Colorado waterfall WIP

[Deborah Secor]

I'm painting this for an article and want to be sure the values are all okay, so you all get to be my audience! What looks weird, funky or off to you? Warning: the color in this painting will NOT be natural. It's all about value before color...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/04-Apr-2005/23609-colorado_waterfallsm.jpg

If you see something that looks goofy let me know. I have to get on with this one PDQ...

Thanks!

Deborah

[Dream_weaver]

I'll give it a shot...the cliff on the further side seems to be in "mid air". I'm sure with color and water reflections it will look wonderful.
Dianna

[Nancy Leone]

Hi Deborah,
Nothing weird, off, funky or goofy to my eyes! I acknowledge the warning and look forward to seeing the results!

[Deborah Secor]

Yup, Dianna, good catch. I checked the photo and it's because the planes above and below are all very similar in value. Color may confuse things, however, because I'm not going to use 'real' colors, so I think I'll play around with that. Thanks!!

Deborah

[Kathryn Wilson]

Thanks for posting this Dee - pulling up a chair to see what turns up - :D

My only observation is that I am not getting a real strong sense of where your light source is coming from. The shadows in the cliff crevasses pointed that out to me.

:wave:

[Ikneadaneraser]

I'm in the audience, too!
I spent 3 years in Co.Spgs.; this piece just re-opens my desire to return someday!!! :cool:

[tURBOCAT]

This will be fun.

Johnnie

[Artistammy]

:wave: I'm ready to watch too! I didn't see anything until I read the other posts. I think I agree with them. lol This will be fun to see.

[CindyW]

Deborah,
I'm waiting to see how you work into this. It really looks lovely and I want to be there! I see no goofiness.
Thanks for sharing!
Cindy

[Deborah Secor]

Wow--an audience! :D

Did I explain this exercise to you all? You see, the colors won't be real colors...at least not in theory. Here's the deal:

I made a chart of five values, light (not white), medium-light, medium, medium-dark and dark (not black). Then I chose four colors to match each value at random...just trying to match the value correctly and not thinking about color. Then I found this photo and printed it in grayscale. This drawing is going to receive these weird wild colors I chose, plugged in to the appropriate value area (in theory...) Usually this ends up being a very wacky looking painting from a color standpoint. I will say that the colors I chose this time weren't as out there as I've sometimes done. I guess I was aware of the magazine article. But the idea is to play with color solely based on value--to just let the colors go and have some fun!

Let me show you another one I've done like this. I can't remember if I've shown it here or not, but I think I may have:
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Apr-2005/23609-valuechartpainting.jpg

Here's the chart of colors I used for this one:
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Apr-2005/23609-value-color_chart2sm.jpg

And here's the grayscale photo:
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Apr-2005/23609-overlook_grayscale.jpg

Tomorrow I'll see if I can get on with the waterfall and get a shot of the first layer to show you. Thanks for standing by... :wave:

Deborah

[Ikneadaneraser]

"Color as value"
is a precept my mentor keeps repeating!
A valuable lesson!
Rock on!

[Deborah Secor]

<groan> Very punny.

:wink2:
Deborah

[Piper Ballou]

You are a teacher at heart. I think I am going to try this excerise. I need to work on color value.
thanks
piper

[Artistammy]

I do understand the colors aren't going to be traditional & am looking forward to seeing & learning from this. It's amazing how you can used wierd colors & have it look good if the values are right. :wave:

[t-sue]

What a fabulous lesson, Deborah! I have a comfy chair pulled up and a pot of coffee brewing... am ready for the next installment! Oooooohhh.... hope you use those wonderful Southwestern colors!! Oh, you said I will say that the colors I chose this time weren't as out there as I've sometimes done. ... I almost want to say "Rats!" I love it when you use the "out there" colors!

None-the-less, this will be wonderful, and I'm eagerly anticipating what you come up with!!!!!

[CindyW]

[QUOTE=t-sue]I almost want to say "Rats!" I love it when you use the "out there" colors!
QUOTE]
I agree! I love these colors in your example.

[jackiesimmonds]

we did exactly this exercise at Kitty's workshop in Santa Fe last summer. She gave us each a b&w photo, and we had to use correct values but unnatural colours. I did maroon fir trees and pale blue foreground grasses!

i am running my own version of this workshop in November.

Good teaching, Dee.

