PDA

View Full Version : New Course- Elements of Form with Kenneth Vloothuis Discussion


Pages : [1] 2

Johannes Instructor
01-31-2013, 01:56 PM
http://www.artistsnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/WetcanvasLive_logo.jpg
Elements of Form with Ken Vloothuis!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/31-Jan-2013/135220-hamilton-boat-300x291.jpg

Join Ken for a rigorous study on the elements of form, of what makes something appear the way it does through the intense study of the components in light and shadow. Ken will refer to largely to Sargent’s method of simplifying the complexity of what you see into practical paintable terms. He will analyze each of the following elements and absolutely everything implied therein:

1) Highlight or light accent
2) Light
3) Local tone
4) Halftone
5) Shadow (core and cast)
6) Reflected light
7) Dark accent
Ken will also cut through all the confusion and clichés involved in the very controversial field of study of color temperature, and its subtle transitions as well as discussing alternative theories through the usage of painting demos.This highly recommended course will be a preliminary for future courses in landscape, still life, and most particularly in the challenging study of portraiture; for the artist, to have a practical theory or approach to painting form, is as necessary as the scientific method is to the scientist.

TIME: 1:00 to 3:30 PM EST.
DATES: 3 Saturdays: February 16th - March 2nd
Fee: $9.99 Fee only includes taking the live classes. Recorded videos to be sold separately. The original fee will be deducted from the retail price.
Requirements: High speed internet (aprox. 1.5 MB download speed). An optional $3.99 fee may required if you wish to avoid occasional ads on the streaming video on ustream.tv.


To register
http://www.northlightshop.com/wetcanvas-live-elements-of-form-u6481

mickisew
01-31-2013, 02:03 PM
Purchased and registered - ready to go! I am looking forward to your class, Ken!

Micki

oCDs01-711
02-01-2013, 12:44 AM
So did I! I've moved and haven't touched a brush for months. This will motivate me! :clap:

Shirley

Ken Instructor
02-01-2013, 04:27 PM
Great, everyone is in for a treat!!! Thanks for your support,
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-01-2013, 04:55 PM
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.104226759666825.9134.100002385047103&type=3

That is most updates site for my work, and it is entirely under my control in terms of its updates and content. I am thinking of creating a blog or site with more paintings, including the study of figure or gesture drawing, in case anyone is interested in that field as well...

mickisew
02-01-2013, 07:27 PM
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.104226759666825.9134.100002385047103&type=3

That is most updates site for my work, and it is entirely under my control in terms of its updates and content. I am thinking of creating a blog or site with more paintings, including the study of figure or gesture drawing, in case anyone is interested in that field as well...
Hi Ken:

Yes, I am interested in following your blog - your study at University, drawing and painting. Please count me in.

I enjoyed viewing your gallery and hope to see many more examples of your work.

Micki

HazelP
02-01-2013, 09:01 PM
Looking forward to another great class with you Ken.

Banner
02-02-2013, 09:52 PM
Interested yes please

Czechmate53
02-02-2013, 11:01 PM
Looking forward to new class. Is that last picture in the first group on your Facebook page painted at the 'Grand Canyon of Yellowstone'? Nice to recognize old haunts.

Ken Instructor
02-02-2013, 11:44 PM
Looking forward to new class. Is that last picture in the first group on your Facebook page painted at the 'Grand Canyon of Yellowstone'? Nice to recognize old haunts.
Yes, I think you are referring to Yellowstone falls. I think it is called Yellowstone canyon, I am not sure. It was a quick sketch I decided to preserve because it rained terribly on me and half the time I was struggling to keep the umbrella steady that Johannes kindly rescued me with. If it had not been for that I would have been painting in pure rain. My hands were cold, stiff and clammy, and had to use the thickest paint possible. It hardly worked. The rain actually began to pick up the paint and left a grainy, scraped or freckled look to the canvas, which I thought was terribly interesting and very expressive of the grey-purple day. I needed to get the play of purple and yellow. The canvas is an 11 by 14, though I have not figured out how to make it a larger composition. I just do not have enough info.

My upcoming course will explain EVERYTHING I know about form, light, temperature etc. After years of meticulous study, theorizing and bumping into confusion, I finally found the key to handling any situation. With this you will not even need to paint what you see, but will work from what you understand or know will work. If you understand the next course, you can help me teach you more sophisticates areas such as portrait and figure drawing/painting. But you need to understand light, planes and form. I highly recommend this because if anyone thinks of taking futre courses with me, I will always assume a certain degree of prior knowledge of my previous courses. I will always reference concepts I thoroughly explained in previous webinars. Some students give me the most loaded questions I cannot answer in a sentence, but I can lead them to the whoooole answer in other webinars. I will remind and restate key ideas, but if you do not want my answers to sound too convoluted it is because you need to understand the stuff I am slowly using to build future webinars on. I am designing the webinars in a certain sequence, so that I tackle the meticulous concepts, detail-istic or specific ideas that you need in order to benefit more fully from what Johannes and I have done. We made an agreement to leave the nitty-gritty basic (but not so basic) stuff to me; funny, since all problems in painting arise from a failure to understand this. My work load is no less. Johannes gave the golden nuggets that will be more beneficial to whoever has the necessary skills and understanding to use it, to go to the next level. What use is the 'melodic line' concept if your problems are at a more fundamental level of understanding? Can you understand form? Temperature? What a gray subject would look like under a certain light? DO you even understand light? How to make things glow? Things like this need to be tackled before expecting to deal with other more key concepts that will take the advanced artist to the elite level.
So that is that. I promise I will not fail you at this. After this course, unless there is a change of plans or learning curve as the webinar unfolds, I will give the portrait class, on building the head, then after that the features, then hands, then composition, then edges. Sargent, Zorn and Sorolla will always be discussed in my webinars, so if you are into them, you are in luck!!!!
I am Kenneth Vloothuis.... and I approve this message! ajahahah:lol:

MapperGis
02-03-2013, 09:32 AM
Yes I need this! Just signed up and going to Facebook now. Thank You!!
:smug:

mickisew
02-03-2013, 11:56 AM
"Kenneth Vloothuis" you are - and I am excited to venture on with you in the upcoming Webinars. The more we learn, the more there is to learn.

Micki

chalet_dor
02-04-2013, 01:52 AM
:clap: Purchased and registered - ready to go! I am looking forward to your class, Ken! dor:)

Facebook is unavailable at the moment.......so I will try again later.........thank you.........

debwk
02-04-2013, 04:45 PM
I'm sorry to miss this class do to other plans, but will most definitely be buying as soon as available. thank you

chalet_dor
02-05-2013, 11:46 AM
My upcoming course will explain EVERYTHING I know about form, light, temperature etc. I will always assume a certain degree of prior knowledge of my previous courses. I will always reference concepts I thoroughly explained in previous webinars. Some students give me the most loaded questions I cannot answer in a sentence, but I can lead them to the whoooole answer in other webinars. I will remind and restate key ideas, but if you do not want my answers to sound too convoluted it is because you need to understand the stuff I am slowly using to build future webinars on. I am designing the webinars in a certain sequence, so that I tackle the meticulous concepts, detail-istic or specific ideas that you need in order to benefit more fully from what Johannes and I have done. We made an agreement to leave the nitty-gritty basic (but not so basic) stuff to me; funny, since all problems in painting arise from a failure to understand this. My work load is no less. Johannes gave the golden nuggets that will be more beneficial to whoever has the necessary skills and understanding to use it, to go to the next level. What use is the 'melodic line' concept if your problems are at a more fundamental level of understanding? Can you understand form? Temperature? What a gray subject would look like under a certain light? DO you even understand light? How to make things glow? Things like this need to be tackled before expecting to deal with other more key concepts that will take the advanced artist to the elite level.
So that is that. I promise I will not fail you at this. After this course, unless there is a change of plans or learning curve as the webinar unfolds, I will give the portrait class, on building the head, then after that the features, then hands, then composition, then edges. Sargent, Zorn and Sorolla will always be discussed in my webinars, so if you are into them, you are in luck!!!!
I am Kenneth Vloothuis.... and I approve this message! ajahahah:lol:

Oh Ken......I read this and smile. I am the dumb one.........but I will be in your class..............dor : )):)

lorigina
02-05-2013, 04:55 PM
Hi. This course is just what I need. I've signed up and will be joining you on February 16th. I'm really looking forward to this class. Thank you for making this type of instruction available to me and everyone at wetcanvas, at such a reasonable cost.

Jacdesusbielle
02-05-2013, 05:24 PM
Can't wait to your next class Ken and will sign for the ones to come. So much to learn from you !.....
Please, just remember not to speak too fast for your foreign students .... TY

nougat
02-06-2013, 11:30 AM
i've registered tooo :)
also interested in the blog :)

nougat
02-06-2013, 11:32 AM
"Please, just remember not to speak too fast for your foreign students"
LOL
also to give us (me) a moment for the info to register and sink in :D

Ken Instructor
02-06-2013, 02:46 PM
I will do my best. But remember, the more I talk, the more info is released for you to go back to it over and over again in case you get the recording. Unfortunately there just isn't a simple way to explain some of these concepts, so I will try to do live demos, with a drawing pad.
Best,
Ken

chalet_dor
02-06-2013, 03:17 PM
I will do my best. But remember, the more I talk, the more info is released for you to go back to it over and over again in case you get the recording. Unfortunately there just isn't a simple way to explain some of these concepts, so I will try to do live demos, with a drawing pad.
Best,
Ken
I second what Nougat said above.
My two cents! I am really old! So I hesitated before signing up because of being so slow and that it takes months to get the demo video. By that time I have forgotten everything and lost my enthusiasm. So please slow down and give me time to think about what you just said.

I think your doing a demo, with a drawing pad to illustrate what you are saying would help immensely.

Smiles to you dor :)

Jacdesusbielle
02-06-2013, 06:04 PM
Thank you Ken. I am sure you'll do your best and I am sure it will be perfect. With demo on a pad you'll be better understood certainly. We are all looking forward to your teaching. Up above you explained what you intended to talk about. Exactly what I need ..... And quite complementary to Jo's .wonderful classes

Artz54
02-07-2013, 12:54 AM
Form, light, temperature, nitty - gritty basic stuff.... yes, that's what I need. See you on the 16th!

nougat
02-07-2013, 11:38 AM
Thank You Teach!

Ken Instructor
02-08-2013, 04:06 PM
Ok, I see the issue now. I therefore have an announcement to make. I will draw as I explain key issues or concepts too complicated to convey verbally. So as I talk about a certain point or question, I will be drawing throughout the entire webinar, LIVE.

I explain a concept, I draw it.

You have a question, I explain, and draw it.

This way it is more visual.

How can you get a better deal than that folks? It would be like you guys being just behind my shoulder as I work.

chalet_dor
02-08-2013, 07:00 PM
Ok, I see the issue now. I therefore have an announcement to make. I will draw as I explain key issues or concepts too complicated to convey verbally. So as I talk about a certain point or question, I will be drawing throughout the entire webinar, LIVE.

I explain a concept, I draw it.

You have a question, I explain, and draw it.

This way it is more visual.

How can you get a better deal than that folks? It would be like you guys being just behind my shoulder as I work.

:clap: Way to go! Thank you so much, I am thrilled dor:wave:

mickisew
02-08-2013, 09:51 PM
Ok, I see the issue now. I therefore have an announcement to make. I will draw as I explain key issues or concepts too complicated to convey verbally. So as I talk about a certain point or question, I will be drawing throughout the entire webinar, LIVE.

I explain a concept, I draw it.

You have a question, I explain, and draw it.

This way it is more visual.

How can you get a better deal than that folks? It would be like you guys being just behind my shoulder as I work.

How thoughtful of you to do this, Ken. We know you will do everything possible in order for us to understand. Only one week to go before we start - I am so ready to begin.

Micki

Ken Instructor
02-11-2013, 12:50 AM
I also forgot to mention that there will also be a painting demo of a landscape besides the live drawing. So you get both, you get to ask questions as I draw, and have me draw to answer your questions.
Cheers,
Ken

Banner
02-12-2013, 05:11 AM
I am really looking forward to your classes Ken How fortunate we are to ha ve you as our tutor

Pinklady219
02-13-2013, 08:46 PM
Way to go Ken. Is it Saturday yet???

MapperGis
02-14-2013, 09:52 AM
Kenneth, I registered for your newest class on the elements of form. I read this thread and the thread on your “Masters” class. I purchased the Masters recording.
I am retired and new to painting with some understanding which in my case means I know nothing and want to learn. I am going on the theory that the only dumb question “submission” is the one I do not ask.
The home work from “week one” of the masters was to

""submit a value study showing depth. ""

I am rushing my painting submission before new class starts and I see I referred to a large painting and of course used a small 8 by 10 sheet. With time running out, and only trying to gain understanding, I overcome my fears and post.:confused:Lois http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Feb-2013/221251-Value.jpg

nougat
02-15-2013, 01:29 AM
hello lois
welcome to wetcanvas :)

ToskaFromAlabama
02-16-2013, 09:14 AM
Hello Kenneth,

Looking forward to your class today. I'll be in the back row!

lildip
02-16-2013, 10:11 AM
Ken, it really wouldn't hurt to go slower (just for us older folks who may have trouble grasping what you are teaching.) Remember, what you don't get in with these sessions, those of us who want to learn will keep looking for more intructions It's really the quality of what you teach, not the quantity. Your father has had to repeat himself over and over to those of us who keep pestering him with questions, and he's so laid back that it's a pleasure to watch him in any action. We learn more in his instruction than any other venue I've ever seen, and i've attended many courses over the years. Patience is a wonderful virtue. thanks for letting me vet. Lildip

Pinklady219
02-16-2013, 11:19 AM
got it!

Colorix
02-16-2013, 12:22 PM
Looking forward to getting this all in *one* class, instead of trying to pick it up by bits and pieces here and there. A refresher is always good.

robert1952
02-16-2013, 12:29 PM
Hi Ken, signed up late with northlight, no confirmation/password. sent you and you dad an email with the invoice number, how can I get the password from you guys? katie white

susy q
02-16-2013, 04:10 PM
Hi Ken, very interesting class today. I wasn't able to see what happened right after the break with the shoe drawing however; in Joh's rock lesson he explains how the "thing" that is 90 degrees from the light source get the pure light...then it tapers off according in strength as the angle opens up...so I would really like to learn this concept. Could you draw a face in 3/4 light THEN change the light on the same face to top light or bottom light or lower angle so we can learn it in the above concept. Photos are more often then not in the diffused light or full flash but I would like to learn to do it with dramatic lighting even if the actual photo doesn't have it--possible? Thanks for today.

Ken Instructor
02-16-2013, 04:27 PM
There were some complications because it was the first time we tried using live drawings sessions and lecture slides. It affected the connection for some reason, but now we know how to solve it. I will post the homework in a few hours. I appreciate your patience and time. Feel free to post questions as it will let me know how much of this I need to go over next time. I will tend to your emails later on the day was well.
Thanks alot,
Ken

ToskaFromAlabama
02-16-2013, 04:35 PM
There were some complications because it was the first time we tried using live drawings sessions and lecture slides. It affected the connection for some reason, but now we know how to solve it. I will post the homework in a few hours. I appreciate your patience and time. Feel free to post questions as it will let me know how much of this I need to go over next time. I will tend to your emails later on the day was well.
Thanks alot,
Ken
Would it be possible to post the PowerPoint slides? You covered too much material to take notes. Thank you, Toska

Ken Instructor
02-16-2013, 04:53 PM
Would it be possible to post the PowerPoint slides? You covered too much material to take notes. Thank you, Toska

No Toska, that is exactly what the recording will be for when it comes out. I will go over everything the next two days since its all related.

Remember, the reason Johannes and I give these courses is because the company depends on the revenue. If that goes down, both Johannes and I will no longer be asked to give these webinars and it will be the end for everyone.


All the material seemed to be too much but it was all going back to the exact same point, if anything they were just examples. I will get the nack of knowing exactly how much to give. This is after all, online teaching, different than what I am used to in real life. I am trying something different where it is more visual with drawings. It is too hard to hold people's attention on an online class.

Post the homework here, the description is in a new thread because I know people will look for it in a separate thread. But post it here to keep it all in one. I will check both anyway in case there are lost sheep.

Thanks,
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-16-2013, 05:01 PM
Your painting lacks depth because it lacks a variety of values that show depth, coincidentally, this is also what my new course is about, that started today.
REmember, keep you foreground values more distinct, and less so as your objects recede. So emphasize the darks and lights in the bottom and less so as your planes recede.
The purpose was also to show how to create depth with objects that come together to form a mass or shape, visually. Like a flock of birds far away connecting in value with an object in the foreground, and using colors to produce depth. I think that was another lesson. It was also reviewed today in the new course.

Look for the thread of the homework for the secrets of the masters, see some examples, but keep posting here.

Best, and good luck, thanks for the submission and send me more. Go over the course again.
Ken

Kenneth, I registered for your newest class on the elements of form. I read this thread and the thread on your “Masters” class. I purchased the Masters recording.
I am retired and new to painting with some understanding which in my case means I know nothing and want to learn. I am going on the theory that the only dumb question “submission” is the one I do not ask.
The home work from “week one” of the masters was to

""submit a value study showing depth. ""

I am rushing my painting submission before new class starts and I see I referred to a large painting and of course used a small 8 by 10 sheet. With time running out, and only trying to gain understanding, I overcome my fears and post.:confused:Lois http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/14-Feb-2013/221251-Value.jpg

Ken Instructor
02-16-2013, 07:40 PM
There were some complications because it was the first time we tried using live drawings sessions and lecture slides. It affected the connection for some reason, but now we know how to solve it. I will post the homework in a few hours. I appreciate your patience and time. Feel free to post questions as it will let me know how much of this I need to go over next time. I will tend to your emails later on the day was well.
Thanks alot,
Ken

I just spoke to some members that took the class and they had no problem. Before having this information I reasoned that is must have been the drawing, maybe sucking the bandwith or something like that. But no, I was just explained that is not possible. I was confused.
Next week should not be a problem, not at least from our end.
Best,
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-16-2013, 07:41 PM
Hi Ken, signed up late with northlight, no confirmation/password. sent you and you dad an email with the invoice number, how can I get the password from you guys? katie white

did it get resolved? did you get any email?

Ken Instructor
02-16-2013, 07:56 PM
I just remembered something, someone asked if the reflected light can be as light or lighter than anything in the light. And the answer is no, optically speaking but yes if you isolate the values. Meaning, you can put the same puddle of paint you put in your halftone in your reflected light, and then add the remaining shadow. The thing is, reflected light gradates very softly, creating several in between values. While the value or separation between the middle tone and and shadow, the terminator is always abrupt. I will talk about this next class. Why does the reflected light appear not to pop out as much as the light? Remember simultaneous contrast theory? Well, the same puddle of paint looks brighter or darker depending on the surrounding contrast. Hence, the reflected light can be just as light, but looks darker because its surrounding values do not allow it to look so bright. IF it matches the light, it means there is another light source at play. Someone ask this again on Saturday, I can draw it up again.
Ken

chalet_dor
02-16-2013, 09:20 PM
did it get resolved? did you get any email?

Hi Ken................I wonder if the person filled out the registration form?

