When painting, the artist must consider what their limitations
are, what constraints given the objective they want to pull off successfully
given the time they have (sunlight...weather, etc). The aim...is to pull off a painting that works, and as I
like to say, "paintings work for reasons paintings work"...so given
we have just four values assigned this time...darkest dark, mid value, light
value plus white...the question then becomes "what can I make work here
given my limitations?"
Nature exists before you either to be slavishly copied...or
masterfully manipulated and creatively interpreted. Nature is a model...like someone sitting in a chair or you
to paint. In the beginning...cause
and effect, we like to see our time invested pay off...and imitating what we
see becomes for us a proof.
Putting our creative spin on what we see tends to come with time and
confidence, but it is an aim.
Nevertheless...when you have but four values, like it or not...we have
no other choice but to interpret.
The problem is...when artists put out all sorts of colors
and values, they've given themselves much room to interpret and try and get it
right, but there exists painting outdoors the element of a short window of
opportunity. It is fleeting. Just putting the paint on the palette
and organizing the working space will see changes in the light and subject, and
thus your emotive response to it as an artist. Some artists will never get beyond painting outdoors with
the aim to do "sketches"....that perhaps they can take inside with
reference photos and make a nicer longer timed effort. Some will learn to manage their time,
their palette, take charge and produce what they feel comfortable to call,
"finished paintings."
Neither of these aims is better than the other, just being out there before
nature is beneficial and wonderful.
What I have found over the years...is that artists must face
themselves, that something drives them, and often change or challenges incur
some risk. Artists must actually give themselves some permission to do something
out of their routine in effort to see what will come.
When I take, say the distance that I am seeing behind my
main subject or focal point, and choose to lighten the value perhaps even more
so than I see it because it will give more prominent voice to my subject in
front of it...that is an artistic choice of interpretation cognizant that
"paintings work for reasons paintings work"....
That decision to interpret necessarily becomes clearer the
more constrained our options are before us. If I have but four values to work with...and our eyes are
capable of seeing nearly 400 values...some serious interpretation and decision
making will be forthcoming.
Now...as to "paintings working for reasons paintings
work"...I refer then to the teaching and understanding of many past
masters, one John F. Carlson and his book on Landscape Painting put out in
1929, written in assistance by his wife.
His observations were that the air contains water molecules, and has a
particular density. Some regions
of the world have more density of water in the air...some less, and distances
are clearer or less distinguishable.
In that observation, if we take a dark value of what is in front of
us...and put some greater distance walking away from it, the farther away we
go...the less dark that value appears.
Walking back to it...the darkness would return. As we put distance between us and that
value...we increase the volume of water density molecules in the
atmosphere. The light from the sky
above is captured within those molecules and a hazing effect takes place. This
is a bit like trying to look thru a smudged dirty glass. The what of what can be seen has been
kept from us in whole.
Thus masses that are far away...appear lighter than what is
in front of us. Now...some say rules
are meant to be broken, and I say yes...but it is important to know what the
rule is and why it should be broken.
Then...feel freely to do so.
While we might see a darker mass in the distance, aware of our
limitations before us and that the aim is to give greater visual voice to our
nearer focal points...we have some decision making and interpretation to
do. We will break the rule of what
we are ACTUALLY seeing based on our limitations of what can reasonably be done.
In this example I made for online students at ANU (Artist Network University) ... I show a tree forward in the picture plane, finding less competition from the distance
and thus standing out strong without issue. The first week's assignment limits the students to four values, similar to what you see in this image- ...and to add, a serious restriction of optional choices to work with.
Where everything is shouting, nothing gets heard...so by quieting the
distant visual voices (in values, edges and color) from that of what is forward
(in values, edges and color)...the tree "gets heard"....
Now...our second week in the course introduces "half-tones"
which are transitions of values within EACH main dominant value. Those half-tones assist the eyes in
sliding or moving from one dominant value to the next. In truth...since our eyes see nearly
400 values...there could be other "half-tones"....but even so, Edgar
Payne teaches us that with pigment we are lucky to even suggest 40 possible
values. With time of a shorter
window before us. A reduced
palette size by virtue of our paint box.
Interpretation painting from life is necessary. You will find...that two half-tones in
each of the three dominant values (white has no halftones) will more than
enough provide pigment to create a full and rich painting.
No comments:
Post a Comment