J

[Deborah Secor]

Yep, my students have talked about it and I've added it to my repertoire of tricks (try saying that three times fast..) except that I don't allow them to even see the photo until they have a palette of colors, in order to allay their desire to make the sky blue and the mountains purple, etc. I just assume that with 20 colors in 5 values they'll be able to approximate the values in any photo...

Okay, check back in a few for the color version of the waterfall. I'm not sure I like it that much, but will leave that decision to you. Maybe I should have gone hog wild! :eek:

Deborah

[Deborah Secor]

Here it is...

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/06-Apr-2005/23609-waterfall_sm.jpg
Colorado Waterfall, 11x17" Wallis paper (of course)

I still want to tweak a lot of stuff here, but you get the idea. I shortened the trees a lot. Once I got them in they were dominating everything, and now I'm thinking I want to create some movement with them so I'm reconsidering heights.

Here's the palette I created. The values are far from perfect, but this is ART not science! :wink2:
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/06-Apr-2005/23609-color-value_chart_2sm.jpg

Any feedback welcomed!! I have to get this puppy done and (photos of it) out the door soon, however... :wave:

Deborah

[bogbeast]

aawwww, the colors don't seem wild at to me! :crying:

But the picture is beauteous! Great contrast and drama in the cliffs!

[Deborah Secor]

I agree, Libby, BUT that could change! I mean, this is layer 1. Ya never know where red might show up over green, or lavender over orange, or orange over blue, on layer 2!

Thanks...

Deborah

[meowmeow]

Yummy! And the colors look fine to me...I mean they don't seem like off colors at all. But I think it is because the value thing works...when you look closely maybe the colors aren't quite "right"....nice painting and I liked the other one you did too.
This does have a western color feel to it.


Sandy

[Doodlepad]

This is very interesting and something I'd like to try, the paintings are beautiful and I especially like that second one you've posted, even though the colors are different then real life colors I would purchase this one over one that was done in true to life colors.

I have heard or read somewhere that color doesn't matter with pastels as long as you get the values right and this sure proves it.

I will be watching you.......... :D

Sandy J.

[Mikki Petersen]

I also did this exercise in Kitty's workshop last summer and it really set the lesson about values for me. It was interesting that we didn't know we were selecting a palette when we selected the colors so we had some way out there colors but when applied to the paintings in true value, the colors really didn't matter. I still have photos of the results everyone had.

For an example, I have to say that the painting of the grasses really demostrates your point better than the waterfall painting. The waterfall painting is quite gorgeous but the colors look very traditional to me even though there is wonderful value contrast. In the grasses piece, there is a better range of nontraditional colors to demonstrate the point about color being second to value, IMHO.

They are both beautiful paintings! I think one of the things I like so much about your work is the high value contrast that just makes the paintings sing.

Mikki

[jackiesimmonds]

I have to say that I am with Mikki on this one. I am not sure that the waterfall colours really demonstrate the teaching. If you wanted to show how the exercise works, then why use blues for the distance...that is very conventional....wouldn't it be a more interesting test to use a totally different colour, like that coral in your chart, which is sitting on the same line as the blue for value, for the distance, and see if THAT works, along with blues and greens in your rocks in the foreground, and maroon in the trees. Or maybe you plan to do this anyway, because you say you are still busy layering..........

Here is a greyscale of your colour chart. If you are planning to put this in an article, then perhaps you should point out the deliberate errors :) ! :

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/08-Apr-2005/1805-values.jpg

[Kitty Wallis]

I have been debating about saying something about the inconsistancies of your value chart, wondering if it's my monitor or your photo, not the chart IRL.

[Deborah Secor]

LOL I know, I know!! I pointed out that this is not science--and I don't mean to be that precise. In fact, I think part of the experiment is to show that people percieve some subtle variations in value somewhat differently and you really shouldn't rely on technology to 'prove' anything, even something as simple as a red, blue or yellow filter. That's what makes this art... I never get overly picky with myself or my students when I see this inconsistency, I just mention it and see if the perception changes over time.

Someone posted a thread sometime back showing how different things looked if you used varying technology--I think it was you, Jackie. If you turned it into grayscale or used a copier, etc. So I think that's a bit artificial. BUT I do think it's a good idea to show the finished painting in grayscale to see if in the end the values came out fairly close--which means that despite the success of the value-color match on the chart you are seeing the value-color match in the image.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/08-Apr-2005/23609-overlookgray.JPG

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/08-Apr-2005/23609-ColoradoWaterfallgray.jpg

I think from that poiunt of view the experiment looks successful, while the color is varied and interesting!

