Comments on: Painting Rungius

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 11 Mar 2012 04:17:35 +0000

Further Rungius suggestions for anyone who wants to look at his work in detail—–check out the Whitney Gallery of Western Art online digital collection. There are many great artists in their list. They have done a wonderful thing for artists, because the zoom feature on all their paintings allows you to zoom in up to 186%. They have 10 Rungius paintings. The detail in these works are just amazing. You can scroll across and look at his marvellous paint handling, and study how he builds form, value, and texture. This kind of detail is simply impossible to see otherwise, except for standing in front of the real thing. The people at Whitney who have provided this free online service, deserve tremendous thanks for such generosity and intelligent understanding of great works of art. I hope someday the National Museum of Wildlife Art does it too with their wonderful collection. It’s just a pity that the people at the Glenbow Museum in Calgary are so out of touch with reality and will probably never do the same. Wouldn’t it be fantastic to go through their huge collection like you can with Whitney’s.

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 11 Mar 2012 04:08:58 +0000

I’m a Canadian writing in reply to the comments from the people who plan a visit to the Glenbow Museum in Calgary. Glenbow has the biggest Rungius collection in the world, which they got after he died because the rich oilman who founded the museum loved Rungius’ work. The collection consists of about 1200 items, hundreds of drawings, sketches, major works, and all his correspondence and personal items. If you go there from the USA and think you are going to see a big display like National Museum of WIldlife Art—FORGET IT! All that you will see in the main gallery, will be a few paintings at most. I travelled 600 miles once, and all I could find were two small oil sketches buried in a dark corner. The Glenbow keeps virtually everything buried in its basement. Rungius is just not considered a major artist in Canada, which predominantly favours Group of Seven and Canadian artists. The people who run the museum are more into modern/conceptual stuff in their art gallery—-for dinosaurs like me, this stuff stinks and I really dislike it. It’s really too bad. If you are lucky and apply in advance, you can get permission to visit their archives and look at his work in the basement. Personally, I would like to see the entire Glenbow Rungius collection sold to an American museum like National WIldlife , where it would definitely be put on display. Glenbow doesn’t deserve such a great treasure. If you go to their website, all they have is a couple of small images and some black and white photos—-totally amateur and ridiculous compared to the American sites and museums.

By: how to make money

how to make money — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 00:20:22 +0000

You made some respectable factors there. I regarded on the web for the issue and found most individuals will go along with along with your website.

By: serrurier montmorency

serrurier montmorency — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 06:10:23 +0000

Notre quincaillerie fait uniment spécialisée dans la duplication de solutions;

By: trabajo desde casa

trabajo desde casa — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 06:43:46 +0000

If you’re still on the fence: grab your favorite earphones, head down to a Best Buy and ask to plug them into a Zune then an iPod and see which one sounds better to you, and which interface makes you smile more. Then you’ll know which is right for you.

By: how to get weed

how to get weed — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 22:03:12 +0000

Heya this is a good article. I’m going to email this to my friends. I came on this while searching on yahoo I’ll be sure to come back. thanks for sharing.

By: larry jewett

larry jewett — Thu, 29 May 2008 15:24:37 +0000

I don’t think most of the public ever had any connection to begin with.

But I sure agree that it’s hard to value something that one has no connection with or personal stake in.

It also does not help that those of us who DO value wild places and wild animals are often branded as “elitist” (extremist, nutty, tree-hugger, {feel free to insert your own idiotic, ignorant term here}) “environmentalists” bent on “locking up” land and resources for our own personal use.

Of course, there is a bit of selfishness involved - -as there is in nearly everything — but it really DOES benefit the general public to have parks and nature preserves, though they may not even realize it.

The real irony is that the people who would destroy this stuff are the real elitists. They are in it STRICTLY for themselves: for the profit. But of course, they would give the wacky Adam Smithian argument that the economic gain that is good for the one is good for the many.

By: Suzanne Ellis

Suzanne Ellis — Thu, 29 May 2008 10:33:55 +0000

In places where wild animals are not hunted, Kenya being one (not including poaching), it is much easier to observe animal behavior. Our wild ‘parks’ here also.
I do appreciate being able to go to places to take up close photos of animals. The reference photos are valuable. But the animals have no ‘fire in the belly’.
But what I was talking about is that the general public has lost its connection to the natural world. It is foreign and feared. So why would they value a wildlife painting if they do not value wildlife?

By: larry jewett

larry jewett — Wed, 28 May 2008 17:14:23 +0000

at some level, everyone was Paying Attention.

That’s it precisely and the alertness is in their entire body — ready to move into action at a moment’s notice.

And it is true of both prey and predator because if the predators were not always alert, their dinner would get away.

From what i understand, Rungius actually spent a lot of time traipsing through wild areas.

back in those early days, artists were really a combination of things: naturalist, biologist, artist– all rolled into one. Audubon is another example. So is Olaus Murie, though he is usually not recognized as a wildlife artist, but his Animal Tracks book is chock full of sketches of animals, tracks (and scat!)

I believe it is precisely the knowledge of the animals AND of their habitat that really comes across in their artwork. And i also think that is what is sorely missing in most of what is called “wildlife art” today. Animals outside their habitat are not really “wild’ at all, in my opinion. The best wildlife art really puts you into the scene and makes you feel what the animal must have felt.

By: Susan Fox

Susan Fox — Wed, 28 May 2008 02:51:44 +0000

The difference between wild and captive animals really came home to me when I was able to go to Kenya. I was watching zebras, which are a dime a dozen there, but what struck me was the way, always, at some level, everyone was Paying Attention. Of course, it was the presence of the predators. He who does not pay attention risks becoming a menu item. Compared to the wild ones, the zebras I’ve seen in zoos are essentially cows.

I also treasure my wild bear and wolf photos. They may be fuzzy and distant, but they put the animal in context and provide that memory of having seen them. I’ve got one decent wild bobcat photo. You can clearly see everything except…..the head (of course).

I do tend to do a monochrome underpainting, at least a loose one, to establish my drawing and overall value pattern before adding color. In my illustration classes at art school, one of the really useful things they taught us was a procedure which broke down the problem-solving process: thumbnails for overall composition and large masses; finished drawing: value study: color rough. And you were told to “save something for the finish”.

One doesn’t need to do every step every time, but the process is so great to have to fall back on if you get into trouble. It’s a traditional approach that someone with Rungius’ academic training would have been familiar with.