already there's somehing a bit off in the sketch. But it did serve as the impulse to keep thinking about a more finished work with this subject.

Yesterday we spent much of the day at Peace Valley Park in nearby Montgomery County. We only get there about once a year. Yesterday's promise of sunny weather in the high 60s AND a selasphorous hummingbird seen the day before were enough to convince us to give it a visit. The hummingbird had not been seen since the day before and we didn't see it either. There were six Ruddy Ducks and lots of gulls but other than that the only surprise was a late season Gray Catbird.

But there were cattails! There is a lovely pond in front of the bird blind there. We sat for awhile and sketched cattails. Ever since I'd done the sketch of the kinglet and cattail I've regretted that I didn't take some cattail photos for reference. So when we found some right in front of us it seemed the perfect time to make sketches and take a couple of photos.

This morning I tried to put all that together in the ink and watercolor above. This one is done on paper from the Stillman & Birn Beta series of sketchbooks. It's similar to the Delta series in that it's a very heavyweight paper. The difference is that this is natural white rather than ivory. Both have proved very useful for this type of quick sketch that includes a fair amount of water.

As usual I'm finding this method of ink that runs when water touches it and a bit of watercolor on this paper to be a good way to work through ideas for more developed work. I'm still not sure that I can pull off a painting based on this theme. But I'm definitely toying with the idea.

A few hours after posting this I had decided to just make an acrylic from this idea. At top is the result of the first few hours work. I'm sure there's still much more to do. I'm happy to say it's based largely on sketching from life and only minimally on photos I took.

Ten Terns and SWLA(The Other Acronym)

In any field there are acronyms that often mean a lot to the few people that are interested in that particular subject but often are meaningless or actually sound like pretentious nonsense to others. I used to work in IT and as you can guess there were so many in that field that you could almost construct entire sentences of just acronyms - not that anyone in their right mind would want to.

As I've mentioned on and off over the years of this blog's existence I've struggled to combine my so-called 'fine art' background with wildlife art. I put 'fine art' in quotes because to me there's a false but nonetheless existent dichotomy in the art world between the two. If you doubt this actually occurs in practice ask yourself how many paintings with wildlife as subject you've seen in museums. It is almost unheard of to find contemporary wildlife art shown in museums.

I think this is both silly and harmful. But it's also a complex situation. There's much wildlife art I don't like. It's cute, or formulaic, or slavishly photographic. So I've always felt myself much on the far outskirts of wildlife art. And yet there's no reason at all that it shouldn't be the subject of contemporary, high-quality art. When I started using birds as subject five or six years ago I could find extremely little contemporary art with wildlife as subjects that I liked.

But slowly I found a few people. And then I found a lot. A huge number of them could be found at one place: SWLA. So for me this is an acronym that packs quite a punch. It exemplifies, particularly in the work of many of its members, what wildlife can accomplish and what it should aspire to.

SWLA stands for Society of Wildlife Artists. For years I've looked through the work of its members and admired it. When I can afford to I've bought books of their work. For others I'm waiting, eagerly, for their first books to be published.

It is based in London but accepts international members. There is also an annual competitive show, called as of last year I believe, 'The Natural Eye.' The 48th annual exhibition is on exhibit now in London.

I applied for it a number of months ago. I thought it would be difficult to get into, not to mention difficult to figure out how to ship. Because of the costs of shipping though they allow international artists to apply first with digital images. If they are pre-selected then they need to ship their framed works for the show and go through a final judging.

My work was pre-selected! So I created new mats and frames and figured out how to ship it there, without truly extravagant costs. But I didn't anticipate customs, something I've never really dealt with. To make a long story short the prints were still in customs on the day of final judging. I gave up on being in the show.

Then a few weeks ago I heard from Mall Galleries that the prints had arrived and would be in the show. I couldn't believe it! My prints hanging with some of the artists I most admire. I put a small notice at the top of my blog under 'About Me' that referred to it. But I didn't want to write about it on the blog until I knew for sure that the prints were hanging. A week ago I wrote that I was in two shows in one week, both with acronyms. This is the other one.

So I looked for reviews after the opening last week. The best I've read so far has a number of photos. But it and other reviews all showed the work with light colored mats and light colored frames. Mine had neither. Was there a framing rule I'd missed that required them? Since even pre-selected work could be refused for improper framing I began to doubt that my work was finally in it.

Today it was confirmed that it is and has been hanging at show for last week or so! I think I need to pinch myself in order to truly believe this. I only wish I could see the show myself. The review mentioned above states how high the quality is and also mentions that the printmaking is 'stunning.' I couldn't ask for much more than that, other than to actually see it.

There is one more thing that would even be better: to have gone to the opening and to have met my online friends from the Wildlife Art thread of birdforum that are also in the show. The ones I know of are: Tim Wootton, winner of Birdwatch Artist of the Year award, Nick Derry and Adam Bowley. I don't think any of them were at opening and may not even get to show. But as I said that is the one thing that I could wish for to make being in the show even more exciting. And I've never seen their work, or the work of SWLA members, in person. I'd love to be able to do that, especially with mine hanging somewhere nearby.

****
I had to choose an illustration for this post. I could have chosen two prints that are in show but I've shown them before. One in fact is now the header image for this blog. That's the Blackburnian Warbler. The other print is the black and white linocut of the Louisiana Waterthrush and Ebony Jewelwing.

But since I've nearly finished the newest lino I decided to show it instead. It's at a point now where every little change makes a difference. I think it's done, outside of printing an edition on good paper. But I need to let it sit for a day of two to make sure it's done before printing an edition.