BTW, I agree that Overlook is much more to the point than Waterfall in color. I think it's because I was too conscious of what I was doing. The chart for the Overlook is even less precise in matching color to value!

I love the way you all keep me honest here. Please don't hesitate to mention things to me!! :D (Looking at Kitty... :cool: )

Oh--oops! I never posted the final version of the Waterfall! Still much too 'real' in color. Here it is:
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/08-Apr-2005/23609-ColoradoWaterfall.jpg

Deborah

[jackiesimmonds]

we knew you knew. Of course you do.

Funnily enough, my perception of what colours do was challenged quite a lot when I picked up a picture done by a Royal Academician (I've been hunting for the catalogue but cannot find it, durn it). Instead of using paler, cooler tones for the distance, he had used EXACTLY the same tones from the "front" of the scene to the "back" of the scene, and yet it worked spatially.

I studied it for ages and then the penny dropped. although the colours and tones did not change at all, he had used dramatic change of scale - foreground marks, representing small forms such as leaves, were large, while marks in the distance were tiny, although they represented large forms, like whole trees.

So - he had put aside all the rules about colour/value and recession, and yet the picture still worked.

All rules are there to be manipulated, provided you understand the rules in the first place, so that you can manipulate with intelligence.

It is always worth trying to learn as much as possible about seeing colour as tone, just so you can put the whole deal aside if you so choose.

Jackie

[Mikki Petersen]

Deborah, even if the colors seem fairly traditional, I love the final of the Waterfall. It also occurred to me that this Colorado Waterfall might have been falling against granite instead of the Southwest Sandstone colors that appear in the painting, in which case the colors would have been much different. Who cares...it's a gorgeous painting.

Jackie, I would love to see the painting you spoke of if you stumble across the catalog again. It would be interesting a different approach to the spatial stuff.

Mikki

[Deborah Secor]

Yes, Jackie, I'd love to see this painting too! Hope you can find it...

Deborah

[jackiesimmonds]

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/10-Apr-2005/1805-rogerdegrey.jpg

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/10-Apr-2005/1805-roger_de_grey_coast.jpg

Ok girls, here are two Roger de Grey images. See how the values hardly change at all, from the foreground to the background, particularly with the woodland scene. Yet spatially, the images work well because of the change of scale of the marks. And in the bottom one, the contrasts in tone in the foreground obviously hold our eye there...but there are similar contrasts in the distance yet the change of scale allows it to work, the distance remains distant and doesn't shoot forward. Fascinating.

J

[t-sue]

Love this thread Deborah, and your input, too, Jackie! Lots to study and think about and try to apply!!! :clap:

[Deborah Secor]

Wow! I see just what you mean Jackie! This would be a great exercise for students. Challenge them to use the same colors and tones througout, but create space with varying shapes, strokes, contrast and scale relationships. Hmmmmmmm....

Do you think that he's chosen a warm-cool pair to assist in this? In the seascape the cools predominate in the distance, warms in front. I think you'd have to pair a wam and cool to make this work, but I wonder if it could be any warm-cool..? But in the woodland scene it seems even more successful and less built on warm-cool... How did he do that???? Okay, there's definitely perspective at work in it. The marching lines of trees guide our eye to the end of the pathway, where the lightest lights exist, so contrast is at work pulling us there, too. I'm really impressed. Who is this guy? Great work...

Thank you so much Jackie!

Yep, this is turning into a very interesting thread--a whole lot more so than my waterfall makes it! LOL :wink2: I finished the package to send on to my editor, lump in throat as so often happens when my own work is illustrating something. Neither of my examples is great, but I suppose they'll do the trick for this article in one way or another. I'm soooo on deadline it's scary, so they will have to do! :rolleyes:

Deborah

[Mikki Petersen]

Thanks Jackie! Maybe these should be moved out to their own thread so more folks get to see the examples. One of the things I noticed is that the palette is very low contrast overall in both pieces almost like tinted line drawings. Really fascinating to see another aproach to depth.

Deborah, I'm sure your editor(s) will be pleased with the article and the examples. Both are gorgeous paintings, worthy of publication. What's next?

Mikki

[Deborah Secor]

You know, Jackie, I agree. I think these should be seen, even though they aren't pastels...

You mention line, Mikki. It's true, he's used lines as part of the success, too. The boldness or delicacy of the line tends to speak of the depth--which relates to strokes but isn't exactly the same. Double hmmmmm......