Just a possibility...........after you paid for the course, did you scroll down that page at North Light and fill out the registration form? Until you do.......you will not receive an e-mail with the password...........dor

Susan Peltonen
02-17-2013, 02:23 AM
Ken - I really enjoyed today's class. It is exciting to be learning from someone as knowledgeable as you! Your drawings were very helpful in clarifying the points you were trying to make. Thank you so much for all the time and effort you are putting into these classes. You and your Dad are incredibly dedicated teachers. I am looking forward to next week's session.

chalet_dor
02-17-2013, 02:58 PM
Hi Ken

Trying to understand you, let me see if I have this correct! This is actually where you want home work submitted for Elements of Form.

I think I was being taught to understand that what my eyes read when viewing an illustration is that the forms distance, appearance, relationships is all illustrated by light and dark, shapes, form, and color. (all of this I should already know) but don't, not really. Value, how light or dark (shadow) (light)(reflections) are most important.

All is a process to consider when we illustrate on paper for the viewer. How we illustrate it may have to be contradictory to reality because of the way our eyes and the viewer's eyes work. what experts teach us and what we learn from experimentation.

This must be understood before we can begin to illustrate accurately.

I enjoy the class because it is exciting to me trying to learn.
More later...............All this is beyond my brain from retaining and using. I would be more happy with myself if I were actually painting, rather than trying to understand theory...............

With respect, dor:)

jbath
02-17-2013, 03:08 PM
Hi Ken- could you tell again where the homework assignment for yesterday's online class is posted? Thanks. Your drawings really helped me better understand the concepts. Must be a visual learner. It's definitely challenging.

chalet_dor
02-17-2013, 03:23 PM
Hi Ken- could you tell again where the homework assignment for yesterday's online class is posted? Thanks. Your drawings really helped me better understand the concepts. Must be a visual learner. It's definitely challenging.

Here is where Ken tells us what the homework is..........
http://www.wetcanvas.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1308146

dor

jbath
02-17-2013, 05:04 PM
Thanks, Chalet dor :-)

ToskaFromAlabama
02-17-2013, 07:10 PM
Ken, Here is homework day one: I chose three portraits I felt had errors in painting the light or shadows. Toska

1. Van Gogh--I think there should have been shadow on the neck, therefore it appears forward. The nose is almost full profile, were the lips and face are two thirds. Makes it look like the nose is turning away. (He didn't follow rules anyway.)
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1146577-Van_Gogh.jpg 2. The De rola portrait of girl is really off. Can't tell where the light source is because there is shadow on right side of face, left side of upper lip, stronger shadow under right side of chin, highlight on right side of shoulder, and shadow on left neck and upper shoulder. Don't know if she is coming or going!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1146577-De_rola_portrait_of_girl.jpg
3. Finally, here is an Angelica Kauffman self-portrait. She must have had photo umbrellas to not have any shadows on the face. I think because there was so much light full on the face, underneath the hat-brim should be lighter than the white dress that is in the shadow. But it works as it is.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1146577-Kauffman_Angelica-ZZZ-Self-Portrait.jpg

jbath
02-17-2013, 07:43 PM
Don't know if I'm turning this into the right place, but here goes...
Ken,
Here are photos of my dog, Rose. She is sitting where the light shines on one side of her body and the other side is in the shadow. The shadowed sides are flat without form. Is this what you meant?
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/979056-Rose.jpg
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/979056-Rose_2.jpg

Ken Instructor
02-17-2013, 10:07 PM
Hi Ken

Trying to understand you, let me see if I have this correct! This is actually where you want home work submitted for Elements of Form.

I think I was being taught to understand that what my eyes read when viewing an illustration is that the forms distance, appearance, relationships is all illustrated by light and dark, shapes, form, and color. (all of this I should already know) but don't, not really. Value, how light or dark (shadow) (light)(reflections) are most important.

All is a process to consider when we illustrate on paper for the viewer. How we illustrate it may have to be contradictory to reality because of the way our eyes and the viewer's eyes work. what experts teach us and what we learn from experimentation.

This must be understood before we can begin to illustrate accurately.

I enjoy the class because it is exciting to me trying to learn.
More later...............All this is beyond my brain from retaining and using. I would be more happy with myself if I were actually painting, rather than trying to understand theory...............

With respect, dor:)


Yes, what our eyes tells us and what is out there are two different things, after all, out visual world (not illustration precisely), physically speaking is made up of light and the lack of it. That is it. It is a game. And, painting for the sake of painting without understanding can only reinforce bad habits or perpetuate mistakes. Artists think more than what they paint, because they need to know the next step. I can go weeks without touching a brush, but really studying the subject with a pencil. Why? I need to break my false understanding on what I am seeing so that I acquire healthier habits. See what I mean?
Best,
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-17-2013, 10:09 PM
Hi Ken- could you tell again where the homework assignment for yesterday's online class is posted? Thanks. Your drawings really helped me better understand the concepts. Must be a visual learner. It's definitely challenging.
Just send me some photos of cases where the lighting situation contradicts what we know about the object. Please explain why it applies, for a photo by itself will not tell me whether you understood this.
I need to make sure that you understand how light works in order to express volume, regardless of whether it is there or not. Also, to notice the transparency in shadows. You all should be studying shadows since the class, wondering what is going on, meditating on their appearance.

Hope that helps,
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-17-2013, 10:21 PM
Ken, Here is homework day one: I chose three portraits I felt had errors in painting the light or shadows. Toska

1. Van Gogh--I think there should have been shadow on the neck, therefore it appears forward. The nose is almost full profile, were the lips and face are two thirds. Makes it look like the nose is turning away. (He didn't follow rules anyway.)
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1146577-Van_Gogh.jpg 2. The De rola portrait of girl is really off. Can't tell where the light source is because there is shadow on right side of face, left side of upper lip, stronger shadow under right side of chin, highlight on right side of shoulder, and shadow on left neck and upper shoulder. Don't know if she is coming or going!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1146577-De_rola_portrait_of_girl.jpg
3. Finally, here is an Angelica Kauffman self-portrait. She must have had photo umbrellas to not have any shadows on the face. I think because there was so much light full on the face, underneath the hat-brim should be lighter than the white dress that is in the shadow. But it works as it is.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1146577-Kauffman_Angelica-ZZZ-Self-Portrait.jpg

Van Gogh: You should have shaded with a bit of your green shadow, the neck, as it folds away. The nose does seem like it bends more than the face would allow, but that is not bothering me. IT is the general impression that counts, the concept or idea. We can all fiddle finding mistakes in details. I gotta give you credit for the dynamic background, how you incorporated it into the shadows (background and shadows relate). And finally how you managed to offset the coolness of the painting with the orange hair... not bad, I like the powerful expression too, very sincere and emotional.

Derola: The shade on the nose says the light is coming from one way, but the neck shows it is coming from another....enough said.

Angelica: The hair under the hat should get a bit darker so that it appears that it goes under the hat. The eye seem a but cockeyed, though I am sympathetic with it since I know the difficulty involved. However the flat lighting would have been a great opportunity to cool that start to recede, keeping the value, but more background in the part closer to the background, so that they relate more.

I do not understand this comment: underneath the hat-brim should be lighter than the white dress that is in the shadow.


Try to look for these things more in real life scenarios, around you, study the trickery of light. But I enjoyed our critique here!!! Good stuff...
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-17-2013, 10:23 PM
Don't know if I'm turning this into the right place, but here goes...
Ken,
Here are photos of my dog, Rose. She is sitting where the light shines on one side of her body and the other side is in the shadow. The shadowed sides are flat without form. Is this what you meant?
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/979056-Rose.jpg
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/979056-Rose_2.jpg

Notice also how the brow that is in the shade looks more voluminous than the one that is one our left, her right. You feel the air as the shadow recede into the dark accent, in her right ear, our left?
Find more examples, this was easy.:clap:

KEn

jbath
02-17-2013, 11:11 PM
Thanks for the quick response. Forgive me for being sort of slow.:confused: I'm not sure I understand what you mean when you say, "feel the air". I really want to comprehend this concept. :crossfingers:
I'll be looking for more examples. Even though you have probably guessed this, I have many gaps in my art knowledge. I am soaking up all I can.

Another question: If I were to paint the first photo of Rose, would I need to decrease the brightness, on canvas, of that left eyebrow (in the shadow) so that it would not jump forward?

chalet_dor
02-17-2013, 11:15 PM
Yes, what our eyes tells us and what is out there are two different things, after all, out visual world (not illustration precisely), physically speaking is made up of light and the lack of it. That is it. It is a game. And, painting for the sake of painting without understanding can only reinforce bad habits or perpetuate mistakes. Artists think more than what they paint, because they need to know the next step. I can go weeks without touching a brush, but really studying the subject with a pencil. Why? I need to break my false understanding on what I am seeing so that I acquire healthier habits. See what I mean?
Best,
Ken

Yes Ken, I understand what you are saying. Ah but here is the hard part for me, I never use a pencil and I must correct that. I am sooooooooo lazy! I know I have a false understanding of what I am seeing because when I put brush to canvas it is obvious that I am not seeing correctly and my hand just
keeps making incorrect strokes with wrong values and hues! I am sticking with this. Now I am going to show you what I have been doing all day today.......(homework) thinking....dor:)

chalet_dor
02-17-2013, 11:36 PM
Hi Ken here is my homework.

I have had a difficult time understanding and showing something to support how light can contradict what we know about the actual surface of the object.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture_1.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture2.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture3.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture4.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture5.JPG

I forgot to add the caption to the Beautiful Shadow Image of two people that show the distortion shadow can make beautiful or not. The woods scene depicts how the right light and shadow can make or break everything. Even change a mood and in our ability to see with our own eyes and convey in a painting.
I thank you for being patient with me!
dor:)

jmcedeno
02-18-2013, 03:16 PM
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.104226759666825.9134.100002385047103&type=3

That is most updates site for my work, and it is entirely under my control in terms of its updates and content. I am thinking of creating a blog or site with more paintings, including the study of figure or gesture drawing, in case anyone is interested in that field as well...

I will certainly join in, count on me.
TANK YOU, for your interest and effort to teach us. Your method of teaching is perfect for me.

susanc
02-18-2013, 04:22 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1146577-Van_Gogh.jpg

Van Gogh: You should have shaded with a bit of your green shadow, the neck, as it folds away. The nose does seem like it bends more than the face would allow, but that is not bothering me. It is the general impression that counts, the concept or idea. We can all fiddle finding mistakes in details. I gotta give you credit for the dynamic background, how you incorporated it into the shadows (background and shadows relate). And finally how you managed to offset the coolness of the painting with the orange hair... not bad, I like the powerful expression too, very sincere and emotional.

Ken--thanks, I enjoyed your "student" critiques!

I'm terribly lost but ready to try to figure all this out. Does Van Gogh's jacket almost blend in with the background, via color, texture, and most of all, through fairly close value, causing the face to seem closer to us because it is lighter in value, has darker shadows, and increased warm colors? To me, it seems his jacket is also slightly warmer than the background behind it, so it advances to a closer plane in front of the background. But does his shirt, being lightest in value, come forward even more aggressively than his face does?

Thanks!

chalet_dor
02-18-2013, 04:52 PM
Hi Ken Homework
Renaissance artists manufactured the term “Chiaroscuro” to describe how light and dark can imply depth and volume. This picture demonstrates it. Notice how small value changes, change the appearance of her right arm and shoulder.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1184319-220px-Raffael_045.jpg dor :)

ToskaFromAlabama
02-18-2013, 07:00 PM
Van Gogh: You should have shaded with a bit of your green shadow, the neck, as it folds away. The nose does seem like it bends more than the face would allow, but that is not bothering me. IT is the general impression that counts, the concept or idea. We can all fiddle finding mistakes in details. I gotta give you credit for the dynamic background, how you incorporated it into the shadows (background and shadows relate). And finally how you managed to offset the coolness of the painting with the orange hair... not bad, I like the powerful expression too, very sincere and emotional.

Derola: The shade on the nose says the light is coming from one way, but the neck shows it is coming from another....enough said.

Angelica: The hair under the hat should get a bit darker so that it appears that it goes under the hat. The eye seem a but cockeyed, though I am sympathetic with it since I know the difficulty involved. However the flat lighting would have been a great opportunity to cool that start to recede, keeping the value, but more background in the part closer to the background, so that they relate more.

I do not understand this comment: underneath the hat-brim should be lighter than the white dress that is in the shadow.


Try to look for these things more in real life scenarios, around you, study the trickery of light. But I enjoyed our critique here!!! Good stuff...
Ken

I guess I was too subtle. I was actually making the point that the masters use artistic license, breaking the rules and by doing so, create great works of art . I love Van Gogh's art. His face and expression was important. As you observed, the color is what made his head stand out.
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1146577-Van_Gogh.jpg

The last portrait: I meant that, because there had to be a lot of light shinning on her face (no shadows), underneath the hat brim should have been lighter than her left arm in the shadow. (Black in the sunlight is lighter than white in the shade.) However, again, the painting works. The hat gave contrast to the face.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1146577-Kauffman_Angelica-ZZZ-Self-Portrait.jpg

chalet_dor
02-18-2013, 07:20 PM
:wave: Hi
Here the image shows volumn (3d)face simulated in two demensional work by light and dark.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1184319-face_has_volume_3D_simulated_in_two_demensional_work..jpg

dor:)

susanc
02-18-2013, 07:23 PM
This is the gist of what I understood from the class: since the lightest value of a painting appears to come forward the most, the impression we receive from this engraving is that the center, which in reality comes closest to us physically, seems further away because it isn't the lightest part of the engraving? We can offset this effect with warm color in the center area if this had been a painting instead. (I used what appears to be a public domain image.)

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1697-cylinder_1_lg.gif

susanc
02-18-2013, 10:40 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1697-a2641_ml.jpg

This photo came from the National Archives (http://www.digitalvaults.org/record/2425.html?print=1). According to this information (http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=558236&jScript=true), it has unrestricted usage, but this (http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=5&%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&%24partitionIndex=0&%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&%24submitId=1&%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&%24highlight=false) says it is not to be used for advertising purposes--whatever that means?

Anyway, one reason I used it is because you can actually see into the shadows--the facial shadows aren't quite as opaque in this photo as in others I've seen tonight.

The girl on the far right has less shadow on her face than the girl who is standing 2nd from the left. You might think that the girl on the far right is therefore standing closer to us than the girl who is 2nd from the left, but they are either standing fairly parallel to each other, or the girl on the far right is a little further back. (She's much smaller so maybe linear perspective is at work, then again, maybe she's just small?) It seems like the hat of the girl on the far left is responsible for throwing increased shadow onto the face of the girl to her right, which is giving us the wrong information about where she is standing in the picture plane.

The pillow is very light and seems to come forward, which agrees with the actual positioning of this group of people. The lace cuffs on the girl on the far left--her cuff on our left side is lightest and has lost much of its detail. Her cuff on our right isn't as brightly lit and its lace pattern is more apparent.

chalet_dor
02-19-2013, 02:21 AM
[QUOTE=susanc]http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1697-a2641_ml.jpg

Susan you are brilliant! Thank you for the picture and your words explaining what we are seeing. Eager to see Ken's Response!..... dor:clap:

Jacdesusbielle
02-19-2013, 06:19 AM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/19-Feb-2013/1067432-002.JPG

Not only was I a lost sheep posting in the wrong thread, but I did not read carefully what Ken asked .... Here is a pic more adequate I think. The light is in the back of the viewer so only the waitress is crearly seen. With the light,the armours and the stools come forward and the grey coat of the man on the left, positionning the men in the painting. Hope I am not completly wrong... Missed a good part of the class due to technical problems.

susanc
02-19-2013, 11:47 AM
Dor--thanks for the encouragement!You are one of the kindest people on WC. I always find I have gaping holes in my knowledge base every time Ken teaches. As several people asked him questions, I realized that I had no clue what they were saying except that maybe they seemed to be speaking in English?

So, I'm looking forward to Ken's response to see if I'm on the right track or not. Jacdesusbielle, I think I'm posting in the wrong thread--probably not you! The painting you posted has a wonderful haziness to it that I've rarely seen in a painting before. I live in a hazy area (SoCal) and wish I could paint the landscape here with that same credibility!

HazelP
02-19-2013, 12:15 PM
Ken your class was so very enlightening. Not 'Golden Nuggets' this time but 'Gems of Light'.

Some of these gems are really catching the foreground light and coming forward in my minds eye. Others are still glimmers of light in the dark background.

I liked the format you used for the class - PowerPoint and then drawing. Maybe you could slow down a little when reading from the slides - I think that because you put so much expression into reading that a lot of folk don't realise that you are actually reading from them. We are all used to your father's style but it won't take us long to get used to your style of presentation.

I am really looking forward to the next classes!!! We in 'The uttermost parts of the earth' are so priveledged to be able to learn from great artists who are not so plentiful in our own country.

Hazel in New Zealand

Jacdesusbielle
02-19-2013, 12:35 PM
Dor--thanks for the encouragement!You are one of the kindest people on WC. I always find I have gaping holes in my knowledge base every time Ken teaches. As several people asked him questions, I realized that I had no clue what they were saying except that maybe they seemed to be speaking in English?

So, I'm looking forward to Ken's response to see if I'm on the right track or not. Jacdesusbielle, I think I'm posting in the wrong thread--probably not you! The painting you posted has a wonderful haziness to it that I've rarely seen in a painting before. I live in a hazy area (SoCal) and wish I could paint the landscape here with that same credibility!


No Susan, if I read well, Ken asked to post in this thread even if it is not logical because the other thread is called "homework" thread. But never mind.
I loved your explanation on the pic you posted. You analyse so well that everything seems more clear to understand. Good for you ! Could not be that clever to explain, for sure !

mlgk
02-19-2013, 04:44 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/19-Feb-2013/161785-copper-kettle.jpg The part closest to you is the middle of the kettle and. should be the lightest area to make it come forward. However the lightest area is the hilite area. Do you paint it like you see it or like it is suspose to be?

susanc
02-19-2013, 05:08 PM
Jacdesusbielle, thanks! My English teacher's favorite criticism on my writing assignments was the comment "confusing". I always worry if I'm making sense or not!

mlgk, did you photograph your own setup and label it? Great idea!

I've been enjoying Velazquez today and would love to get Ken's comments on this painting, The Thread Spinners. The background is well-illuminated, so I'm confused. But the background isn't as bright as the light in the foreground, and the colors in back are less saturated/some cooler, which helps everything stay in the background? A comment (http://www.spanisharts.com/prado/velazquez.htm) about this painting said:
"The spinners composition is like earlier pieces where the principal theme is in the background to the benefit of the theme in the foreground of the painting."

So, he purposely illuminated the background for a reason. He didn't want it in shadow because it tells an important part of the paintings story. Through diminishing light values, my eye jumps from the woman in front on the right, to a woman further back on the left, to another woman in the background to her right.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/19-Feb-2013/1697-velazquez_spinners2.jpg

Here's a portrait Velazquez painted. The head is turned so that the highlight on the nose falls on the part of the nose that is closest to us?

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/19-Feb-2013/1697-velazquez.jpg

mlgk
02-19-2013, 08:01 PM
Yes. I set this up and photographed it. Labeled it for homework with photoshop. I did a painting of it a few years ago although not from this particular photo but a similar one. Liked your Velaquez explanation

LadyMadonna
02-20-2013, 09:44 AM
This a painting ( not mine ) I am drawn to because of its incredible light and the manner in which the light exposes the tabletop and the chairs. The play of the shadows add to the scene itself. As you said in your last class the warmth of the light brings the foreground chair closer to the viewer. Such mood and romance.....

jbath
02-20-2013, 11:16 AM
LadyMadonna- love this painting, too.
The term "transparency" in shadow, is that what I'm seeing on the front side of the table cloth ? I'm new and trying to understand. :confused: Thanks for sharing this pic. :)
Jbath

susanc
02-20-2013, 11:44 AM
mlgk, I think your set up idea is so clever, I'm going to copy it and do a set up of my own!

