|
Multi Panel Paintings
Mainstream artistic tradition holds
that each panel of a multi-panel painting
should be a stand-alone composition.
I don’t necessarily agree with this, but
I like to have a legitimate reason to use
more than one panel; otherwise it feels
like a gimmick. When I’m constrained
by my pochade box to using small panels,
painting more than one panel for a larger
composition is a logical solution.
Over the years, I have approached
multi-panel painting in three different
ways:
|
|
(1) I’ll tape two or more panels to a
piece of cardboard clipped to the lid of my
pochade box, paint the panels together as
if they were one canvas and then transport
them safely home in my carrier case as
separate panels. (2) I select the composition,
divide it into panels and paint them
one at a time, sometimes on different
days. (3) I will return to a previous location
with a painting I did there, with the
thought of painting an adjoining panel.
When I paint each
panel separately, in
sequence, I find that
the resulting slight
disconnect from
panel to panel can
be quite engaging.
This discontinuity
can enhance that
characteristic which
distinguishes plein
air painting: the
subtle expression
of experiencing a
subject and its surroundings
over time.
|
|
Some recent observations of visual
function¹ suggest that we engage and
process visual information more intensely
when it is presented in multiple panels,
such as a view seen through an old fashioned
multi-paned window (as opposed to
a picture window). This may help explain
why multi-panel paintings frequently
enhance an image rather than detract
from it.
Then there is the question of framing.
Anyway you look at it, framing a multipanel
painting is going to be more complicated
and/or expensive. Separate, narrow,
simple frames for each panel, mounted
close by one another on the wall or hinged
together to stand alone are reasonably
simple. |
|
Single frames divided by mullions
(below) can be very effective, but the considerable
expense of having them custom
made can make them impractical.

1. From a November 5, 2000 NPR Weekend Edition interview
with Christopher Alexander, author of A Pattern Language.
|