Thanks for the encouragement, Mikki. I often feel that I could have done a much better job with another six months to do it right. Maybe one of these days I'll actually do that and make it into my book. I have my workbook--but now I find myself wanting to write the triple-sized volume with all that I've learned in the intervening eight years in it! All I need is a couple of free months to do it. LOL In fact I am toying with the idea of taking subscriptions for it--you know, a discount price if you pay ahead, so that I can cover the costs of copying and binding and all. Well, we'll see...

Next for me? I'm doing an article on framing, but not the nuts and bolts stuff. Maggie has already done that. This will be more on the creative side. I need to play around with some new and different framing anyway, so this will be a good chance to do it. I'm looking forward to it! (And no paintings have to be done to illustrate it! :D )

Deborah

[Mikki Petersen]

Well sign me up for a subscription! I refer to your workbook frequently, whether it shows in my work or not, and would love the new one, I'm sure.

Framing! Creative framing! How about "cost effective" framing? I saw an article recently, I think in Better Homes and Gardens, about how to make really interesting frames from cardboard. They took layers of cardboard and glued them together to achieve the desired thickness, then cut strips from the mass and used it on edge. By spray painting and other finish techniques, they achieved some really attractive frames. I'm thinking of experimenting with the idea when I have some time...

Have fun!
Mikki

[jackiesimmonds]

I am so glad you guys appreciated my input with the Roger De Grey paintings, you clicked into EXACTLY what I was on about. Deborah, I too felt "HOW does he DO that?" when I first saw them, I was completely fascinated.

Bit of background about the guy for anyone interested: An art teacher once upon a time, for, amongst others, the Royal College of Art, who contributed greatly to the post-war renaissance of British art schools. Ex-president eventually of the Royal Academy - 1894-1993. (wow.) Wore viridian socks and ties. Lots of concern in his work for tight pictorial structure. Lots of measuring going on, apparently but unlike others of the Euston Road School, who would leave obtrusive reference points visible, he covered them up. He used, according to my catalogue "precisely modulted, limited range of colour and directional brushstrokes grouped into blocks to suggest form, structure and spatial progression. He introduced framing arrangements of trees in the middle distance and high horizon lines to emphasise the picture plane. Like Cezanne, De Grey aspired to a kind of painting charged with tension and ambiguity. Spatial illusion, although vital, was to be countered throughout the canvas by the assertive identity of the paint itself". A bit wordy, but if you plough through this, it begins to make sense after a while! He would begin a work out of doors, but had to finish it in the studio, where it went through many changes. He said "I used to believe that yu had to begin and finish a painting in front of the motif, but I cant do that any more. I have to bring the paintings back and work for a very long time on them and shoehow they begin to change for all sorts of reasons that I cannot really explain, excpet that one mark makes one think of another and it preceptively alters the nature of the painting".He also said that working out of doors had been the motivation and the limitation of his painting. "Painting what you see is in itself an abstraction ... there's no such thing as copying because there's no way you can copy a space, a mood, an atmosphere. What you put down is an interpretation fo what you see". Brilliant artist imho. A REAL artist. I am sorry he isn't a pastellist, but I think we pastellists can still learn a lot from him.


OK back to your thread, Deborah :)


Deborah ...why don't you approach a publisher re your workbook? You write so well, and have done most of the work, why on earth dont you see if someone like North Light Books would commission you to do the job as a proper, hard-back book? You have the credentials, and if HarperCollins accepted me, I see no reason why North Light, or someone else, perhaps Watson Guptill, wouldn't accept you. Find out the name of the Senior Commissioning Editor for art books (why am I telling you this? You've been in publishing for years, you must know all this all ready) and approach them. I would think they wold fall over themselves to have you, you are SO brilliantly articulate and teach very well indeed.

Jackie

[Deborah Secor]

My goodness, Jackie... Thanks. I'm quite flattered that you think so highly of my writing. :o I've done a smidgen more than 'think' about a book, but found a stone wall up till now. The word I've received is that they do NOT want any more books devoted solely to pastel. I would have to incorporate other media (specifically watercolor, though other kinds are okay too) and you have to understand how limited my knowledge of other media is. :p So, for now I'll be content with self-publishing, I think! And then if God wants it to become a book sometime in the future, I'll be pleased as can be.