Someone in the chat said last Saturday said it was impossible for 2 sides of a cube to be the same value. Under many circumstances that would be true, but if a light hits a cube along one of its edges at a perfect 90 degree angle, it could bathe both sides of that cube with the same intensity of light, resulting in both sides being the same value. I tried to simulate this, but my photo is imperfect. It think the top and right sides are close enough in value, though, that you can see that it's not an impossibility for 2 sides to have equal value. I ran out of time because I now have two unexpected emergencies and have to get going on those.

One other thing, an opaque object might block the light source that is falling on a cube, causing an atypical shadow, and alter its normal 3 value appearance...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/20-Feb-2013/1697-cube.jpg

jbath, that's a good question about transparency in shadows. I've been assuming that shadow transparency is when you can still see some muted details in the shadow, that it's not a "flat" dark color with nothing going on in it. I'm glad I will now find out if I've been wrong about that~

jbath
02-20-2013, 12:48 PM
SusanC - I'm coming from a beginners point of view, when it comes to the technical terms and their definitions. So, it's all new to me :-) I doubt you've been wrong. Your thoughts on transparency have helped me with understanding it better. Thanks a ton!

jbath
02-20-2013, 12:49 PM
What's happened to our instructor?

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 01:27 PM
Due to some requests I have been getting, next webinar will mostly take place on my drawing board. My slides confuse people, so I will just use them as reminders about what to say, and not type all that stuff on the slides. I do it for me, for me to remember what to say, but it confuses people because they think that what I say can be different than what I am reading, which is never the case. So no more confusing slides, I will just use them for pics, and as a personal language to just guide me as to what to say. I have been told I can talk better with a pencil, so I will let the images do the work. Let's see how that works for you all. I know what to say so I will explain it instead while drawings instead of making it feel so much like University lecture. I am just finding what works better for all.
SO I just wanted to make that announcement.

One more thing, the purpose of shadow is to give the idea of the air quality of the scene, not just to have light and dark values. If you have not thought about shadows as airy or regarding the atmosphere or transparency, you are missing the point regarding dark values.

Best,
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 01:32 PM
Thanks for the quick response. Forgive me for being sort of slow.:confused: I'm not sure I understand what you mean when you say, "feel the air". I really want to comprehend this concept. :crossfingers:
I'll be looking for more examples. Even though you have probably guessed this, I have many gaps in my art knowledge. I am soaking up all I can.

Another question: If I were to paint the first photo of Rose, would I need to decrease the brightness, on canvas, of that left eyebrow (in the shadow) so that it would not jump forward?

Remember it jumps out because the light is hitting it, it is not in the shade. IT would be a problem if it was jumping out IN THE SHADE. This is why I am teaching this, because people do not know how to handle light or shadow. Now, if aesthetically speaking, it look like its too bumpy, too bothersome, I would darken it slightly without sending it into the shade.
Does that help?
Ken

chalet_dor
02-20-2013, 01:34 PM
LadyMadonna- love this painting, too.
The term "transparency" in shadow, is that what I'm seeing on the front side of the table cloth ? I'm new and trying to understand. :confused: Thanks for sharing this pic. :)
Jbath

Good question! I am trying to understand also The term "transparency" in shadow........dor:)

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 01:36 PM
Yes Ken, I understand what you are saying. Ah but here is the hard part for me, I never use a pencil and I must correct that. I am sooooooooo lazy! I know I have a false understanding of what I am seeing because when I put brush to canvas it is obvious that I am not seeing correctly and my hand just
keeps making incorrect strokes with wrong values and hues! I am sticking with this. Now I am going to show you what I have been doing all day today.......(homework) thinking....dor:)

I did not mean for you to use a pencil, I am just trying to convey the idea that painting under a false paradigm hardly makes you advance. We make a break through not because we have gone past a mark in our brush mileage, but because we have experiences a paradigm shift, a different way of understanding the problem. Keep at it, I know this is hard.

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 01:38 PM
Hi Ken here is my homework.

I have had a difficult time understanding and showing something to support how light can contradict what we know about the actual surface of the object.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture_1.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture2.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture3.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture4.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture5.JPG

I forgot to add the caption to the Beautiful Shadow Image of two people that show the distortion shadow can make beautiful or not. The woods scene depicts how the right light and shadow can make or break everything. Even change a mood and in our ability to see with our own eyes and convey in a painting.
I thank you for being patient with me!
dor:)

IS the text in purple your writing or the text source?

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 01:40 PM
I will certainly join in, count on me.
TANK YOU, for your interest and effort to teach us. Your method of teaching is perfect for me.

Thanks Jose, it is good to hear a change of tune.

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 01:46 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1146577-Van_Gogh.jpg



Ken--thanks, I enjoyed your "student" critiques!

I'm terribly lost but ready to try to figure all this out. Does Van Gogh's jacket almost blend in with the background, via color, texture, and most of all, through fairly close value, causing the face to seem closer to us because it is lighter in value, has darker shadows, and increased warm colors? To me, it seems his jacket is also slightly warmer than the background behind it, so it advances to a closer plane in front of the background. But does his shirt, being lightest in value, come forward even more aggressively than his face does?

Thanks! You are not lost. In painting if you have two different planes in the same color or value, the artist can separate it through impasto (detail). You can measure an artist by how we can separate subtleties like these in space. The face does pop out because of all those reasons you mentions. You are right in your assessment. About his shirt, it does pop out but the face should appear more forward, at least in the original painting; just because it is the lightest in value will not guarantee anything, it is how the surrounding elements play in. The detail on the face should push that light value back more towards the plan of the shirt, same plane, different local color.
By the way, by planes I do not necessarily mean planes as in foreground, middle and background, planes of depth. I mean the faces that an object has, like a cube 6 sides, 6 faces, therefore 6 PLANES. A square only has one. A sphere has none and or an infinite amount, depends on how you look at it.
Good stuff guys,
KEn

chalet_dor
02-20-2013, 01:55 PM
Hi Ken

Thanks for all you have announced! Especially for this

"One more thing, the purpose of shadow is to give the idea of the air quality of the scene, not just to have light and dark values. If you have not thought about shadows as airy or regarding the atmosphere or transparency, you are missing the point regarding dark values."

dor :)

NorthCarolinaStudent
02-20-2013, 01:59 PM
Quick sketch of a tiny matte glass bottle. The light is coming from above. It is highlighting potions of the top first, the neck, the middle lower part and the area just under the bottle's shadow. Some of the bottle on the sides is highlighted. My sketch looks as if the bottle has a big belly rather than what it is, straight (from the bottom neck) down to the metal table. I hope this is what you meant, Ken.

Elisabeth Cline
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/20-Feb-2013/774972-sm1myhomework2202013_edited-1.jpg

chalet_dor
02-20-2013, 02:00 PM
Hi Ken

Thank you for this By the way, by planes I do not necessarily mean planes as in foreground, middle and background, planes of depth. I mean the faces that an object has, like a cube 6 sides, 6 faces, therefore 6 PLANES. A square only has one. A sphere has none and or an infinite amount, depends on how you look at it.

dor : ))

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 02:03 PM
I guess I was too subtle. I was actually making the point that the masters use artistic license, breaking the rules and by doing so, create great works of art . I love Van Gogh's art. His face and expression was important. As you observed, the color is what made his head stand out.
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1146577-Van_Gogh.jpg

The last portrait: I meant that, because there had to be a lot of light shinning on her face (no shadows), underneath the hat brim should have been lighter than her left arm in the shadow. (Black in the sunlight is lighter than white in the shade.) However, again, the painting works. The hat gave contrast to the face.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1146577-Kauffman_Angelica-ZZZ-Self-Portrait.jpg

I notice that under sunlight, tar appears lighter than shaded snow, because no matter how dark the tar is, the amount of sunlight is actually compensating for the local color, or surface of tar, which is very light absorbent, versus the snow which is very reflective but of a darker light source. Now, you see this rule in order to simplify values better in painting, I think it has to do more about aesthetics, elegance. Now, if the object in the sunlight reflects less light, in spite of reflecting a stronger light source,- if it is reflecting a lesser amount than something in the shade, that appears lighter, it is because the object in the shade is sooo reflective, that it reflects more even of a darker light source, than a very absorbent object could reflect a much stronger light source. Ultimately the light quality should win, but we have objects that just don't always want to cooperate. In overcast cool light, you can have this rule broken alot, because there is not enough light, direct light, to make the black hat appear light than the very reflective white shirt. I know, this can be confusing, just know the science behind, and the aesthetic need for it in certain cases.

chalet_dor
02-20-2013, 02:06 PM
IS the text in purple your writing or the text source?

The purple text is my writing.........dor

I was having trouble uploading all those images so I pasted some together, typed, save and uploaded.

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 02:08 PM
This is the gist of what I understood from the class: since the lightest value of a painting appears to come forward the most, the impression we receive from this engraving is that the center, which in reality comes closest to us physically, seems further away because it isn't the lightest part of the engraving? We can offset this effect with warm color in the center area if this had been a painting instead. (I used what appears to be a public domain image.)

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1697-cylinder_1_lg.gif Bingo, though I am not sure if the center would appear further back, it is just not coming out, reading like a flat plane, instead of a curved plane. In fact if all we have are 5 tones, we can only describe 5 planes, even though there are more. However it is the linear curve or silhouette of the object that tells us it is more round, than the value pattern by itself can tell us. The reflected light since it gradates sooo softly, with more values, gives a greater spin, because the more values, the more planes are expressed. Here the focus or where the light breaks from the shadow is off-center, so THAT part feels like it pops forward, making the center read as flat. WE would have to cheat like you said, to make the center come out a bit, like warming it up, sneaking in some detail or slight values there, but its tricky, right? Because how much can we play with it without sending that area into the light? Remember the pine tree problem I expressed in my painting? I can only go as detailed as 2 values, that is all I had, to make the tree turn, in the SHADE, because the light was taking on ALLL the focus or foreground. The shade pops out more in the object, but we do not see that, we imply or fill in that; it is so because our mind is used to reading things like this as round. Again, our mind fills in more than half of our visual world...
Very good, this means I explained it well. The next step is knowing how to cheat without breaking the form.
Thanks!

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 02:22 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1697-a2641_ml.jpg

This photo came from the National Archives (http://www.digitalvaults.org/record/2425.html?print=1). According to this information (http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ExternalIdSearch?id=558236&jScript=true), it has unrestricted usage, but this (http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=5&%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&%24partitionIndex=0&%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&%24submitId=1&%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&%24highlight=false) says it is not to be used for advertising purposes--whatever that means?

Anyway, one reason I used it is because you can actually see into the shadows--the facial shadows aren't quite as opaque in this photo as in others I've seen tonight.

The girl on the far right has less shadow on her face than the girl who is standing 2nd from the left. You might think that the girl on the far right is therefore standing closer to us than the girl who is 2nd from the left, but they are either standing fairly parallel to each other, or the girl on the far right is a little further back. (She's much smaller so maybe linear perspective is at work, then again, maybe she's just small?) It seems like the hat of the girl on the far left is responsible for throwing increased shadow onto the face of the girl to her right, which is giving us the wrong information about where she is standing in the picture plane.

The pillow is very light and seems to come forward, which agrees with the actual positioning of this group of people. The lace cuffs on the girl on the far left--her cuff on our left side is lightest and has lost much of its detail. Her cuff on our right isn't as brightly lit and its lace pattern is more apparent.
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap: AS I was reading this the clouds were opening up!!!! ahahaahah. Yes you got it, most time light tells us things that agree with the actual position of things, MOST OF THE TIME, but sometimes our mind assumes so. See, the girl with glasses may look further back than the girl on the far right, due to the light on her apron, though there may not even be an actual recession, or less than what we perceive. Take the laces of the girl on the far left, the one in the shade would appear further back, but it is attached to a hand that has alot of stuff happening there plus the detail on the shaded fabric as you say, so the mind assumes that it comes forth , instead of going back behind the lighted lace, of her right arm. By themselves you can get this impression, but the surrounding elements play in too; the perspective of size and play in too or affect this impression. But you get the principle, also notice the airyness of the girl that is furthest away, how she looks soo ghostly, airy, fumy, how you can feel the atmosphere there, versus the opaque light.
Good stuff!
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 02:30 PM
There is another phenomenon that when light is too strong it bleaches everything, all the detail and transitions, making our eyes unable to take in that information, so it stops trying and instead starts to notice the information in the shadow, making it more focal by allowing our pupils to open up. If you force your eyes, you may see more stuff in the light, making the shadow black by virtue of our pupils closing, but then you hurt your eyes, so what happens is you stop trying to capture the light and you adjust your eyes to take in the info in the shadow. We see this happen all the time in nature where there is strong light, like sand, granite rock, snow etc. This what could have happened in the example with the girl's wrist.
Great!
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 02:34 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/19-Feb-2013/1067432-002.JPG

Not only was I a lost sheep posting in the wrong thread, but I did not read carefully what Ken asked .... Here is a pic more adequate I think. The light is in the back of the viewer so only the waitress is crearly seen. With the light,the armours and the stools come forward and the grey coat of the man on the left, positionning the men in the painting. Hope I am not completly wrong... Missed a good part of the class due to technical problems.

If the light on the armour has so much light, and the waitress has less light, how can the waitress therefore be clearly seen? Wouldn't it be that the armor is clearly seen because it has more focal/light material? All that the waitress has is a light shirt but that does not mean she is in the light, for she is in the shade. I am not sure what you mean about the light being in the back of the viewer, you mean behind the viewer? Or at the furthest point of the picture plane? I am just trying to figure it out because maybe I am wrong or misunderstood.

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 02:37 PM
Dor--thanks for the encouragement!You are one of the kindest people on WC. I always find I have gaping holes in my knowledge base every time Ken teaches. As several people asked him questions, I realized that I had no clue what they were saying except that maybe they seemed to be speaking in English?

So, I'm looking forward to Ken's response to see if I'm on the right track or not. Jacdesusbielle, I think I'm posting in the wrong thread--probably not you! The painting you posted has a wonderful haziness to it that I've rarely seen in a painting before. I live in a hazy area (SoCal) and wish I could paint the landscape here with that same credibility!

Susan, you are SOOOO on the right track that you relieved any worries that I may be a bad teacher. You always do this for me. Thanks!!!:thumbsup:

susanc
02-20-2013, 02:37 PM
The next step is knowing how to cheat without breaking the form.

I think that's probably the biggest problem I had in my last painting--keeping shadow things in shadow, light things in the light. Legitimate cheating sounds like it will be fun--looking forward to it!

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 02:40 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/19-Feb-2013/161785-copper-kettle.jpg The part closest to you is the middle of the kettle and. should be the lightest area to make it come forward. However the lightest area is the hilite area. Do you paint it like you see it or like it is suspose to be?\\\

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap: Bingo, your explanation and understanding of the problem is PERFECT, but the solution is not. You cannot expect to put the highlight always in the center, because nature will rarely do that, it will make things look weird and in most cases simply impossible. I will tell you why next class. What you do is suggest focal material in the center in order to keep that area from look flat, and hence pop out only until the highlight touches it. If you look closely, there is detail there on the object itself (stains or whatever that is where you pointed), that is letting you know there is volume in that area, the center. But that is because the object itself has that pattern. What if it had been a white object with no design or receding detail? You can put some warmth there, or some detail of something etc. Great example!!!!
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 02:47 PM
Ken your class was so very enlightening. Not 'Golden Nuggets' this time but 'Gems of Light'.

Some of these gems are really catching the foreground light and coming forward in my minds eye. Others are still glimmers of light in the dark background.

I liked the format you used for the class - PowerPoint and then drawing. Maybe you could slow down a little when reading from the slides - I think that because you put so much expression into reading that a lot of folk don't realise that you are actually reading from them. We are all used to your father's style but it won't take us long to get used to your style of presentation.

I am really looking forward to the next classes!!! We in 'The uttermost parts of the earth' are so priveledged to be able to learn from great artists who are not so plentiful in our own country.

Hazel in New Zealand


I am not sure what you are referring to in this text "Some of these gems are really catching the foreground light and coming forward in my minds eye. Others are still glimmers of light in the dark background. "

Also, why read the slides if you guys can do that? I figured I could read them as if I was talking, which is what I do, so that it does not sound so mechanical. I read them in my mind and talk about them. This is why I am going to see how I can change it up a bit.
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 02:49 PM
Ken your class was so very enlightening. Not 'Golden Nuggets' this time but 'Gems of Light'.

Some of these gems are really catching the foreground light and coming forward in my minds eye. Others are still glimmers of light in the dark background.

I liked the format you used for the class - PowerPoint and then drawing. Maybe you could slow down a little when reading from the slides - I think that because you put so much expression into reading that a lot of folk don't realise that you are actually reading from them. We are all used to your father's style but it won't take us long to get used to your style of presentation.
h
I am really looking forward to the next classes!!! We in 'The uttermost parts of the earth' are so priveledged to be able to learn from great artists who are not so plentiful in our own country.

Hazel in New Zealand


:clap:Oh I think you were being poetic? ahaha

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 03:02 PM
Jacdesusbielle, thanks! My English teacher's favorite criticism on my writing assignments was the comment "confusing". I always worry if I'm making sense or not!

mlgk, did you photograph your own setup and label it? Great idea!

I've been enjoying Velazquez today and would love to get Ken's comments on this painting, The Thread Spinners. The background is well-illuminated, so I'm confused. But the background isn't as bright as the light in the foreground, and the colors in back are less saturated/some cooler, which helps everything stay in the background? A comment (http://www.spanisharts.com/prado/velazquez.htm) about this painting said:
"The spinners composition is like earlier pieces where the principal theme is in the background to the benefit of the theme in the foreground of the painting."

So, he purposely illuminated the background for a reason. He didn't want it in shadow because it tells an important part of the paintings story. Through diminishing light values, my eye jumps from the woman in front on the right, to a woman further back on the left, to another woman in the background to her right.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/19-Feb-2013/1697-velazquez_spinners2.jpg

Here's a portrait Velazquez painted. The head is turned so that the highlight on the nose falls on the part of the nose that is closest to us?

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/19-Feb-2013/1697-velazquez.jpg

It would seem that as thigns recede they get vaguer, less lighted etc, right? But if there is a very strong light happening in a distant plane, it will not read as that distant because the intensity of the light seems to cut through those layers of atmosphere, like a nearby shadow that has very little light, but there is less atmosphere between you and it to choke it. See? Remember the sun? How far is the sun? Does it look that far? OR does it look like a bright spot that follows us around not too far from our head? Ask primitive cultures how far the sun is, they have no way of telling you anything than what they can assume. Their sense of mileage is not like what we have (lightyears etc).
Remember, "my" teaching does not entail that physical backgrounds are always in the shade or that physical foregrounds are always lighted, more like something is back or far depending on the light or shadow, the reverse!
The focal point in the painting is in the optical foreground, where the light is, though it is in a further physical foreground... throw this out of your head, forget about the physical placement of things. Our eye goes to the light, either because of its strength or because there is less air to choke it, at the end, the eye sees less or more light, whether it be far or less but nearer by.
Bear in mind that things get smaller as they recede, so to compensate we use large areas to create interest, to compensate for the weakening of forms as they recede. Also bear in mind that the photo changes slight optical balances that in the real painting can appear different, making things like more 3D.
The Velasquez portrait is an an excellent example of 'legitimate cheating.' Very good!!!!

