tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2999230124118604245.post722842481245198206..comments2024-03-28T16:36:12.581-04:00Comments on Gurney Journey: How should I paint the light in shadows?James Gurneyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01870848001990898499noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2999230124118604245.post-75162206916989911142018-05-21T02:16:56.297-04:002018-05-21T02:16:56.297-04:00I'm always amazed how much more to a painting ...I'm always amazed how much more to a painting there is than the image you see. Great posts!<br /><br /><a href="http://your-dailyhoroscopes.blogspot.co.uk/" rel="nofollow">your-dailyhoroscopes.blogspot.co.uk</a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16611975735389601233noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2999230124118604245.post-35295087791348785112018-05-20T15:01:16.740-04:002018-05-20T15:01:16.740-04:00Great post James. I believe a simplified arrangeme...Great post James. I believe a simplified arrangement of positive and negative shapes separated by distinct light and dark values is one key to a strong picture. And inventing such a plan and sticking to it is a main avenue of artistic creativity. <br /><br />Speaking of photography, it can be similar to painting in that a choice is often made to show shadow detail at the expense of detail in the lights, and vice versa. I think this "limitation" can actually make for better design sometimes since it can be used to guide the viewer's eye the the point of interest.scottThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10033264210231543212noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2999230124118604245.post-70012324088232929912018-05-20T12:29:22.084-04:002018-05-20T12:29:22.084-04:00Apologies James. I meant James', not Jame'...Apologies James. I meant James', not Jame's in my last paragraph... TJKThomas Jefferson Kittshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12605776648016750552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2999230124118604245.post-85221681525321792652018-05-20T12:26:30.028-04:002018-05-20T12:26:30.028-04:00And Ewan, I would add to James' tips on shadow...And Ewan, I would add to James' tips on shadows...<br /><br />4. The lightest value within a shadow (mass) will not be as light as the darkest value in the light (mass). Well, almost never. While the first part is often expressed as a truism, there are rare times when you may think you see an exception, or find it helpful to your painting to violate this truism. But you should make your decision to do so out of knowledge and not by ignorance, or worse, inattention.<br /><br />5. I don't think Ruskin ever addressed my next point since he was a tonal painter (draftsperson/watercolorist, actually) and the aesthetic he championed was a largely focused upon structuring a painting with value-based distinctions – but just as the values within a shadow mass groups together, the corresponding 'temperature mass' of those same values will also group together. So, if there is a single (warm) light source, i.e., the sun, your shadow mass will appear to be cooler in relationship to the light mass. More blue or violet(ish) – assuming we are talking about direct sunlight and not indirect sunlight filtering through a layer of clouds. Are there exceptions to this warm/cool principle too? Well, yes. But again, they are subtle and must be observed directly to be fully understood.<br /><br />Why? Because shadows become more complicated in real life, especially when you wish to express the variation of temperature or color that may be reflecting into them. But if you are working from a photographic reference that has significantly altered or blocked up the shadow masses, and most photographic references will do that, then you can apply Jame's first three principles, with my following two, and end up with a credible representation of natural light.<br /><br />Then again, going outside to paint in situ is good too. ;-) <br /><br />All the best with your future efforts!...<br /><br />ThomasThomas Jefferson Kittshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12605776648016750552noreply@blogger.com