I know that Ann Templeton received the same answer and decided to publish her own hardback, which Michael Chesley Johnson wrote with her. She must have had to invest a healthy sum to do it, I think--my estimates run in the $30,000 range, although that's a back pocket estimate based on looking at web pages (so it could be MORE!) I simply am not in a position to do that. :rolleyes:

But you know, I can write what I have to say and assemble it as I have been (copied, with a couple of pages of color illustrations to refer to, bound with a spiral comb binding--nothing fancy), and the information is there for my students, which is all I really care about in the long run! The cost of each book then is only about $25.00-$30.00, which most folks can manage to pay, and I can update it as I learn more. In fact, lately what I've been doing is including a sample lesson with each workbook I send out, so they get a little bit of what's to come, and an offer of a discount on the upcoming edited version.

That's why I've been considering subscriptions. I thought if my students and friends would invest ahead of time, get a discount price for the finished book, and give me the capital to do the job the way I want to do it, then all of us would benefit. But it's just a scheme right now.

I'll keep on dreaming of that shiny hardback published by a real publisher, but I'll also be happy with what I have. I've been blessed big time already!! :D

Deborah

[jackiesimmonds]

:mad: what on earth do they MEAN they don't want any more pastels books. How ridiculous. The bookshops always want new stock every year, and no-one has brought out a decent pastels book for some considerable time now - mine has been knocking around for quite a few years now, and so have most of the others that I know about. I am so sorry you have come up against a brick wall. What about a smaller publisher? there are some quite good smaller people here in the UK and if I was to come unstuck with the bigger ones like HC, I would approachone of the smaller ones. Still, you know what you are doing, and seem happy with the ideas you have to date, and all I can do is wish you the very best of luck.

As for not being able to write about other media - you underestimate yourself. You don't have to be good at other media to write about it. My "Watercolour Innovations" which is due out any minute now (- I just got my pre-publication copy -) wasn't the easiest of books for me to write, but I managed it, and even managed to do the illustrations for the techniques chapter. I included the work of 8 artists. Perhaps you could rethink, and consider a book which looks not just as pastels but also at other media, and then you could use your own workbook stuff for the pastels side of things, and then include the work of other artists who work with mixed media, or watercolour, acrylics or oils. YOU would not have to know about those media, you would interview them and find out how they do what they do. It's what I did with "Watercolour Innovations". Just a thought. Instead of calling the book "Pastel xxxxxxx" or whatever you call it, you could concentrate on, for example "Colour and Tone" or it could be "The Painter's Workbook" or "20 steps to better painting" or something like that. I think I ought to have bought a copy of your work book to take with me to Greece!! I shall tell my students all about it.

Jackie

[meowmeow]

I don't understand why they keep saying they don't want any more pastel books. It seems to me that is the medium there is the least of....and based on what I see written about the other mediums, you could call it "Color and Tone" and then have the whole book be about pastel....why not? They do it with watercolors all the time! :D 3/4 of what is listed for Northlight is waterclor and doesn't say watercolor in the title.

Terrific thread....always is when Deborah and JAckie have a "conversation"!:D


Sandy

[jackiesimmonds]

I don't understand why they keep saying they don't want any more pastel books. It seems to me that is the medium there is the least of....and based on what I see written about the other mediums, you could call it "Color and Tone" and then have the whole book be about pastel....why not? They do it with watercolors all the time! :D 3/4 of what is listed for Northlight is waterclor and doesn't say watercolor in the title.

Terrific thread....always is when Deborah and JAckie have a "conversation"!:D


Sandy

Sandy one of the reasons they balk at new pastels books is that they sell in far lower numbers than watercolours. Watercolour is by far and away the most popular of all mediums, the vast majority of people who start painting from scratch, begin with watercolours (poor things, little do they realise it is FAR more difficult than pastels.)

Publishers are really only interested in $$$$ returns, and virtually every watercolour book is guaranteed to provide good returns because the market for them is so much bigger. Pastels books are iffy.

Jackie

[jackiesimmonds]

Sandy one of the reasons they balk at new pastels books is that they sell in far lower numbers than watercolours. Watercolour is by far and away the most popular of all mediums, the vast majority of people who start painting from scratch, begin with watercolours (poor things, little do they realise it is FAR more difficult than pastels.)

Publishers are really only interested in $$$$ returns, and virtually every watercolour book is guaranteed to provide good returns because the market for them is so much bigger. ( I also have a theory that every beginner to watercolours probably purchases more than one watercolour book, in fact I suspect many have a whole library of them, because they struggle so much with technique, and keep hoping that THIS new book has the answer. You should have seen how the HarperCollins editor's eyes lit up when I said I would write "Watercolour Innovations". It was a done deal from the moment I opened my mouth. )

Profits from pastels books are much more iffy.