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 03:05 PM
Jacdesusbielle, thanks! My English teacher's favorite criticism on my writing assignments was the comment "confusing". I always worry if I'm making sense or not!

mlgk, did you photograph your own setup and label it? Great idea!

I've been enjoying Velazquez today and would love to get Ken's comments on this painting, The Thread Spinners. The background is well-illuminated, so I'm confused. But the background isn't as bright as the light in the foreground, and the colors in back are less saturated/some cooler, which helps everything stay in the background? A comment (http://www.spanisharts.com/prado/velazquez.htm) about this painting said:
"The spinners composition is like earlier pieces where the principal theme is in the background to the benefit of the theme in the foreground of the painting."

So, he purposely illuminated the background for a reason. He didn't want it in shadow because it tells an important part of the paintings story. Through diminishing light values, my eye jumps from the woman in front on the right, to a woman further back on the left, to another woman in the background to her right.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/19-Feb-2013/1697-velazquez_spinners2.jpg

Here's a portrait Velazquez painted. The head is turned so that the highlight on the nose falls on the part of the nose that is closest to us?

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/19-Feb-2013/1697-velazquez.jpg


Also, remember that in real life we have no borders or margins. Remember my previous webinar on this topic? So something in the focus in real life can be not so, if we place it in a different area on a canvas Velasquez loves having lighted backgrounds, even Sargent adopted this as well. (His 'Las Meninas' and Sargent's "Daughters of Darling Boit"). The question is, if the background had been more towards the frame and the figure more in the middle, would the focal area be the same? I think not....

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 03:08 PM
LadyMadonna- love this painting, too.
The term "transparency" in shadow, is that what I'm seeing on the front side of the table cloth ? I'm new and trying to understand. :confused: Thanks for sharing this pic. :)
Jbath

good painting, but it is not about the shadow or its qualities, meaning the style of the piece is not allowing to convey this concept. Old Master paintings, or from SArgent or Zorn etc, explain this very well. In fact, modern representational painting has lost this quality more and more, that was mastered in the past. At least this is what I am seeing, more focus on brushwork than the particular qualities of light and shadow. Don't only look at paintings, look at real life. HELLO!!! THE CONCEPT IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU IN EVERY CORNER!!!!.
:wink2:
Best,
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-20-2013, 03:13 PM
mlgk, I think your set up idea is so clever, I'm going to copy it and do a set up of my own!

Someone in the chat said last Saturday said it was impossible for 2 sides of a cube to be the same value. Under many circumstances that would be true, but if a light hits a cube along one of its edges at a perfect 90 degree angle, it could bathe both sides of that cube with the same intensity of light, resulting in both sides being the same value. I tried to simulate this, but my photo is imperfect. It think the top and right sides are close enough in value, though, that you can see that it's not an impossibility for 2 sides to have equal value. I ran out of time because I now have two unexpected emergencies and have to get going on those.

One other thing, an opaque object might block the light source that is falling on a cube, causing an atypical shadow, and alter its normal 3 value appearance...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/20-Feb-2013/1697-cube.jpg

jbath, that's a good question about transparency in shadows. I've been assuming that shadow transparency is when you can still see some muted details in the shadow, that it's not a "flat" dark color with nothing going on in it. I'm glad I will now find out if I've been wrong about that~


False, not you, but the comment in class.
See what I mean? My whole class was to show how light can set up situations that contradict reality. You can VERY EASILY have two opposing plans or sides of a cube in the EXACT same value that make the break or corner disappear, how? Both sides bend symmetrically from the light source. This is what I mean, cliche over logic. Now whether things should be PAINTED this way is another story. So good correction!!! :clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Flat shadows are opaque, not transparent because they look inky or dead, with no light trying to travel to your eye. Shadows have stuff receding within them, a play of back and front, within it. A sold value will destroy this. Wow, I have been at this for 3 hours, answering, you guys mind if I pick it up tomorrow? Best,
Ken

jbath
02-20-2013, 03:53 PM
Ken,
Thank you so much for all of your comments and points, and thanks for being patient. So, so helpful!
Jbath

jbath
02-20-2013, 03:57 PM
Remember it jumps out because the light is hitting it, it is not in the shade. IT would be a problem if it was jumping out IN THE SHADE. This is why I am teaching this, because people do not know how to handle light or shadow. Now, if aesthetically speaking, it look like its too bumpy, too bothersome, I would darken it slightly without sending it into the shade.
Does that help?
Ken

Yes !! Thank you !!:thumbsup:
jbath

Jacdesusbielle
02-20-2013, 04:26 PM
If the light on the armour has so much light, and the waitress has less light, how can the waitress therefore be clearly seen? Wouldn't it be that the armor is clearly seen because it has more focal/light material? All that the waitress has is a light shirt but that does not mean she is in the light, for she is in the shade. I am not sure what you mean about the light being in the back of the viewer, you mean behind the viewer? Or at the furthest point of the picture plane? I am just trying to figure it out because maybe I am wrong or misunderstood.

Hi Ken,
Of course you are right. The waitress has only a light shirt but she is in the shade and does not come forward at all vs the armours and stools being in the light and being the focal point. For me, the light is coming behind the viewer from an open door or a window. Thank you for taking the time to comment this painting. All the pics posted and your comments help me understand what you were explaining last Saturday. I did not get all of it .....

LadyMadonna
02-20-2013, 06:51 PM
Okay second try ..
1. The light is coming from the left onto the far birches and making them lighter , circular and 3 dimensional ,thus stand out ( spotlighting them ) . In truth the shadowed trees are closer to the viewer ( which is me taking the photo by the way). The light also shows the planes in the grass and shadows of the spotlighted trees. Do we paint what we see then ? Our teacher will inform.
2. The blue jay is back lit making for a lovely photo but a difficult painting. It does show the lighted sides and planes quite clearly. The light does bring out a far patch of snow on the right branch but keeps the jay's head in shadow. I feel the light in this photo does bring out a translucent quality to the blue jay that is quite beautiful.
3. The play of pink light and shadows on the water tell the viewer this is water and also brings out the form of the ducks though we see nothing more than their silhouettes, we know what they are.
4. The little evergreen is caught in the morning sunlight casting many planes on the snow of its branches.Though we see shadows of branches elsewhere, we do not see the branches themselves though the light is casting branch shadows .. In real life though the light is shining on the little evergreen, in reality, it is the darkened branches in the front that are closer to me.
5. Last but not least , is a computer generated sketch of yours truly. Note that the highlighted portions are the ones that come forward and the right side is receding because it is in shadow. the planes on the face are obvious with the highlight on the left forehead section. Is this how we paint a portrait ? Remains to be seen.

MapperGis
02-20-2013, 08:10 PM
Kenneth,
Thank you for this class it is very informative.
I am trying to show the figures attracting the eye with use of darker values behind. This is in no way a finished painting. The blue colors seem more in “shadow” I think I need to let layers on brown side dry before trying to dry brush over even in a quick sketch. Thank you! Loishttp://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/20-Feb-2013/221251-Sketch.jpg

LadyMadonna
02-21-2013, 07:54 AM
Simple pencil drawing( not mine though I am going to attempt it ). It shows gradation of value without color, and eye flow to the right hand corner. The lightest part of the figure is the calf of the right leg bringing that section of anatomy the closest. The half tones give the viewer the dimensional form and the shadow of the form anchors the figure.

Jacdesusbielle
02-21-2013, 09:08 AM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2013/1067432-IMG_0383.JPG

Another one just to be sure I understand ... which I am not... In this face, nose and moustache come forward because they are in the light .There is a touch of light on the brow and the chin indicating that they come slightly forward, more than the rest of the face. The right of the face is in the shade but through tranparency we can figure out the other eye, the cheek and the shape of the jaw. There are two distinct planes on the brow between light and shade. Is this particular section called "Terminator" ?
This is a pencil drawing copied from JSS.

jbath
02-21-2013, 10:42 AM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2013/979056-jacques-barenton-1883.jpeg
In this Sargent painting of "Jacques Barenton" the lightest part of the face is under the eye on the right, her left. The nose would be closest in reality, but it is not the lightest in the painting.
You can see curls of hair, faintly under "her" right ear. This would be a transparent shadowy area.
You can also, just barely see "her" right sleeve as it recedes into the background, because it is further from us. This is accurate, optically, since she is sitting with the other arm/ shoulder more forward, closer to us, the viewer, and it has more lighted areas. The white piping stripes on the collar are bright where the light hits it, yet it is not the closest part of collar to us.
Am I on the right track

Kerch
02-21-2013, 11:12 AM
I agree, please slow down, and repeat your points.

susanc
02-21-2013, 06:04 PM
I am usually the last to know things like this, so sorry if everyone's "been there, done that" already!

This is a link for a John Singer Sargent gallery at Google Art Project:
http://www.googleartproject.com/artist/john-singer-sargent/4129032/
(You can find other artists with the search box in the upper right corner at that site.)

This is a screen shot of how the painting first appeared on my monitor:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2013/1697-sargentcloseup1.jpg

This is a screen shot of how much it allowed me to zoom into the picture:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2013/1697-sargentcloseup.jpg

How great to be able to zoom into the painting and check out the brushstrokes better! I'm not sure if all the paintings there have this feature, but the first two I tried (one Velazsquez, one Sargent) worked. This might turn out to be a good site to find paintings to share for homework in this class, depending on if the images are in public domain or not?

LadyMadonna
02-21-2013, 06:27 PM
I love that Susan..thank you so much ! I am a big Sargent admirer.

chalet_dor
02-21-2013, 07:31 PM
[QUOTE=susanc]I am usually the last to know things like this, so sorry if everyone's "been there, done that" already!

:clap: Thank you so much for Google Art link.........I was there years ago and forgot all about it...........dor :)

Artz54
02-21-2013, 11:00 PM
Photo: Rural School Children, Texas, 1943. Library of Congress. No known copyright restrictions.
In this photo the greatest illumination is on the boy seated in front. He also has deep shadow areas on the left side of his face, especially around the nose, inner eye socket, side of chin, cheek and forehead. The other three subjects all receive lesser amounts of light. The boy standing furthest back seems to blend into the darkness of the room. Only a small bit of light grazes his face and arms. The balance of light and shadow gives depth to the photo and creates a mood of quiet stillness.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2013/990522-2179121221_3140ba5238.jpg

HazelP
02-22-2013, 12:14 AM
Here is a photo of my grandfather that I have been keen to paint. I notice a lot of colour and warmth in the background shadows on my right and a little in the shadow of the collar on my left. Would I need to blur the edges a little on his shoulder, face and hat on my right hand side to send this side of him back into the distance? Would his eye on my left need a slightly brighter highlight than the other eye to bring it forward?

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/22-Feb-2013/915542-IMG_0895sm.jpg

I am hoping that at the end of these classes I will be able to do a better rendering of him than this one I did in pastels before the classes started!!!! The camera has made the white pastel a lot more chalky than it is in reality.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/22-Feb-2013/915542-P1050331sm.jpg

Jacdesusbielle
02-22-2013, 11:09 AM
Thank you Susan for the link to John Singer Sargent. I love all his paintings and drawings.

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 01:23 PM
Here is a photo of my grandfather that I have been keen to paint. I notice a lot of colour and warmth in the background shadows on my right and a little in the shadow of the collar on my left. Would I need to blur the edges a little on his shoulder, face and hat on my right hand side to send this side of him back into the distance? Would his eye on my left need a slightly brighter highlight than the other eye to bring it forward?

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/22-Feb-2013/915542-IMG_0895sm.jpg

I am hoping that at the end of these classes I will be able to do a better rendering of him than this one I did in pastels before the classes started!!!! The camera has made the white pastel a lot more chalky than it is in reality.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/22-Feb-2013/915542-P1050331sm.jpg
The point of this is not to contradict the light, like putting in a highlight where it would not appear, the point is to work your way through with the present lighting situations. The eye does come forward on its own, the brows help that. See, the point of this is not to lie without reservation. It is only to understand how light and shadow behave or look and to express the turn of planes without violating the logic. For rendering the drawing better, it is just handling values, angles, plum lines etc. The solution is there if you wanna copy the photo, it is easy because the answers are there, there is nothing to solve, unless you want to improve it. So you need to be able to render anything you wish. If not, how then are you going to deal with an actual subject which solution is not given? I will talk about this more tomorrow.
If you don't mind I can draw this up in class tomorrow as a demo in order to see how I would deal with this. Just post here in the thread that you the owner of the pic gives me permission to draw this. If not I will change the features either way and invent a whole new person, but for your learning I would feel better if I had a written statement that you will let me use that pic.
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 01:25 PM
Photo: Rural School Children, Texas, 1943. Library of Congress. No known copyright restrictions.
In this photo the greatest illumination is on the boy seated in front. He also has deep shadow areas on the left side of his face, especially around the nose, inner eye socket, side of chin, cheek and forehead. The other three subjects all receive lesser amounts of light. The boy standing furthest back seems to blend into the darkness of the room. Only a small bit of light grazes his face and arms. The balance of light and shadow gives depth to the photo and creates a mood of quiet stillness.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2013/990522-2179121221_3140ba5238.jpg

Yes, now imagine what would happen if the kids in the front were in the shade and the kids at the back would be in full light.... try to picture the consequences.

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 01:32 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2013/979056-jacques-barenton-1883.jpeg
In this Sargent painting of "Jacques Barenton" the lightest part of the face is under the eye on the right, her left. The nose would be closest in reality, but it is not the lightest in the painting.
You can see curls of hair, faintly under "her" right ear. This would be a transparent shadowy area.
You can also, just barely see "her" right sleeve as it recedes into the background, because it is further from us. This is accurate, optically, since she is sitting with the other arm/ shoulder more forward, closer to us, the viewer, and it has more lighted areas. The white piping stripes on the collar are bright where the light hits it, yet it is not the closest part of collar to us.
Am I on the right track
Pretty much on the right track, just that in spite of the brightness under her eye, the highlight on her nose (Detail), produces again, by light, is pulling the nose forward, though her left nose-cheek area looks more voluminous than her right because of that light. It is not where the brightest value is, is is where the eye is called, and that could be a contrast, a detail, a temperature, sometimes we have brighter highlights on the top of the head of a bald guy, receding, but the light on the brow revealing detail or some focal matter pulls it forward.
The sleeve fading in the background looks like so, optically, because there is no value contrast there, where background an sleeve merge. So it coincides with out understanding of the figure, but the optical truth and the physical truth don't always match.
You are on the right track!
GreaT!

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 01:44 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2013/1067432-IMG_0383.JPG

Another one just to be sure I understand ... which I am not... In this face, nose and moustache come forward because they are in the light .There is a touch of light on the brow and the chin indicating that they come slightly forward, more than the rest of the face. The right of the face is in the shade but through tranparency we can figure out the other eye, the cheek and the shape of the jaw. There are two distinct planes on the brow between light and shade. Is this particular section called "Terminator" ?
This is a pencil drawing copied from JSS.

Normally you would see a highlight on the nose which would be a place of focus that the eye would grab unto to send it forward. The terminator is the shadow line, where the shadow meets the light family. You can figure out the position of the other eye through symmetry and knowledge of anatomy, however the subtle light shows this. The terminator is not the edge between the shaded face and the background, that is called the outside edge, has nothing to do with form and how light behaves, it has to do with one thing meeting the background. The planes are there but the light shows this, and the lack of light hides this. I am not sure if I understood what you mean by distinct planes on the brow... You seem to be on the right track though.

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 01:47 PM
Simple pencil drawing( not mine though I am going to attempt it ). It shows gradation of value without color, and eye flow to the right hand corner. The lightest part of the figure is the calf of the right leg bringing that section of anatomy the closest. The half tones give the viewer the dimensional form and the shadow of the form anchors the figure.

Correct, though my eye is craving some darker more interesting values, aesthetically speaking. Generally speaking, I have seen that female artists are too subtle with value, and men are too bold with value. It is a psychological thing, men want to create the impact, women want to soothe more. I think it is a balance of both we need to incorporate, so think of value as a ying and yang, a play of opposing tendencies.

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 01:55 PM
Kenneth,
Thank you for this class it is very informative.
I am trying to show the figures attracting the eye with use of darker values behind. This is in no way a finished painting. The blue colors seem more in “shadow” I think I need to let layers on brown side dry before trying to dry brush over even in a quick sketch. Thank you! Loishttp://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/20-Feb-2013/221251-Sketch.jpg
MY eye already goes to the figure, the detail of the face etc. Work on the forms a bit more to make them look more solid, less ghostly. I like the concept, all you need in painting is a play of warm and cool, more hues are not really necessary, since all color is either warm or cool, so if you master temperature, you master color.

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 01:58 PM
Hi Ken,
Of course you are right. The waitress has only a light shirt but she is in the shade and does not come forward at all vs the armours and stools being in the light and being the focal point. For me, the light is coming behind the viewer from an open door or a window. Thank you for taking the time to comment this painting. All the pics posted and your comments help me understand what you were explaining last Saturday. I did not get all of it .....
Oh I see what you meant by the light coming from the back. WE have to let our eye tells us what is more dominant, not assume that since this and this is so, there fit MUST be the focal point. No, the eye knows best, just be sensitive to how it moves around or where it is attracted and 9.9999 times out of ten, it is because there is light there, or something produced by light.

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 02:17 PM
Okay second try ..
1. The light is coming from the left onto the far birches and making them lighter , circular and 3 dimensional ,thus stand out ( spotlighting them ) . In truth the shadowed trees are closer to the viewer ( which is me taking the photo by the way). The light also shows the planes in the grass and shadows of the spotlighted trees. Do we paint what we see then ? Our teacher will inform.
2. The blue jay is back lit making for a lovely photo but a difficult painting. It does show the lighted sides and planes quite clearly. The light does bring out a far patch of snow on the right branch but keeps the jay's head in shadow. I feel the light in this photo does bring out a translucent quality to the blue jay that is quite beautiful.
3. The play of pink light and shadows on the water tell the viewer this is water and also brings out the form of the ducks though we see nothing more than their silhouettes, we know what they are.
4. The little evergreen is caught in the morning sunlight casting many planes on the snow of its branches.Though we see shadows of branches elsewhere, we do not see the branches themselves though the light is casting branch shadows .. In real life though the light is shining on the little evergreen, in reality, it is the darkened branches in the front that are closer to me.
5. Last but not least , is a computer generated sketch of yours truly. Note that the highlighted portions are the ones that come forward and the right side is receding because it is in shadow. the planes on the face are obvious with the highlight on the left forehead section. Is this how we paint a portrait ? Remains to be seen.
1. The whole paint what you see thing is a class on its own, yes the light is doing what it is doing in the pic. Those trees in the light still recede in spite of the light, why? linear perspective or their position on the picture plane. The shaded trees come forth because there are some strong darks there too. The light is very bleachy at the end, killing off some detail. In these cases the eye goes to the shadow because it gives up on trying to adjust itself to look at the light. Tell me if you see any detail or sunspots on the sun while staring at it....you can't, your eye will never adjust itself to take in that light, if it could, by glancing afterwards at everything else, it would all look black.
2. The blue jay is not backlight, at least not to me, there is some light for some reason on the lower belly, but I do not know why, hence the potential for showing a plane, but remember when we see a shadow on the form there is a plane change, but if there is cast shadow on a form, is it because of a plane change?
You are correct with everything else, and on the portrait, if you are asking me whether to paint it like that, well yes, if you are describing the form and all , but if you are asking in terms of composition and all that, well that is a whole new topic regarding portraits and composition.
Good stuff,
Ken

HazelP
02-22-2013, 02:45 PM
The point of this is not to contradict the light, like putting in a highlight where it would not appear, the point is to work your way through with the present lighting situations. The eye does come forward on its own, the brows help that. See, the point of this is not to lie without reservation. It is only to understand how light and shadow behave or look and to express the turn of planes without violating the logic. For rendering the drawing better, it is just handling values, angles, plum lines etc. The solution is there if you wanna copy the photo, it is easy because the answers are there, there is nothing to solve, unless you want to improve it. So you need to be able to render anything you wish. If not, how then are you going to deal with an actual subject which solution is not given? I will talk about this more tomorrow.
If you don't mind I can draw this up in class tomorrow as a demo in order to see how I would deal with this. Just post here in the thread that you the owner of the pic gives me permission to draw this. If not I will change the features either way and invent a whole new person, but for your learning I would feel better if I had a written statement that you will let me use that pic.
Ken

Ken I would be delighted for you to draw this up in tomorrows class and give you full permission to use my photo.

I see now what you are saying about the brow bringing him forward and this is something I have missing in my rendering of the photo.

Hazel Persson

LadyMadonna
02-22-2013, 02:51 PM
Note to Ken: the sun was rising that morning over the river and it was BEHIND and to the left of the blue jay hence I used the term "backlit".

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 04:55 PM
Quick sketch of a tiny matte glass bottle. The light is coming from above. It is highlighting potions of the top first, the neck, the middle lower part and the area just under the bottle's shadow. Some of the bottle on the sides is highlighted. My sketch looks as if the bottle has a big belly rather than what it is, straight (from the bottom neck) down to the metal table. I hope this is what you meant, Ken.

Elisabeth Cline
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/20-Feb-2013/774972-sm1myhomework2202013_edited-1.jpg

Nice sketch, but I do not see the highlights on the objects, I see the shadows, but not the object. If the bottle appears to have more of a belly than it should it is because on the left side you implied some shading as if it had a love handle or something. Highlights would be crisp and super distinct, what you have there is just light, not highlight by definition. I will explain these parts tomorrow.

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 04:57 PM
IS the text in purple your writing or the text source? I just want to know if the purple is your lettering, or from another source text so that I can critique it.
Ken

chalet_dor
02-22-2013, 06:36 PM
I just want to know if the purple is your lettering, or from another source text so that I can critique it.
Ken

Sorry I thought I had replied..........yes purple text are my own thoughts........
also most of the black text......

Eager for tomorrows class:clap:

dor

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 07:45 PM
IS the text in purple your writing or the text source?
I agree with everything you said, but the image next to the pelican one not so much, I do not see the concept at play as much. The pelican notice how flat it looks, contrary to what we know. Cast shadows make things seem like holes in the ground though there is a surface there.
KEn

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 07:46 PM
Okay second try ..
1. The light is coming from the left onto the far birches and making them lighter , circular and 3 dimensional ,thus stand out ( spotlighting them ) . In truth the shadowed trees are closer to the viewer ( which is me taking the photo by the way). The light also shows the planes in the grass and shadows of the spotlighted trees. Do we paint what we see then ? Our teacher will inform.
2. The blue jay is back lit making for a lovely photo but a difficult painting. It does show the lighted sides and planes quite clearly. The light does bring out a far patch of snow on the right branch but keeps the jay's head in shadow. I feel the light in this photo does bring out a translucent quality to the blue jay that is quite beautiful.
3. The play of pink light and shadows on the water tell the viewer this is water and also brings out the form of the ducks though we see nothing more than their silhouettes, we know what they are.
4. The little evergreen is caught in the morning sunlight casting many planes on the snow of its branches.Though we see shadows of branches elsewhere, we do not see the branches themselves though the light is casting branch shadows .. In real life though the light is shining on the little evergreen, in reality, it is the darkened branches in the front that are closer to me.
5. Last but not least , is a computer generated sketch of yours truly. Note that the highlighted portions are the ones that come forward and the right side is receding because it is in shadow. the planes on the face are obvious with the highlight on the left forehead section. Is this how we paint a portrait ? Remains to be seen.

the change of value on the blue jay, on his sides is due to local color, like having a white floor change into tar, all in the same plane.

Ken Instructor
02-22-2013, 07:52 PM
Okay second try ..
1. The light is coming from the left onto the far birches and making them lighter , circular and 3 dimensional ,thus stand out ( spotlighting them ) . In truth the shadowed trees are closer to the viewer ( which is me taking the photo by the way). The light also shows the planes in the grass and shadows of the spotlighted trees. Do we paint what we see then ? Our teacher will inform.
2. The blue jay is back lit making for a lovely photo but a difficult painting. It does show the lighted sides and planes quite clearly. The light does bring out a far patch of snow on the right branch but keeps the jay's head in shadow. I feel the light in this photo does bring out a translucent quality to the blue jay that is quite beautiful.
3. The play of pink light and shadows on the water tell the viewer this is water and also brings out the form of the ducks though we see nothing more than their silhouettes, we know what they are.
4. The little evergreen is caught in the morning sunlight casting many planes on the snow of its branches.Though we see shadows of branches elsewhere, we do not see the branches themselves though the light is casting branch shadows .. In real life though the light is shining on the little evergreen, in reality, it is the darkened branches in the front that are closer to me.
5. Last but not least , is a computer generated sketch of yours truly. Note that the highlighted portions are the ones that come forward and the right side is receding because it is in shadow. the planes on the face are obvious with the highlight on the left forehead section. Is this how we paint a portrait ? Remains to be seen.
The thing is, I am not convinced it is getting any sunlight because why aren't the branches as well getting light? You would see a pattern there, the values are just not dramatic enough. Though the sun was at the position, there is a whole house or something behind, or in any case the setting may have been in the shadow. Forget what you remember, the values by themselves, particularly in sunlight, always reveal an obvious value contrast.

chalet_dor
02-22-2013, 09:33 PM
I agree with everything you said, but the image next to the pelican one not so much, I do not see the concept at play as much. The pelican notice how flat it looks, contrary to what we know. Cast shadows make things seem like holes in the ground though there is a surface there.
KEn


Thank you ken........

My thinking was that the shadow over the bottles had flattened them in the same way the Pelican being in very dark shadow appeared to be flat.
dor:)

chalet_dor
02-22-2013, 11:17 PM
The thing is, I am not convinced it is getting any sunlight because why aren't the branches as well getting light? You would see a pattern there, the values are just not dramatic enough. Though the sun was at the position, there is a whole house or something behind, or in any case the setting may have been in the shadow. Forget what you remember, the values by themselves, particularly in sunlight, always reveal an obvious value contrast.

Hi Ken

I do not understand because I do not know which comment and image of Donna's you are referring to. Help please

dor :)

jillmc3
02-23-2013, 12:48 AM
I posted my homework in the "homework- elements of form" thread, but no one else is posting homework there...perhaps you could mention the homework thread tomorrow!
Thanks.

HazelP
02-23-2013, 12:57 AM
I posted my homework in the "homework- elements of form" thread, but no one else is posting homework there...perhaps you could mention the homework thread tomorrow!
Thanks.

Take a look at the first message in that thread. It directs us back to post our homework in this thread.

Ken Instructor
02-23-2013, 06:24 PM
http://www.huevaluechroma.com/021.php

http://artsammich.blogspot.ca/2006/08/tip-of-week-matte-and-specular.html

check those links out... some colleagues that back me up.
I will check homeworks and comments later, as I recover from the tiredness of today ahahhaah. Some people posted homework in the other thread, please do it here, I just saw some posts there I was not expecting. But I will get to them anyway. I wanted to avoid juggling two threads.
BEst,
Ken

LadyMadonna
02-23-2013, 06:50 PM
I admit I was a multi tasker today. The second sketch I did whilst you did the Sargent demo ..not at all like yours but I am hoping I am getting the terminator \ plane premise. The other two I did after dinner. Loving all of this. Thank you so much.

susanc
02-23-2013, 08:08 PM
This was a kind of fun project that Ken mentioned--comparing Sargent's portraits to photos of their photos. Unfortunately, I didn't get very far in researching them!

The following photo comparison came from here (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150939536977321&set=a.414736767320.182891.28314922320&type=1&relevant_count=1), but I wish the photo was easier to see:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentphotowarrens.jpg

I put these together so they're a little blurry. (Anyone want to criticize that he didn't get their features exactly perfect?) :) :

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentlgertrudevernonladyagnewcopy.jpg

He exaggerated that lift of the eyebrow, giving her more character.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentlgretchenosgoodwarren.jpg

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentenawertheimer.jpg

Ken Instructor
02-23-2013, 09:27 PM
Donna, you are doing a great deed, you see the slight differences in likeness?

Look up Mr's Fiske Warren, more photos of her to see how Sargent embellished her in that photo that you posted Donna. But most of all, look at the daughter.

Also look up Coventry Patmore, the real man, and Sargent's sketch.

Ok, I have added to the homework. Look up more Sargent portraits and the actual people, do the detective work. I want to see those pics with the comparative descriptions between the actual person and the portrait, what did Sargent change? With the wetcanvas army we can see tons of examples how you can alter a portrait as long as you did it while being in perfect control, because you intended it to be so, not because you failed at your goal (not getting it right).

Submit altered newspapers cutout or photos where you indicate the terminator, or blocking out with a black marker the shadow family from the light.

You can also outline each and every tone and point it out.

Also look up Jo Jefferson, or Joseph Jefferson, Sargent painted him, see the painting and the real person. Look at more examples. You need to interpret the person as well, not just render feature by feature. It is not my idea, SArgent himself did it. Remember a portrait, like Leffel said, is a dialogue between the sitter and the artist, both have to work together; how the artist sees the sitter and how the sitter would like to see herself...Its a dilemma. I know. For now all we need to know about is planes and tones, we are jumping into a whole new webinar!!!! aahaahaha.
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-23-2013, 09:34 PM
There is a pic I saw long ago of a close up of the daughter of Mrs. Fiske warren, see if you can find it... the girl looked soooo different than in the painting. Her mother was more feminized by Sargent, made the eye sockets less deep, he also made the mouth a bit smaller, more delicate. See?
LAdy Agnew also looks more delicate, more regal, he seemed to have refined the feautres carve them out more perhaps, I also see he lightened the eyes a bit more in the painting, but that could be the photo. Look up the names I recommended, and please post them here so we can all see, I am terrible for looking for things online. This is good stuff guys!!!!
Ken

susanc
02-23-2013, 09:42 PM
Oh, darn. Not good enough. You want to know what he changed in the portraits! :)

Well, in this self-portrait, it appears that he might have slimmed down his face. The photo is in 3/4 view which usually narrows the face appearance anyway? He also gave himself a more elegant carriage or posture. He had a knack of giving everyone more elegant posture. He is also in color in the painting. ;) I think his nose might be straighter than in the photo. And it looks like he always does something different to the eyebrows, makes them better than in real life.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargenthimself.jpg

This is supposed to be the only known existing photo of Madame X, and was taken by Nadar. Her nose is not quite as striking in the photo. He gave it more flair or slope in the portrait. Her eyebrow also has more flair in the portrait. Her clothes are also different. :D Sorry, I'm exhausted! That was a marathon class today!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentvgatreau.jpg

I looked for the daughter, Rachel Warren, and didn't find a photo of her. There might be something somewhere, but I didn't see it. I'll try Monday to look at those other things you mentioned, too. Thanks for the great class today!

susanc
02-23-2013, 10:26 PM
This information came from the Gurney Journey blog, September 14, 2010. here (http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2010/09/caricature-and-likeness.html).

James Gurney cites the book, John Singer Sargent by Richard Ormond, 1970, figures 21 and 22, as his source. This is Coventry Patmore and his portrait that was painted by Sargent.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-Coventry_Patmore_Comparison.jpg

I realize that the photos and the portraits I've used in previous posts are imperfect comparisons because the dates may not match, but they still provide an interesting comparison. According to Gurney, both of these images date from the mid 1890's. I find that interesting because Patmore's face appears more gaunt in the painted portrait, maybe seeming older to me? But his hair is livelier, as is his mustache in the painting. And look how his neck has grown longer in the portrait! I think his nose has a little more character in the painting, too. The bridge isn't as straight.

Here's Joseph Jackson, but he wasn't on Gurney's blog. He is already a character--an actor--and his portrait seems to emphasize that he's an unusual ebullient personality. His hair is fluffed out more in the portrait. His eyebrows are more defined, and I think his face is thinner. Apologies to the following post. I didn't realize you already posted this!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentjackson.jpg

Pinklady219
02-23-2013, 10:38 PM
I am taking a chance here and posting what I think is the week 2 homework. I should look at my notes but I am lazy tonight and want to read more info :heart: about Sargent.
I am also including a photo of Joseph Jefferson and a painting by Sargent of same. Apparently Sargent seen this photo and it did influence his portrait. The hair is exaggerated in the painting.

susanc
02-23-2013, 11:32 PM
The tip of Jackson's nose is narrower in the portrait that Sargent painted. His mouth isn't as wide in the portrait and the jaw seems a little less meaty or thick, too. I was struck by how Sargent painted his gaze so intense and direct. To me, it's much more so than any other Sargent portrait posted before this.

Again, I'm sorry pinklady! I didn't realize that you had posted Joseph Jackson already. I should have scrolled down further but I just added it to my previous post.

Thanks for the links, Ken!

This is Carolus-Duran, Sargent's painting instructor. His hair is tidied up in the portrait, his skin seems smoother in the portrait (maybe he was younger in the portrait?) and again, his face might be thinner, giving an elegance to his appearance.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentcarolusduran.jpg

It's driving me crazy that I can't find Rachel Warren! This is the best I can do so far:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/1697-sargentpainting.jpg

Colorix
02-24-2013, 09:35 AM
Not a wrinkle in sight, and still Mommy looks way older than Daughter. Picture is small, but it seems Mom's lines are sharper and more broken, with higher contrasts. Daughter has much smoother and delicate transitions.


http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentlgretchenosgoodwarren.jpg

polly
02-24-2013, 09:38 AM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/787-NOTAN_3_values_1.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/787-NOTAN_2_values_1.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/787-NOTAN_4_values_2.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/787-NOTAN_4_values_b.jpg
Here are a few value studies..I thought this was what you asked for but seeing everyone else's work I am not so sure now!
showing 2, 1, 3 values
love this class. Phyllis

susanc
02-24-2013, 10:37 AM
Phyllis, I was just having fun posting the photo/portrait comparisons so I'm glad that it morphed into a homework assignment opportunity. I think there are now 3 possible homework assignments to choose from?

If the Boston museum has an original photograph of Sargent painting the Warren's, it could be enlarged without the problems I'm having with graininess of these scanned dot patterns. If anyone else wants to take a crack at finding a photo of Rachel or enlarging this photo, please be my guest! Rachel Warren, daughter of Fiske Warren and Gretchen Osgood Warren, married Samuel Kirkland Lothrop (who was b. 1892) in 1914. Sargent's portrait of Gretchen and Rachel was painted in 1903. I can find a photo of Rachel's husband, and one of his 2nd wife?, but so far not one for Rachel.

pinklady is either using a better search engine than I'm using, or more likely, she's just better at this! She came up with that particular photo of Joe Jackson very quickly. There are so many others showing him with much subdued hair!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/1697-sargentrachelwarrendetail.jpg

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 01:47 PM
Ok, I have added to the homework. LOOK AT OBJECTS AROUND YOU AND SEE IF THE HIGHLIGHTS MOVE AS YOU WALK AROUND THE ROOM, FOLLOWING YOU, SEE HOW ANOTHER PERSON MAY SEE IT IN AN AREA YOU CANNOT. THEN LOOK FOR THIS GRADATION IN LESS OBVIOUS OBJECTS, LIKE ONES WHERE THE LIGHT SEEMS TO STICK TO IT, SEE HOW THE VALUES CAN CHANGE SLIGHTLY AS YOU WALK AROUND. REMEMBER, ALL LIGHT REFLECTS SPECULARLY IN DIFFERENT DEGREES SO YOU SHOULD SEE THIS EVEN IN OBJECTS YOU WOULD NOT EXPECT.

Look up more Sargent portraits and the actual people, do the detective work. I want to see those pics with the comparative descriptions between the actual person and the portrait, what did Sargent change? With the wetcanvas army we can see tons of examples how you can alter a portrait as long as you did it while being in perfect control, because you intended it to be so, not because you failed at your goal (not getting it right).

Submit altered newspapers cutout or photos where you indicate the terminator, or blocking out with a black marker the shadow family from the light.

You can also outline each and every tone and point it out.

Also look up Jo Jefferson, or Joseph Jefferson, Sargent painted him, see the painting and the real person. Look at more examples. You need to interpret the person as well, not just render feature by feature. It is not my idea, SArgent himself did it. Remember a portrait, like Leffel said, is a dialogue between the sitter and the artist, both have to work together; how the artist sees the sitter and how the sitter would like to see herself...Its a dilemma. I know. For now all we need to know about is planes and tones, we are jumping into a whole new webinar!!!! aahaahaha.

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 01:56 PM
Hi Ken

I do not understand because I do not know which comment and image of Donna's you are referring to. Help please

dor :)
I dont know why the pics are not posted as I reply, just scroll back and find a series of pics, one with a blue jay a.

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 01:58 PM
I posted my homework in the "homework- elements of form" thread, but no one else is posting homework there...perhaps you could mention the homework thread tomorrow!
Thanks.

post here, in the beginning of that thread you mention there was a message of mine telling everyone to post it here, unfortunately someone did not read it, and the next guy saw the homework there, pushing my message back in another page, therefore giving the illusion that that thread was the proper thread. Long story how this whole thing came about' lets keep it all here in one thread.

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:02 PM
I admit I was a multi tasker today. The second sketch I did whilst you did the Sargent demo ..not at all like yours but I am hoping I am getting the terminator \ plane premise. The other two I did after dinner. Loving all of this. Thank you so much.

Almost Donna, but not quite yet. Don't fret, this take time to get right ,because we tend to have the false understanding that values appear randomly in a scene and all we need to do is blindly render each shape and then the image magically appears, but if something is off, that whole illusion is destroyed, which is why you have to draw as you understand so that you anticipate or draw according to what you know or looks right, even if you cannot see it in the moment. Your shadows are not quite separate in vale from the rest, Shadows are super distinct contrasts, much more than what you think, not just a darker thing. They tend to be large areas breaking from all the other values, and all the values within the shadow are very close together, making the mass easier to see. Look at SArgent's shadows, you can EASILY identify the terminator. Claroscuro paintings are the best for this example, they knew about the problem of muddling the terminator, it was convenient to painting in extreme lighting situations. Darken those shadows, and simplify them!!!

bbuggia
02-24-2013, 02:03 PM
Will someone take pity on me and post a copy of the man's photo that Ken worked on after the webinar was officially over?

Please, please..... I want to try it, loved it!!!!
B Buggia

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:10 PM
Oh, darn. Not good enough. You want to know what he changed in the portraits! :)

Well, in this self-portrait, it appears that he might have slimmed down his face. The photo is in 3/4 view which usually narrows the face appearance anyway? He also gave himself a more elegant carriage or posture. He had a knack of giving everyone more elegant posture. He is also in color in the painting. ;) I think his nose might be straighter than in the photo. And it looks like he always does something different to the eyebrows, makes them better than in real life.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargenthimself.jpg

This is supposed to be the only known existing photo of Madame X, and was taken by Nadar. Her nose is not quite as striking in the photo. He gave it more flair or slope in the portrait. Her eyebrow also has more flair in the portrait. Her clothes are also different. :D Sorry, I'm exhausted! That was a marathon class today!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentvgatreau.jpg

I looked for the daughter, Rachel Warren, and didn't find a photo of her. There might be something somewhere, but I didn't see it. I'll try Monday to look at those other things you mentioned, too. Thanks for the great class today!
Great stuff, notice how Sargent perked his eyebrow to a tip in the painting, giving him more character, in eyes for instance, any subtle perking of the line or angle into a more angular shape can make such a difference in the likeness of a person, the difference between a curve and a curve that subtly comes to a point. Look at MAdame X's nose, look how he really gave it more character, the tip, revealing the POETIC truth of the person. He did not focus on rendering shape by shape, feature by feature. He was ahead of that, he had that mastered and instead thought of the poetic truth. Rendering features is not necessarily going to give a good portrait. Her eyebrows, if you want a woman to look more refined, and bring out her eyes more, you wax her eyebrows etc. You see? Even if you do not see it, I am sure a women would not mind if in a portrait you give her a makeup job or a makeover!!! ahahahaha. This is why drawings skills are a must, to the point of perfection. But I am trying to teach a method where you think less of drawing and more of planes and masses thereby revealing the features by themselves if you work from large to small correctly. Alot of this thread should be sighted in the upcoming webinars since we are delving into portraits more than what I thought!!! Good stuff! Yeah the Rachel Warren, if anyone can find it, is a perfect example of how generous he was to her.

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:18 PM
This information came from the Gurney Journey blog, September 14, 2010. here (http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2010/09/caricature-and-likeness.html).

James Gurney cites the book, John Singer Sargent by Richard Ormond, 1970, figures 21 and 22, as his source. This is Coventry Patmore and his portrait that was painted by Sargent.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-Coventry_Patmore_Comparison.jpg

I realize that the photos and the portraits I've used in previous posts are imperfect comparisons because the dates may not match, but they still provide an interesting comparison. According to Gurney, both of these images date from the mid 1890's. I find that interesting because Patmore's face appears more gaunt in the painted portrait, maybe seeming older to me? But his hair is livelier, as is his mustache in the painting. And look how his neck has grown longer in the portrait! I think his nose has a little more character in the painting, too. The bridge isn't as straight.

Here's Joseph Jackson, but he wasn't on Gurney's blog. He is already a character--an actor--and his portrait seems to emphasize that he's an unusual ebullient personality. His hair is fluffed out more in the portrait. His eyebrows are more defined, and I think his face is thinner. Apologies to the following post. I didn't realize you already posted this!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentjackson.jpg

I think the Patmore photo and the portrait are around the same time, even then, the bone structure is a bit different, the head seems a bit narrower, the nose a bit bonier, the difference are obvious. Look at the bottom portrait, where are the wrinkles in the portrait? All he did was state the main ones, that give an expression (the split between the two frontal eyebrow muscles), and even then he made it less distinct, going in less into the head, thereby softening the values. Wrinkles that are too dark tell that the person's skin cracked too deeply. You wanna inject some phat or silicone or whatever they do these days to flatten those wrinkled juuuuuuuust a bit.
Good stuff!!!

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:20 PM
I am taking a chance here and posting what I think is the week 2 homework. I should look at my notes but I am lazy tonight and want to read more info :heart: about Sargent.
I am also including a photo of Joseph Jefferson and a painting by Sargent of same. Apparently Sargent seen this photo and it did influence his portrait. The hair is exaggerated in the painting.

Fantastic example!!! Great homework, you understood the difference between the local color or MAIN LIGHT and the LIGHT (or highlight), and the halftone with the shadow. PLease state that more, and out line each mass better throughout the WHOOOOLLLLEEEE face. I would really appreciate it, it is a great example!!!
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:23 PM
I am taking a chance here and posting what I think is the week 2 homework. I should look at my notes but I am lazy tonight and want to read more info :heart: about Sargent.
I am also including a photo of Joseph Jefferson and a painting by Sargent of same. Apparently Sargent seen this photo and it did influence his portrait. The hair is exaggerated in the painting.

One more thing, carefull with the mustache, you dragged the terminator too much into his left mustache, there is an area there that is subtly in the light, look for it. I know it is hard to see because hair is not very reflective.

Work in the nose too, the eyes, if you had 5 values or puddles of paint to describe the face where would you put each puddle? Like a paint by numbers!!!
Great, pinklady!!!

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:30 PM
The tip of Jackson's nose is narrower in the portrait that Sargent painted. His mouth isn't as wide in the portrait and the jaw seems a little less meaty or thick, too. I was struck by how Sargent painted his gaze so intense and direct. To me, it's much more so than any other Sargent portrait posted before this.

Again, I'm sorry pinklady! I didn't realize that you had posted Joseph Jackson already. I should have scrolled down further but I just added it to my previous post.

Thanks for the links, Ken!

This is Carolus-Duran, Sargent's painting instructor. His hair is tidied up in the portrait, his skin seems smoother in the portrait (maybe he was younger in the portrait?) and again, his face might be thinner, giving an elegance to his appearance.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/23-Feb-2013/1697-sargentcarolusduran.jpg

It's driving me crazy that I can't find Rachel Warren! This is the best I can do so far:

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/1697-sargentpainting.jpg
SArgent needed to emphasize Joseph's gaze because that is THE landmark that separates him from being just any other man. His nose and mouth maybe secondary to his gaze, because in his case the eyes take on a major role. Shave off Jay Leno's chin but keep the mouth. What happens? Does it still express his personality? Or if you take away Jennifer Connelly's strong eye brows, would it still be her or the way we got used to her? What about Reagan's smooth black hair? Clinton's nose? One person may have a predominant feature more than the other, some people's mouths can be sooo important to the likeness. I am trying to remember a celebrity, which mouth tapers downward or has a specific gesture or character in that it moves more. Think of these things. When I saw the real Madame X I was disappointed, because I got used to the more archetypal look that Sargent painted. All this is very interesting.
The Duran portrait, I don't think Sargent could avoid it, but the head looks a bit symmetrical due to the hairdo. The photo expresses more variety in that shape. Vary these shapes when you can, or vary the background so alter those shapes. Sometimes I do not think you can get away with it!!! But we must keep it in mind!
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:36 PM
Not a wrinkle in sight, and still Mommy looks way older than Daughter. Picture is small, but it seems Mom's lines are sharper and more broken, with higher contrasts. Daughter has much smoother and delicate transitions.

Correct, it is not the wrinkles that makes someone look old, it is how much the bone under the flesh shows through, and becomes distinctive. Children look sooo generic and smooth because the bone structure has not become unique or shown through the skin, as we age we look more unique and particularized because our unique bone topography show through, giving us more character than the fat would hide. All Sargent did is take away the distracting protrusions in her eyes by putting some more fat in the eye socket, thereby preventing the eyes from going too deep in the skull. As we age, the fat above the eye starts to wear out making the eye sockets more distinct. Look up photos of before and after of Al Pacino or Michael Caine.

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:37 PM
Not a wrinkle in sight, and still Mommy looks way older than Daughter. Picture is small, but it seems Mom's lines are sharper and more broken, with higher contrasts. Daughter has much smoother and delicate transitions.


He also waxed her eyebrows and sharpened up her nose. You need to know a bit of anatomy in order to know how to show the tissues under the nose, the cartilage, that is normally hidden!

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:39 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/787-NOTAN_3_values_1.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/787-NOTAN_2_values_1.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/787-NOTAN_4_values_2.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/787-NOTAN_4_values_b.jpg
Here are a few value studies..I thought this was what you asked for but seeing everyone else's work I am not so sure now!
showing 2, 1, 3 values
love this class. Phyllis
Not quite what I am looking for though these studies are well done. They seem to be more proper to the homework I gave in my other webinar about the masters. Scroll back on this page, someone posted a great example of what I am looking for, I think it was pinklady if I am not mistaken. Good studies though! If not, I hope the members here help me out.
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:41 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2013/1067432-IMG_0383.JPG

Another one just to be sure I understand ... which I am not... In this face, nose and moustache come forward because they are in the light .There is a touch of light on the brow and the chin indicating that they come slightly forward, more than the rest of the face. The right of the face is in the shade but through tranparency we can figure out the other eye, the cheek and the shape of the jaw. There are two distinct planes on the brow between light and shade. Is this particular section called "Terminator" ?
This is a pencil drawing copied from JSS.

Jackie, do this portrait again please, keeping in mind the classified tones I talk about, once you know what to look for, you have more with which to strengthen the portrait. Try again, you will see a better result. Remember you asked about the terminator?

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:51 PM
Here is a pop quiz everyone please see if you can answer this.

Why is it physically or scientifically IMPOSSIBLE for the highlight on a sphere to appear EXACTLY in the center of it? Meaning all the outside edges of the sphere are at the exact distance to the center of the highlight. Why will we never see a highlight dead center of it? Whoever answers this correctly will get a personal prize from me, maybe send you a drawing or something of mine. If you answer this correctly, you will have understood my whole lesson on light reflection from last class.

Anyone motivated?????

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 02:55 PM
Here is a photo of my grandfather that I have been keen to paint. I notice a lot of colour and warmth in the background shadows on my right and a little in the shadow of the collar on my left. Would I need to blur the edges a little on his shoulder, face and hat on my right hand side to send this side of him back into the distance? Would his eye on my left need a slightly brighter highlight than the other eye to bring it forward?

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/22-Feb-2013/915542-IMG_0895sm.jpg

I am hoping that at the end of these classes I will be able to do a better rendering of him than this one I did in pastels before the classes started!!!! The camera has made the white pastel a lot more chalky than it is in reality.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/22-Feb-2013/915542-P1050331sm.jpg

Based on what we have been discussing on the thread, what features are to be the most pronounced or emphasized? Which parts of his face tell the story the most? If you could extrapolate his poetic truth and write it in a sentence what would it say? You have to draw or paint keeping this in mind. Hint? It is NOT in the wrinkles.

jmcedeno
02-24-2013, 02:58 PM
Ken, Saturday class was a real Master Class, thank you, it did clarify for me a lot of tricks regarding Light, shade, cast shadow, etc. On portraits it is something I have struggled for many years trying to achieve a likeness rather than an interpretation as a work of art not a photograph. I look at portraits of different artists in a new way and now after close observation I can see what the artist was trying to achieve comparing it with the photo. I have gone back to the many books in my library to check works by Sargent, Sorolla, Cassatt, etc.
The exercise you added to the homework is very interesting more so when you put a single strong light on one side of the object. This reminded me of a different phenomenon: When you walk on either side of a bust the figure remains static looking in one direction, but when you do likewise looking at a front face portrait the eyes follow you, Weird!!

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 03:00 PM
Thank you ken........

My thinking was that the shadow over the bottles had flattened them in the same way the Pelican being in very dark shadow appeared to be flat.
dor:)
Yes you are right, the thing is another person submitted an image of a bottle as well and I got confused, the cast shadow on the wall makes the surface look like its a hole. But this happens when the cast shadows are almost black. Are you referring to a drawing of a bottle or the picture of it? I think I remember now.

Trivia: Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were afraid to step in the craters of the moon because they felt they were going to fall in and never come out again... why did they have this impression?

I am going to be throwing out more quizzes at you guys!!!

ToskaFromAlabama
02-24-2013, 03:13 PM
Here is a pop quiz everyone please see if you can answer this.

Why is it physically or scientifically IMPOSSIBLE for the highlight on a sphere to appear EXACTLY in the center of it? Meaning all the outside edges of the sphere are at the exact distance to the center of the highlight. Why will we never see a highlight dead center of it? Whoever answers this correctly will get a personal prize from me, maybe send you a drawing or something of mine. If you answer this correctly, you will have understood my whole lesson on light reflection from last class.

Anyone motivated?????

Ken, My Answer: The highlight could not appear exactly in the center of a sphere because, you would have to be standing and at eye level exactly between the light-source and where it hits the sphere. You would be blocking the light, and therefore no highlight. When standing at another location to view the sphere, the highlight would be at a location on the light side of the sphere in relation to your line of sight. The highlight could not be dead center, and would move in relation to your moving and change of line of sight.

That is how I understood it. Your description was very clear to me. I don't know if I phrased it correctly. Toska

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 03:16 PM
This is the gist of what I understood from the class: since the lightest value of a painting appears to come forward the most, the impression we receive from this engraving is that the center, which in reality comes closest to us physically, seems further away because it isn't the lightest part of the engraving? We can offset this effect with warm color in the center area if this had been a painting instead. (I used what appears to be a public domain image.)

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/18-Feb-2013/1697-cylinder_1_lg.gif
I was reading this again, going through the comments. It is not the light itself, the mass or area that comes out, it is the light area where it meets the next shape, in the most dramatic form, the contrast itself that comes forward. The mass itself is flat, the contrast between the masses as they relate to other weaker contrasts (shadow), are what make 'things' appear like the go back and forth. It is not the area, it is where they meet. After all it is light, but you cannot have light without shadow or a darker value next to it..... but, you can have darkness without light ( a dark room), but you cannot have an all bright room without any shadows.

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 03:19 PM
Ken, My Answer: The highlight could not appear exactly in the center of a sphere because, you would have to be standing and at eye level exactly between the light-source and where it hits the sphere. You would be blocking the light, and therefore no highlight. When standing at another location to view the sphere, the highlight would be at a location on the light side of the sphere in relation to your line of sight. The highlight could not be dead center, and would move in relation to your moving and change of line of sight.

That is how I understood it. Your description was very clear to me. I don't know if I phrased it correctly. Toska

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap: and the grand prize goes to TOSKA!!!!!!!!!!!!! send me a private message with your address. Whoa, that was FAST!!!! Everyone understand the explanation?

chalet_dor
02-24-2013, 03:27 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/1184319-ScreenShot007.jpg Will someone take pity on me and post a copy of the man's photo that Ken worked on after the webinar was officially over?

Please, please..... I want to try it, loved it!!!!
B Buggia

Here it is
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/1184319-ScreenShot008.jpg

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 03:37 PM
Hi Ken here is my homework.

I have had a difficult time understanding and showing something to support how light can contradict what we know about the actual surface of the object.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture_1.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture2.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture3.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture4.JPG http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-Feb-2013/1184319-Capture5.JPG

I forgot to add the caption to the Beautiful Shadow Image of two people that show the distortion shadow can make beautiful or not. The woods scene depicts how the right light and shadow can make or break everything. Even change a mood and in our ability to see with our own eyes and convey in a painting.
I thank you for being patient with me!
dor:)

I forgot to mention the cast shadow of the drawing. The bottle, its cast shadow looks lighter at the top, that is impossible since the solidity of the cork would block out the light EVEN MORE than the semi translucency of the light. Is this the pic you were referring to Dor?

chalet_dor
02-24-2013, 03:49 PM
I forgot to mention the cast shadow of the drawing. The bottle, its cast shadow looks lighter at the top, that is impossible since the solidity of the cork would block out the light EVEN MORE than the semi translucency of the light. Is this the pic you were referring to Dor?

Yes it is.......Thanks Ken

Susan Peltonen
02-24-2013, 04:00 PM
Ken, here is my homework submission:
In this drawing of Yeats by Sargent, (elogedelart.canalblog.com) the terminator is very clearly defined, and separates the light areas of the face from the shadowed areas with a significant value drop. The closeness of values in the shadowed area are much tighter then those in the light, optically making that area look like one mass. The bow tie and section of the shirt collar in the shadowed area are catching the light, indicating that they are protruding and are closer to the viewer. The area on the forehead catching the light identifies the planes there and gives structure to the face.
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/153022-elogedelart.canalblog.com.jpg

bbuggia
02-24-2013, 04:36 PM
Oh I am sorry, I wasn't clear..... I meant the actual photo of the man that Ken worked from. Is it anywhere I could find it????

Thanks so much
B Buggia

Jacdesusbielle
02-24-2013, 06:46 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/1067432-image.jpg
This is the photo that Ken was working on after the class was over. Is it what you were looking for ?

HazelP
02-24-2013, 06:51 PM
Based on what we have been discussing on the thread, what features are to be the most pronounced or emphasized? Which parts of his face tell the story the most? If you could extrapolate his poetic truth and write it in a sentence what would it say? You have to draw or paint keeping this in mind. Hint? It is NOT in the wrinkles.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/915542-image.jpg

What stands out to me is the sharp change in the angle of his nose with the light shining on the top part and on his forehead, the high, prominent cheek bones, the gaunt hollowed out cheeks and eye sockets of the elderly man, his quirky, bushy eyebrows and his bushy beard.

Arthur (my grandfather) was in his 90s when this photo was taken and lived till his 99th year, very alert till the end.

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 07:30 PM
794173


Here is the pic I used. The angle is there guys, obviously I would not have the drawing skills to sketch everything else and leave something that obvious to be wrong. It looks funny, I know. I will try to play with it a bit see what I can do, but Sargent is SArgent.

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 07:32 PM
Let me get back to this thread in a a few days, give people time to submit more stuff.
Best, good stuff guys, keep posting,
Ken

bbuggia
02-24-2013, 07:43 PM
PERFECT!! You guys are so kind!!

Thanks so much.
Brenda Buggia

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 08:48 PM
Jackie, do this portrait again please, keeping in mind the classified tones I talk about, once you know what to look for, you have more with which to strengthen the portrait. Try again, you will see a better result. Remember you asked about the terminator?

AHAHAH what did you use for the lights on the face? There is another medium there? ahahaha I do that too sometimes. It is the eye in the shade that is off. You have good values there. I just want to see if you could improve it with what you know now.

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 08:53 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/21-Feb-2013/1067432-IMG_0383.JPG

Another one just to be sure I understand ... which I am not... In this face, nose and moustache come forward because they are in the light .There is a touch of light on the brow and the chin indicating that they come slightly forward, more than the rest of the face. The right of the face is in the shade but through tranparency we can figure out the other eye, the cheek and the shape of the jaw. There are two distinct planes on the brow between light and shade. Is this particular section called "Terminator" ?
This is a pencil drawing copied from JSS.

One more thing, we tend to draw in things in the shadow that are not seen, but we know are there, why? because we want to satisfy ourselves with knowing what is there. The problem is we tend to invent values there. You need not to 'figure out' the eye in the shadow, like you said, unless I am misinterpreting you. If you cannot see something there, let it be, don't try to see more than what the lighting situation provides, unless you are consistent throughout. So do not figure out shadows, if they look transparent or vague, paint them like so.

Ken Instructor
02-24-2013, 08:59 PM
One more quiz: would there by a highlight on an eye if it is in the shadow? That is to say, a highlight from the main light source very obstruction is responsible for that very same shadow?

HazelP
02-24-2013, 10:34 PM
One more quiz: would there by a highlight on an eye if it is in the shadow? That is to say, a highlight from the main light source very obstruction is responsible for that very same shadow?

If the eye was shaded from the main light source it would not be able to pick up highlights from that source.

chalet_dor
02-24-2013, 10:58 PM
If the eye was shaded from the main light source it would not be able to pick up highlights from that source.

:thumbsup: I agree with you Hazel..........


(If I wasn't busy watch Hollywood Oscars on TV I would have posted before you):wink2: .......... dor

Rosemarie
02-25-2013, 01:43 AM
Here is a pop quiz everyone please see if you can answer this.

Why is it physically or scientifically IMPOSSIBLE for the highlight on a sphere to appear EXACTLY in the center of it? Meaning all the outside edges of the sphere are at the exact distance to the center of the highlight. Why will we never see a highlight dead center of it? Whoever answers this correctly will get a personal prize from me, maybe send you a drawing or something of mine. If you answer this correctly, you will have understood my whole lesson on light reflection from last class.

Anyone motivated?????

The person looking at the ball would be between the the ball and the light source and the light would be in shadow, hence no light in the very center.

chalet_dor
02-25-2013, 04:33 AM
Homework Week 2
Have learned it is difficult to find photos of the subjects in Sargent's portrait because the camera was new or did not exist. The most interesting subject I found was (Madame_Pierre_Gautreau)

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Madame_Pierre_Gautreau_photograph_.jpg

This lady caused quite a scandal in Paris and became very well known. Sargent was very fond of her and made numerous sketches. He was well known for painting flattering portraits.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Madame_Pierre_Gautreau_Sketch.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Study_for_Madame_X_227.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-SARGENT_John_Singer_Madame_X_Madame_Pierre_Gautreau_MET_LS_d100_07.jpg

I have had a wonderful time reading about Sargent. My very first time to do so. Thank you Ken. Your class this Saturday was wonderful! I have other images to share with everyone, later because it is 3:30 AM in Florida. Because you can draw and talk at the same time it was perfect for me to relax and learn! I will be purchasing the videos when available. I encourage everyone to do so. I have your video lessons for Secrets of the Masters! dor :)

chalet_dor
02-25-2013, 05:10 AM
Home work Week 2

So excited I can't sleep, just had to share this right now...........Mrs_John_William_Crombie By Sargent

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Sargent_Mrs_John_William_Crombie.jpg

Look the bags under her eyes are gone! Look at her skin and how fine it is. She looks like herself but with each brush stroke she has become beautiful. If he were alive and I had the money, he could paint my portrait any time. How about you? :smug:

chalet_dor
02-25-2013, 08:04 AM
Home Work Day 2

Ken mention Claroscuro! I could not find an artist with that name. :crying: I found out in Spanish it means a play of light and dark. Examples below!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-220px-Jacques-Louis_David_-_La_Mort_de_Marat.jpg. . . .http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-claroscuro.jpg. . . .http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Play_of_light_and_dark_claroscuro.jpg


Is it possible that Ken was trying to trick us? dor :D

Johannes Instructor
02-25-2013, 10:06 AM
Home work Week 2

So excited I can't sleep, just had to share this right now...........Mrs_John_William_Crombie By Sargent

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Sargent_Mrs_John_William_Crombie.jpg

Look the bags under her eyes are gone! Look at her skin and how fine it is. She looks like herself but with each brush stroke she has become beautiful. If he were alive and I had the money, he could paint my portrait any time. How about you? :smug:
???

Jacdesusbielle
02-25-2013, 10:24 AM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1067432-image.jpg
I am not sure they are quite different .... I tried to apply what I had learned last Saturdays . The lights show more because I did not take a white paper so I could use a white pastel pencil to reinforce them. Like Sargent did in this drawing, I did not put any background. Is that any better ?
You are a wonderful teacher and I learned already a lot from you. Thank you a million times Ken. Hope your next class is also about portraits, my favourite ...
See you next Saturday
Jacqueline

Jacdesusbielle
02-25-2013, 10:38 AM
He looks so British, like an old Colonel of the Army of India. I love to draw this kind of face from the beginning of the last century. Sorry for this personal intrusion .....

Ken Instructor
02-25-2013, 10:46 AM
Home work Week 2

So excited I can't sleep, just had to share this right now...........Mrs_John_William_Crombie By Sargent

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Sargent_Mrs_John_William_Crombie.jpg

Look the bags under her eyes are gone! Look at her skin and how fine it is. She looks like herself but with each brush stroke she has become beautiful. If he were alive and I had the money, he could paint my portrait any time. How about you? :smug:
I do not know if this is a challenge or a prank aahahah but as I saw the photo and the painting I noticed that that photo of the actual person is too clear to be taken during Sargent's years, they did not have that clarity in those times, compare it with the ones posted just above. And the photo (the position of the face) is too identical to the painting, as if Sargent himself had taken the photo on the spot, not from a different angle, or anything; I thought it even looked copied and pasted. Two, the painting, the lighting of the face, just did not match the context of the rest of the painting, not to mention the face looks too photographic, not even like an Ingres- too photographic for those times. I notice there is no evidence of the brushwork and there is not a single painting of Sargent that did not show his craft or technique to one degree or the other. There is evidence of his brushwork, on the clothing, but not on the face? So I googled the name of the painting and came up with the following image. I have been studying this artist as long as I can remember, and I immediately noticed something wrong. I liked how Sargent "photoshoped" the bags under the eyes. Nice try ahahahah!!!:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

jbath
02-25-2013, 12:11 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/979056-image.jpg

Here's my first try. Hope it's not too confusing. Not sure if I'm off.

Linda Reyes1959
02-25-2013, 12:37 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/978726-img002.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/978726-Mrs_-William-Shakespeare-Louise-Weiland-large.jpg I hope I got this right. I missed the first class and I'm playing catch-up. In the painting it apears that the highlight on the eye is in shadow, but I think it is just next to the shadow sense you would not see a highlight in shadow. Is this right?

susanc
02-25-2013, 01:13 PM
If he were alive and I had the money, he could paint my portrait any time. How about you? :smug:

That's a hard question! If he were alive, maybe I'd prefer watching him paint someone else's portrait instead. But yes, I would rather have him paint my portrait than anyone else I can think of! Imagine having his work hanging in your home (whoa!)--plus, looking 10 or so lbs lighter in the portrait, too. Win/win!

chalet_dor
02-25-2013, 02:32 PM
I do not know if this is a challenge or a prank aahahah but as I saw the photo and the painting I noticed that that photo of the actual person is too clear to be taken during Sargent's years, they did not have that clarity in those times, compare it with the ones posted just above. And the photo (the position of the face) is too identical to the painting, as if Sargent himself had taken the photo on the spot, not from a different angle, or anything; I thought it even looked copied and pasted. Two, the painting, the lighting of the face, just did not match the context of the rest of the painting, not to mention the face looks too photographic, not even like an Ingres- too photographic for those times. I notice there is no evidence of the brushwork and there is not a single painting of Sargent that did not show his craft or technique to one degree or the other. There is evidence of his brushwork, on the clothing, but not on the face? So I googled the name of the painting and came up with the following image. I have been studying this artist as long as I can remember, and I immediately noticed something wrong. I liked how Sargent "photoshoped" the bags under the eyes. Nice try ahahahah!!!:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
Glad you guys had a good laugh. I swear this was no prank! Searched for Sargent Portraits with photograph of model all night with different search engines, out of thousands of images this one popped up and I was :clap: for joy. Damn can't trust anything these days! Lesson here......scrutanize what what my eyes tell me. I am easily fooled!
dor :o

susanc
02-26-2013, 07:37 PM
Dor, Don't feel bad. It wasn't just you. At first glance I thought it was genuine, too! Ken has been studying Sargent portraits for quite a while, so he saw style differences we wouldn't notice right away since we're just starting out!

I thought the question you asked was an extremely valid one. I wasn't laughing at you. I'm very sorry if you thought I was. I would love to watch him paint--anything--so I was trying to decide if that would be of more value to me than having him paint my portrait or not. But in my opinion, Sargent made the women look so much better in their portraits than they did in real life. Who wouldn't want him to paint them?

This link might be the photo Ken was thinking about:
http://greatmuseums.org/explore/more/collective_vision_isabella_stewart_gardner_museum

Now scroll down until you see the sepia-toned photo of Sargent painting. Click on it to enlarge it. You can see the daughter a bit better in it. If you stare at the portrait of the daughter, then look at her face in the photo, you do notice a difference. He has made their jawlines so much more graceful. (These photos are in the collection of the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, where the portrait was painted in 1903.)

susanc
02-26-2013, 08:07 PM
Lucky Boston-area people! I was just looking at the site for the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum. Running from Feb 28 through May 13, the ISGM will host "Anders Zorn: A European Artist Seduces America" (http://www.gardnermuseum.org/collection/exhibitions/forthcoming_exhibitions/anders_zorn), featuring 24 paintings and also 22 drawings, letters and gifts that Zorn gave Isabella Stewart Gardner. I'm not sure it's possible to display enough envy emoticons for this! :envy: :envy: :envy: :envy: :envy: :envy: :envy:

Pinklady219
02-26-2013, 08:51 PM
Fantastic example!!! Great homework, you understood the difference between the local color or MAIN LIGHT and the LIGHT (or highlight), and the halftone with the shadow. PLease state that more, and out line each mass better throughout the WHOOOOLLLLEEEE face. I would really appreciate it, it is a great example!!!
Ken
Here is what I think you wanted--the whooollleee face LOL. This is the best I could come up with using my limited technical knowledge. ugh :crossfingers:

Jacdesusbielle
02-27-2013, 09:52 AM
Very nice Pinklady ! How did you do that ? The explanation is very clear. Bravo!

Colorix
02-27-2013, 10:11 AM
Terminators

Caravaggio, St Jerome
Red and green for terminators, a few of them (simplified), then it gets complicated...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/117343-Carav-Jerome.jpg


Rembrandt, self portrait (one of a gazillion)

Red = terminator
Yellow = edge of cast shadow, not a terminator? Or should it be *regarded* as one?

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/117343-Rem-self.jpg

chalet_dor
02-27-2013, 02:50 PM
Hi Ken
Homework Day 2

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/1184319-ScreenShot001.jpg


Now that I posted it I see I have lost my yellow Light Accent down the nose and under it, when I put the Half Tone in.
Maybe an E for effort dor :wink2:

chalet_dor
02-27-2013, 04:29 PM
Second try of Day 2

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/1184319-ScreenShot001.jpg

I think this is much better...........dor

mlgk
02-27-2013, 04:31 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/161785-sargent-caspargoodrich.jpgJohn Singer Sargent portrait

chalet_dor
02-27-2013, 04:34 PM
Well I'll be darn! I fixed it and kept the same file name.......So both uploads are the same picture, the better one overwrote the first! dor

Ken Instructor
02-27-2013, 09:16 PM
Just as a quick comment, don't worry people I am not ignoring the homework, I will get to these tomorrow or Friday. I have been letting them pile up so I can knock 'em all down. I have been mega busy and tomorrow is my birthday and as much as I would like to stay home working on the webinars and the homework, no one will let me do that on that specific day. I will get to it very soon, thanks for your support and participation. Some have been sending emails with portrait critiques, its the same, I will get to it all soon.
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-27-2013, 09:20 PM
Lucky Boston-area people! I was just looking at the site for the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum. Running from Feb 28 through May 13, the ISGM will host "Anders Zorn: A European Artist Seduces America" (http://www.gardnermuseum.org/collection/exhibitions/forthcoming_exhibitions/anders_zorn), featuring 24 paintings and also 22 drawings, letters and gifts that Zorn gave Isabella Stewart Gardner. I'm not sure it's possible to display enough envy emoticons for this! :envy: :envy: :envy: :envy: :envy: :envy: :envy:

Susan, I am going ,please send me more info on this, my email is [email protected] I have never seen Zorn live as much as I wanted. I can make a blog about it and talk about his techniques for you guys, as a change from Sargent. PLease fill me and if anyone knows about more shows like this, please let me know. You guys benefit from me being there and absorbing all this!!!
KEn

chalet_dor
02-27-2013, 11:30 PM
Day two homework

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/1184319-Vermeer_Girl_With_Purple_Earing.jpg

Wishing you a Wonderful Happy Birthday Ken! :D dor

chalet_dor
02-27-2013, 11:40 PM
[QUOTE=susanc]Dor, Don't feel bad. It wasn't just you. At first glance I thought it was genuine, too! Ken has been studying Sargent portraits for quite a while, so he saw style differences we wouldn't notice right away since we're just starting out!

I thought the question you asked was an extremely valid one. I wasn't laughing at you. I'm very sorry if you thought I was. Why on earth did you think that?
:lol: If you weren't laughing you should have been. I was!! Smiles to you I still am :lol:

Sgourlayart
02-27-2013, 11:54 PM
Day two homework

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/1184319-Vermeer_Girl_With_Purple_Earing.jpg

Wishing you a Wonderful Happy Birthday Ken! :D dorDor, this painting is here in San Francisco right now at the De Young Museum. Stu

chalet_dor
02-28-2013, 12:19 AM
Hi Stu
Small world isn't it? smiles dor!

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:37 AM
I HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT, THOUGH THE COURSE DESCRIPTION OFFICIALLY MENTIONS PAINTING DEMOS, PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PREFERRING MY QUICK DRAWINGS ON THE SPOT, AS LONG AS I USE THEM TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, IMPROVISING IN THE MOMENT TO SUIT PEOPLE'S NEEDS AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT DEVIATE TOO MUCH FROM THE TOPIC.

THE FIRST HALF OF THE NEXT CLASS WILL INCLUDE SLIDES BECAUSE I NEED TO EXPLAIN THE COLOR ASPECT OF WHAT I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, FOR THAT I NEED PRE PLANNED SLIDES, BECAUSE PAINTING ALL THOSE EXAMPLES WOULD TAKE TOO MUCH TIME (PAINTING IS NOT AS FLUID AS DRAWING).

BUT THE NEXT HALF CAN BE ONE OF TWO THINGS:

A) LIVE DRAWINGS PARTICULARLY IN REFERENCE TO PLANES, WHICH IS SOMETHING PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ASKING A LOT ABOUT. I CAN DRAW SOME ROCKS AND ROUNDED OBJECTS AND SHOW OR EXAGGERATE THE PLANES AND EXPLAIN MORE HOW IT RELATES TO THE FACE. THIS WILL PREPARE YOU GUYS FOR THE NEXT COURSE WHICH WILL DEAL ONLY WITH THE PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF THE HEAD THROUGH PLANES. I COULD ALSO REDRAW, SOME OF SARGENT'S PORTRAITS, JUST THE HEADS IN CASE PEOPLE GOT STUCK ON THE HOMEWORK, EXPLAINING PLANES AND THE 7 TONES.

B) WE CAN GO ON TO A PAINING DEMO, NOT LIVE, BUT A PRE RECORDED VIDEO OF ME DEMONSTRATING A SARGENT STUDY, IT IS NOT A PORTRAIT! IT WILL NOT SHOW (AS MUCH) THE TOPICS PEOPLE HAVE BEEN MOSTLY INTERESTED IN, BUT JUST THE BRUSHWORK, HANDLING OF SUBJECT, AS WELL AS ME EXPLAINING HOW HE GOT THE THINGS TO LOOK SO BRIGHT, WHICH WAS ALSO PART OF MY INTENTION TO REVIEW... LUMINOSITY.

NOW, I AM SUBMITTING THIS TO A DEMOCRACY, PLEASE SEND ME AN EMAIL ASAP TO THE EMAIL OF:

[email protected]

USE NO OTHER EMAIL. AND IN THE SUBJECT LINE TYPE EITHER "DRAWING"- IF YOU WANT THE DRAWING DEMOS OR...

'PAINTING' IF YOU WANT THE PRE-RECORDED DEMO.

PLEASE, I WILL NOT OPEN THE EMAILS, I WILL ONLY COUNT HOW MANY PEOPLE WANT WHICH OPTION, BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF SUBJECT LINES THAT VOTE FOR EITHER TWO OF THE OPTIONS. I WILL NOT EVEN OPEN THE MAIL. TYPE IT IN CAPS AND WRITE NOTHING ELSE, MY EYE NEEDS TO COUNT QUICKLY WITHOUT DISTRACTIONS, FOR THERE ARE 400 EMAILS I WOULD EXPECT ON GETTING.

ONLY USE THAT EMAIL FOR THIS PURPOSE. PLEASE.

THANKS FOR YOUR COOPERATION, AGAIN, THIS IS TO SUIT YOUR INTERESTS, I TRY TO PLAN FOR ONE DIRECTION, BUT PEOPLE'S MINDS AND INTERESTS TEND TO BE A BIT DIFFERENT THAN ANTICIPATED WHEN WRITING THE COURSE DESCRIPTION. I APPRECIATE YOUR COOPERATION, WHILE I WORK ALL THESE BUGS OUT.

DO THIS ASAP, PLEASE, FOR YOUR SAKE.

KEN

Linda Reyes1959
02-28-2013, 10:44 AM
Happy Birthday Ken, Hope You Have The Best Day Ever

pixieartist
02-28-2013, 01:29 PM
Hi Ken! Happy Birthday to You!! (sorry it's a day late...had a lot of trouble getting into Wet Canvas a couple days ago and your dad said to wait until Thurs to see if the problem resolved, which it must have cause everything worked ok today...and got very busy helping hubby's aunt and uncle when they came to town for med appts, grocery shopping, aunt went to hospital for 2 1/2 hours last night...everything fine tho, she needs to eat snacks when she comes to town, now!!!!......) Anyway, hope your day was special yesterday!!! My son is same age...his b'day is in Nov!!!! Looking forward to Mar 2 class...hope to post tomorrow!!! Pixieartist.

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 01:43 PM
If the eye was shaded from the main light source it would not be able to pick up highlights from that source.


CORRECT!!!!

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 01:44 PM
Ken, here is my homework submission:
In this drawing of Yeats by Sargent, (elogedelart.canalblog.com) the terminator is very clearly defined, and separates the light areas of the face from the shadowed areas with a significant value drop. The closeness of values in the shadowed area are much tighter then those in the light, optically making that area look like one mass. The bow tie and section of the shirt collar in the shadowed area are catching the light, indicating that they are protruding and are closer to the viewer. The area on the forehead catching the light identifies the planes there and gives structure to the face.
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/153022-elogedelart.canalblog.com.jpg

I agree with your analysis!!!

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 01:47 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/24-Feb-2013/915542-image.jpg

What stands out to me is the sharp change in the angle of his nose with the light shining on the top part and on his forehead, the high, prominent cheek bones, the gaunt hollowed out cheeks and eye sockets of the elderly man, his quirky, bushy eyebrows and his bushy beard.

Arthur (my grandfather) was in his 90s when this photo was taken and lived till his 99th year, very alert till the end.


Exactly, so the bone structure needs to be emphasized here, both in men and the elderly. With women, to make them look like they are aging more gracefully, you subdue this a bit or emphasize the bone only graceful areas, like the nose or perhaps the cheek bones. With younger women you want to be careful with this too, because they need to look softer and rounded, not so much boney. So as you can see men are easier for portraits!

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 01:49 PM
The person looking at the ball would be between the the ball and the light source and the light would be in shadow, hence no light in the very center.

Right, so that should trump and idea that the highlight is the plane facing the light source the most, for if it was, the light source being static, the highlight would never move but would stick on the sphere as you walk around the room. And we know that rarely happens.
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 01:50 PM
Homework Week 2
Have learned it is difficult to find photos of the subjects in Sargent's portrait because the camera was new or did not exist. The most interesting subject I found was (Madame_Pierre_Gautreau)

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Madame_Pierre_Gautreau_photograph_.jpg

This lady caused quite a scandal in Paris and became very well known. Sargent was very fond of her and made numerous sketches. He was well known for painting flattering portraits.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Madame_Pierre_Gautreau_Sketch.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Study_for_Madame_X_227.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-SARGENT_John_Singer_Madame_X_Madame_Pierre_Gautreau_MET_LS_d100_07.jpg

I have had a wonderful time reading about Sargent. My very first time to do so. Thank you Ken. Your class this Saturday was wonderful! I have other images to share with everyone, later because it is 3:30 AM in Florida. Because you can draw and talk at the same time it was perfect for me to relax and learn! I will be purchasing the videos when available. I encourage everyone to do so. I have your video lessons for Secrets of the Masters! dor :)


Look in the previous pages here under this thread, there is more on Madame X, look through the neat stuff people have been posting!
Good stuff,
KEn

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 01:53 PM
Home Work Day 2

Ken mention Claroscuro! I could not find an artist with that name. :crying: I found out in Spanish it means a play of light and dark. Examples below!

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-220px-Jacques-Louis_David_-_La_Mort_de_Marat.jpg. . . .http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-claroscuro.jpg. . . .http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1184319-Play_of_light_and_dark_claroscuro.jpg


Is it possible that Ken was trying to trick us? dor :D
No, I never meant to give the idea that Claroscuro was an artist, it is a specific approach to light and shade, be kind, and please post what I wrote, so that I can brush up on my writing skills. I am curious how that fled my attention. AS you can see the terminator is more obvious here in these because there is less reflected light creeping into the shadows.

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 01:58 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/1067432-image.jpg
I am not sure they are quite different .... I tried to apply what I had learned last Saturdays . The lights show more because I did not take a white paper so I could use a white pastel pencil to reinforce them. Like Sargent did in this drawing, I did not put any background. Is that any better ?
You are a wonderful teacher and I learned already a lot from you. Thank you a million times Ken. Hope your next class is also about portraits, my favourite ...
See you next Saturday
Jacqueline

I like the second one more, better values, I would just soft the edge of that nose, it should be sharper at top, and get softer as it move to the nostril, bone versus cartilage. I will explain this next course.

Now, I would like anyone to help me, Jacky mentioned something about Sargent perhaps using white pastel for his drawing. I am not sure if she only referred to her drawing, but does anyone know if Sargent used anything other than charcoal for his portraits, like pastel? If so, or if there is a reference somewhere I am unaware of, I need to know. Jacky, did you mean to say that Sargent used white pastel? I really do not know, and I want to know where you know this from because I would have never guess. Please let me know, because the last thing I want is for there to be a hole in my Sargentology.
KEn

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:01 PM
I know I think he could be one of the British generals from WW1, but he might not have been included in that painting, maybe he is just some British guy, but yeah, he really gave him character.

The painting I am referring to is called, I think, 'The generals of the great war,' I think it is the first world war, for I doubt Sargent lived to see the second.
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:04 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/979056-image.jpg

Here's my first try. Hope it's not too confusing. Not sure if I'm off.

You seem to be on the right track, though I am not too sure since it is a bit confusing, I might review this one during class, as well as other submissions.
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:10 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/978726-img002.jpg http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/25-Feb-2013/978726-Mrs_-William-Shakespeare-Louise-Weiland-large.jpg I hope I got this right. I missed the first class and I'm playing catch-up. In the painting it apears that the highlight on the eye is in shadow, but I think it is just next to the shadow sense you would not see a highlight in shadow. Is this right?

Your homework seems correct, I see many people understand this or have taken portrait classes before. This is not always an easy concept to grasp, even more when you believe in the 90 degree plane being the lightest while facing the light course, since we know that is because of the oilyness of the skin reflecting the light source to your eye, this is what Sargent referred to as the lightest light prior to the light accent.

Caution, the highlight of an eye IN THE SHADOW is due to a secondary light source. The eye is sooo wet and reflective that it can pick up even a weaker light source, a light source so weak that it might not even creep in as much into the shadow, hence leaving it in the shadow in spite of being another light source, and affecting its planes; but it certainly can bounce off a delicate and reflective surface such as the eyeball why? the reflectivity of the surface.
I meantioned that it was the light source, the angle of the plane towards the light source, the reflectivity of the object and or the local color of that object.

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:15 PM
Glad you guys had a good laugh. I swear this was no prank! Searched for Sargent Portraits with photograph of model all night with different search engines, out of thousands of images this one popped up and I was :clap: for joy. Damn can't trust anything these days! Lesson here......scrutanize what what my eyes tell me. I am easily fooled!
dor :o


AAHAHHA dont worry, I thought afterwards that you could have gotten it from the internet, from some joker who was playing make over. What you should look for is consistency of styles, an artist, commonly speaking would not be painterly here, and not there. There is usually a consistency in each painting.

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:22 PM
Dor, Don't feel bad. It wasn't just you. At first glance I thought it was genuine, too! Ken has been studying Sargent portraits for quite a while, so he saw style differences we wouldn't notice right away since we're just starting out!

I thought the question you asked was an extremely valid one. I wasn't laughing at you. I'm very sorry if you thought I was. I would love to watch him paint--anything--so I was trying to decide if that would be of more value to me than having him paint my portrait or not. But in my opinion, Sargent made the women look so much better in their portraits than they did in real life. Who wouldn't want him to paint them?

This link might be the photo Ken was thinking about:
http://greatmuseums.org/explore/more/collective_vision_isabella_stewart_gardner_museum

Now scroll down until you see the sepia-toned photo of Sargent painting. Click on it to enlarge it. You can see the daughter a bit better in it. If you stare at the portrait of the daughter, then look at her face in the photo, you do notice a difference. He has made their jawlines so much more graceful. (These photos are in the collection of the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, where the portrait was painted in 1903.)

Yes, the jawlines, he made them less squarish, it is not part of the female archetype to make jawlines squarish. An artist should know these things so you know what look for, what emphasize and what NOT to emphasize. However there was an even closer photo, where the face of the girl is well zoomed in, and I think even the frontal areas was subdued, something he did that made the girl so pretty.
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:27 PM
Here is what I think you wanted--the whooollleee face LOL. This is the best I could come up with using my limited technical knowledge. ugh :crossfingers:

Everything seems correct except the terminator and dark accent, the dark accent is just a small thin area, the terminator is not a MASS it is an imaginary border where the core shadow meets the halftone, not a mass, it is not USA or Canada, it is the line that divides.

I will talk more about this next class.

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:33 PM
Terminators

Caravaggio, St Jerome
Red and green for terminators, a few of them (simplified), then it gets complicated...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/117343-Carav-Jerome.jpg


Rembrandt, self portrait (one of a gazillion)

Red = terminator
Yellow = edge of cast shadow, not a terminator? Or should it be *regarded* as one?

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/117343-Rem-self.jpg
It does get horribly complicated, I know. The cast shadow is not a terminator perse, since the word is used to describe the line where the core shadow meets the halftone. The cast shadow has nothing to do with the halftone, though it is a line a stronger line, it has to do more with where the light is no longer blocked by the object casting the shadow. The form shadow is its own cast shadow, and the cast shadow is a shadow being cast due to a raised surface, to another one.

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:34 PM
Second try of Day 2

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/1184319-ScreenShot001.jpg

I think this is much better...........dor

I will address this in class.

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:35 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/161785-sargent-caspargoodrich.jpgJohn Singer Sargent portrait

correct! help me look for any terminators in the eye, are there any?

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:37 PM
Day two homework

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/27-Feb-2013/1184319-Vermeer_Girl_With_Purple_Earing.jpg

Wishing you a Wonderful Happy Birthday Ken! :D dor
Almost I think you made the DA bigger than it should and you inverted the CS with the RL. I will review most of these in class. Great stuff!!!

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:45 PM
Thanks everyone for the Bday wishes, if I missed a homework critique I will most likely get to it on SAturday. One more thing I am planning on going to see the Zorn exhibition these upcoming months. I am going to be there for a few days in Boston, I might go also the MFA and the Harvard museum of art which holds several Sargents as well. If anyone would like to meet me and pick my brain during my excursion or museum walk as I sketch and take notes of the paintings, you are happy to do so, perhaps have lunch and all that. We can meet in a group at a certain time, and informally discuss the paintings and you get to pick my brain on the matter. Not a formal class, just a get together while you see me sketch and point out key things in the paintings.
How is that? Just let me find the best date for this.
Ken

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 02:55 PM
I HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT, THOUGH THE COURSE DESCRIPTION OFFICIALLY MENTIONS PAINTING DEMOS, PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PREFERRING MY QUICK DRAWINGS ON THE SPOT, AS LONG AS I USE THEM TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, IMPROVISING IN THE MOMENT TO SUIT PEOPLE'S NEEDS AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT DEVIATE TOO MUCH FROM THE TOPIC.

THE FIRST HALF OF THE NEXT CLASS WILL INCLUDE SLIDES BECAUSE I NEED TO EXPLAIN THE COLOR ASPECT OF WHAT I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, FOR THAT I NEED PRE PLANNED SLIDES, BECAUSE PAINTING ALL THOSE EXAMPLES WOULD TAKE TOO MUCH TIME (PAINTING IS NOT AS FLUID AS DRAWING).

BUT THE NEXT HALF CAN BE ONE OF TWO THINGS:

A) LIVE DRAWINGS PARTICULARLY IN REFERENCE TO PLANES, WHICH IS SOMETHING PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ASKING A LOT ABOUT. I CAN DRAW SOME ROCKS AND ROUNDED OBJECTS AND SHOW OR EXAGGERATE THE PLANES AND EXPLAIN MORE HOW IT RELATES TO THE FACE. THIS WILL PREPARE YOU GUYS FOR THE NEXT COURSE WHICH WILL DEAL ONLY WITH THE PROPER CONSTRUCTION OF THE HEAD THROUGH PLANES. I COULD ALSO REDRAW, SOME OF SARGENT'S PORTRAITS, JUST THE HEADS IN CASE PEOPLE GOT STUCK ON THE HOMEWORK, EXPLAINING PLANES AND THE 7 TONES.

B) WE CAN GO ON TO A PAINING DEMO, NOT LIVE, BUT A PRE RECORDED VIDEO OF ME DEMONSTRATING A SARGENT STUDY, IT IS NOT A PORTRAIT! IT WILL NOT SHOW (AS MUCH) THE TOPICS PEOPLE HAVE BEEN MOSTLY INTERESTED IN, BUT JUST THE BRUSHWORK, HANDLING OF SUBJECT, AS WELL AS ME EXPLAINING HOW HE GOT THE THINGS TO LOOK SO BRIGHT, WHICH WAS ALSO PART OF MY INTENTION TO REVIEW... LUMINOSITY.

NOW, I AM SUBMITTING THIS TO A DEMOCRACY, PLEASE SEND ME AN EMAIL ASAP TO THE EMAIL OF:

[email protected]

USE NO OTHER EMAIL. AND IN THE SUBJECT LINE TYPE EITHER "DRAWING"- IF YOU WANT THE DRAWING DEMOS OR...

'PAINTING' IF YOU WANT THE PRE-RECORDED DEMO.

PLEASE, I WILL NOT OPEN THE EMAILS, I WILL ONLY COUNT HOW MANY PEOPLE WANT WHICH OPTION, BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF SUBJECT LINES THAT VOTE FOR EITHER TWO OF THE OPTIONS. I WILL NOT EVEN OPEN THE MAIL. TYPE IT IN CAPS AND WRITE NOTHING ELSE, MY EYE NEEDS TO COUNT QUICKLY WITHOUT DISTRACTIONS, FOR THERE ARE 400 EMAILS I WOULD EXPECT ON GETTING.

ONLY USE THAT EMAIL FOR THIS PURPOSE. PLEASE.

THANKS FOR YOUR COOPERATION, AGAIN, THIS IS TO SUIT YOUR INTERESTS, I TRY TO PLAN FOR ONE DIRECTION, BUT PEOPLE'S MINDS AND INTERESTS TEND TO BE A BIT DIFFERENT THAN ANTICIPATED WHEN WRITING THE COURSE DESCRIPTION. I APPRECIATE YOUR COOPERATION, WHILE I WORK ALL THESE BUGS OUT.

DO THIS ASAP, PLEASE, FOR YOUR SAKE.

KEN

chalet_dor
02-28-2013, 03:28 PM
Almost I think you made the DA bigger than it should and you inverted the CS with the RL. I will review most of these in class. Great stuff!!!



I sure need to understand this. What you have said about me confusing CS with the RL baffles me. I am a very :confused: dor See you Saturday

Jacdesusbielle
02-28-2013, 04:21 PM
I like the second one more, better values, I would just soft the edge of that nose, it should be sharper at top, and get softer as it move to the nostril, bone versus cartilage. I will explain this next course.

Now, I would like anyone to help me, Jacky mentioned something about Sargent perhaps using white pastel for his drawing. I am not sure if she only referred to her drawing, but does anyone know if Sargent used anything other than charcoal for his portraits, like pastel? If so, or if there is a reference somewhere I am unaware of, I need to know. Jacky, did you mean to say that Sargent used white pastel? I really do not know, and I want to know where you know this from because I would have never guess. Please let me know, because the last thing I want is for there to be a hole in my Sargentology.
KEn

Ken, I am pretty sure your Sargentology has not a single hole. I really don't know if Sargent used a white pastel pencil, I was only referring to my my own drawing. Being a Master in using charcoal he did not need a whiter surface for his lights. They were popping out at the right place without using anything else. But I needed a trick just to show a difference that did not appear clearly in my first drawing.
Thank you for your comments always very useful and waited for.

Jacdesusbielle
02-28-2013, 04:34 PM
Wish I could meet you in Boston for the Zorn exhibition and the Harvard Museum with the Sargent paintings. Should have been extremely interesting to see you drawing and listen to your explanations in person. Halas ! The pond is too wide .....
Hope many students will join you. So nice of you to offer such an opportunity !

chalet_dor
02-28-2013, 04:56 PM
Hi Ken
"I sure need to understand this. What you have said about me confusing CS with the RL baffles me." I am a very dor See you Saturday
Have looked and looked and now I think I understand and see.
Another problem is with the word Terminator. I see on a ball clearly, but looking at a complex object baffles me as you know already.
dor

Colorix
02-28-2013, 05:36 PM
Had some more time, so here's Rembrandt's face divided into simplified flat areas of light and shadow. So simplified I don't think a colour key is needed.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/28-Feb-2013/117343-Rem-w-values.jpg

Question: Why only 3 values for shadows?

Question: (Probably already answered, but I missed a huge chunk of lesson one.) Some call shadow areas 'opaque', and others 'transparent'. I did catch that you said transparent, Ken. Do you mean thinner paint? Or something else?

My mind is set on shadows being murkier and more opaque than the clarity of light, as there generally is less detail in shadow (but it can be the other way around), while light brings out more nuances.

Ken Instructor
02-28-2013, 06:43 PM
Had some more time, so here's Rembrandt's face divided into simplified flat areas of light and shadow. So simplified I don't think a colour key is needed.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/28-Feb-2013/117343-Rem-w-values.jpg

Question: Why only 3 values for shadows?

Question: (Probably already answered, but I missed a huge chunk of lesson one.) Some call shadow areas 'opaque', and others 'transparent'. I did catch that you said transparent, Ken. Do you mean thinner paint? Or something else?

My mind is set on shadows being murkier and more opaque than the clarity of light, as there generally is less detail in shadow (but it can be the other way around), while light brings out more nuances.
The image seems well divided. Three values for the shadow if you include the dark accent, so it is core shadow, reflected light, and dark accent, three puddle of paint.
Opaque and transparent is not used in the sense that opaque means murky or unclear. The whole first webinar was about this, opacity is refereed to as feeling solid, physical, the light, and transparency means distant, airy, that you can see through them. Meaning, when you look at a shadow you shouldbe able to feel a sense of recession, like a landscape. It has to do more with how the weakness of light shows the air quality of the shadow. It is hard to explain. Please all day long, stare at shadows and try to feel how as they darken they recede, making you feel like you can sense the air between you and them, while the light sticks out. Shadows look opaque, or physical, too physical or dead when they are solid black, for they show no light trying to get to your eye, no depth, just flatness. Now remember, solidity is produced by light, so the less light, the less solid or opaque an object looks.
About the paint quality, some artists avoid putting in thick paint in the shadow, because the surface of the paint may reflect the light, like impasto, thereby altering the values, hence you want to thin the paint so that it does not reflect but sits in there better. Sargent seemed to use not very think paint in his shadows, but he still managed to make them look right. In fact he did not start with the shadows and gradually build up the paint quality as he moved to the light. He started in the middle tones, or halftones.
I hope everyone else can help me here with this, I want to see how the rest of you all understood this. Can anyone put it in better terms?
Ken

chalet_dor
02-28-2013, 07:48 PM
No, I never meant to give the idea that Claroscuro was an artist, it is a specific approach to light and shade, be kind, and please post what I wrote, so that I can brush up on my writing skills. I am curious how that fled my attention. AS you can see the terminator is more obvious here in these because there is less reflected light creeping into the shadows.

Ken I do not recall how the word Claroscuro caught my attention, verbally or written. With no knowledge of the word I assumed you were referring to an Artist. I should have made that clear to everyone when, I tried to be funny asking that question. Your writing skills are excellent. I think anyone who can talk and draw at the same time is very Gifted.

dor :envy:

chalet_dor
03-01-2013, 01:01 AM
Day Two Homework
One More Try

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Mar-2013/1184319-dors_Vermeer_copy.jpg



Since the terminator is imaginary and I see it clearly on the ball. Why do I have so much trouble figuring where it is in this painting? Do not know if the dark background of the picture should be called the Core Shadow. As I have shown here. The other thing that is giving me trouble is this girl is not full face.........so how to handle it?

I am eager for Saturday dor :confused:

chalet_dor
03-01-2013, 06:23 AM
Homework day 2
Final Vermeer submission
I am too old to quit

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Mar-2013/1184319-dors_final_vermeer.jpg


I think I have figured it out. :crossfingers: dor

Colorix
03-01-2013, 08:29 AM
when you look at a shadow you shouldbe able to feel a sense of recession, like a landscape. It has to do more with how the weakness of light shows the air quality of the shadow. It is hard to explain. Please all day long, stare at shadows and try to feel how as they darken they recede, making you feel like you can sense the air between you and them, while the light sticks out. Shadows look opaque, or physical, too physical or dead when they are solid black, for they show no light trying to get to your eye, no depth, just flatness. Now remember, solidity is produced by light, so the less light, the less solid or opaque an object looks.

Thank you, Ken. (I will get the recording of first class, I had computer problems during it.)

Could it be said that the shadows show more of the quality of the atmosphere than what the brightly lit areas do (within reason)? Like, Monet's famous enveloppe?

A gallery in Stockholm, Sweden, is showing 100 of Zorn's etchings. Great opportunity to study how he handled values. He etched like he painted, with lines following along limbs. A bit far to travel, though... :-)

chalet_dor
03-01-2013, 09:30 AM
Day 2
dor's Final Manet

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Mar-2013/1184319-dors_Final_Manet-Portrait_Berthe_Morisot_with_Violets.jpg

Fingers crossed dor:crossfingers:

mlgk
03-01-2013, 12:03 PM
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/01-Mar-2013/161785-sargent-caspargoodrich.jpg correct! help me look for any terminators in the eye, are there any?
Is there a terminator above his left eye where it turns from the light into shadow and in the left corner of the eye itself ?

Ken Instructor
03-01-2013, 10:37 PM
Guys, watch this before tomorrow's class, it will help me explain some things if you have this as a template.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQMNORw3YgU