FEAR of the DARK, do you use black? [Archive]

LarrySeiler

06-21-2002, 12:29 PM

As an art educator, I am familiar with the periods of history and wonderful masters that have used black effectively.

For the first 17 years of my painting professionally, which was all instudio, I used sketches, photo references...and worked a piece in successive stages based around tonal value building up... one such piece won a major competition for me with about 300 hours of such layering-
http://www.artlandishconcepts.org/snowyowl_partridge.htm

I favored Ivory black....in those years.

When I began to paint out of doors, it was not even reading the methods of the IMpressionists or others that convinced me not to use black any longer. It was simple observation of the outdoor lighting and my sincere effort to capture what I saw.

Light from the atmosphere reflects, bounces around, penetrates, and even objects painted with a black paint...when viewed in natural light reflect hints of color within its atmospheric surroundings.

As I began to be more and more comfortable with color, painting out of doors urged me to think of color more in terms of warm and cool temperatures. Thus, I use a split primary three colorwheel system. A warm and cool red, warm and cool blue, warm and cool yellow, plus white. I do include a Viridian and Naples Yellow.

I have found that I can achieve any level of value for contrast effect necessary for my paintings to breathe life and realism without black. IN fact, I attempted to use black initially, but they came off flat and lacking life to them. I found I had to mix color into the blacks to begin to breath more aptly what I was seeing.

That problem caused me to pay more attention, and then I poured myself more into reading. I discovered many artists not using black for various reasons...and I concurred. I was not swayed, but concurred.

I can make the darkest dark with a virdian and Alizarin Crimson, or a Phtalo Blue and Alizarin, with a touch of Cadmium Yellow and the difference is...I can influence the dark to be a warm or a cool. What that does is give me power to contrast the adjacent positive element that perhaps is opposite. Black alone has no such color mood and is incapable of having that affect by itself. Also, it kills a color....so I find it totally unnecessary.

By eliminating black, it has forced me to learn how to mix my color more effectively and think more about what light is doing. I do not agree that black is necessary to achieve values.

This does not mean I am so dogmatic that I have lost the ability to appreciate the wonderful artworks of others that yet use black. One master of using black that intrigues me because his work yet breathed inarguably life was John Singer Sargent.

He amazes me more, and peaks my curiosity because his contemporaries and friends were many of the IMpressionists, so it is likely these discussions about black were frequent for him.

I'm inclined to think however...and this might be an arguable point, that his real genius in handling color was due to his rather large body of watercolor studies he did out of doors, where his brush applications are more like the dabs of bold color known to the Impressionists. While I love his portrait works, they do not in my opinion compare really to the life he observed seen in his watercolors. I think thus, he found himself in constant flux and tension by having the habit of doing the many watercolor studies.

In time though...after he had become very self sufficient financially and at the peak of his portrait fame, he walked away from portraits entirely to do landscapes. If I am correct, I think he nearly eliminated black from his palette at that time. Again, I think his watercolor observations from nature were no doubt a cause for that.

Lastly...I think dependency upon photo references is perhaps one of the greatest contributers to why many artists today yet work with black in an "instudio" environment. The thru the lens metering in favoring light, shuts down the capability to read color in the shadows and simply/chemically reduces the area to blacks.

Artists not having the habit of painting from life thus do not develop that inclination and power of observation to interpret more going on in a photograph than what really is.

Sargent made use of photos for reference often, as photography was big in his day....but his habit of painting watercolors from life no doubt freed him to interpret and translate what photos did not provide.

Thus...I think tonalism today in a modern setting is more likely connected to instudio work and dependency upon photo references. Paint more exclusively from life itself, and any artist may be inclined more and more to move away from black. It simply finds less need to be used. Using it, will be more the habit of a routine of working methods, but will require overriding what the eyes are actually observing.

Of course....this is my opinion, and opinions are often like armpits. Everyone has at least two of them, and most stink!
:eek: :D :rolleyes: :cool:

Larry

belladonna

06-21-2002, 01:15 PM

I don’t use tube black as I have been on a limited pallet kick for quite a while. I’m down to 3 colors plus white. The white is the only constant on my pallet. The other colors are different depending on the subject. Black is just too predictable for me. Holds no surprises. Hence… no fun. I don’t miss it a bit. I let the mix of colors unify the painting, instead of using black for all the darks. Here is a piece of my newest painting, (all that will fit on the scanner), ‘Ruby Red and Bread’, using Yellow ocher, Alizarin Crimson, Fr. Ultramarine, and White. Plenty of good darks in it. No tube black.

belladonna

06-21-2002, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by belladonna
IHere is a piece of my newest painting, (all that will fit on the scanner), ‘Ruby Red and Bread’, using Yellow ocher, Alizarin Crimson, Fr. Ultramarine, and White. Plenty of good darks in it. No tube black.

Sorry that first pic didn't work out... Here it is now I hope.

paintfool

06-21-2002, 02:26 PM

Bella, i love the glow of that goblet!

belladonna

06-21-2002, 02:30 PM

Me too! (blush) :D It's better in real life though...brighter and crisper... ah well.

Luis Guerreiro

06-21-2002, 02:34 PM

Mars Black if I need a lean black although not as translucent.
Ivory Black is very fat, but a favorite if in need of a translucent.
Both are the colours I use less often.

ldallen

06-21-2002, 07:45 PM

Ivory black - but I am using less than I used to. I've been working on landscapes and I do mixed cad yellow with black for a nice green.

cobalt fingers

06-22-2002, 02:05 PM

Here's my thoughts on black. I feel it's a tool, a color among other mere colors. I like having all the tools in my arsenal that I can. Just as I would not try to do a painting w/o sables or filberts or painting knives I don't want to paint w/o black. I can and have painted w/o it but see no advantage.

I have said elsewhere, that once I had several artists over looking at a painting which had lots of color in it and sort of grey tablecloth. Several guys asked what did you use to get that neat grey? the answer; black and white. It only looked interesting in relationship to the other surrounding colors.

When you ask artists do you use red they would all say well yes. How about blue? of course...black is the great exception. All but a hand full of the very famous artists in history including this century used black...across the boards. I like to be able to grab it for a quick way to knock down certain colors or to make grey greens with yellow. IF I want to take some intensity from a yellow and push it towards a dull gren I can do that fast with a pinch of black. What must I go thru if I don't have that color on my palette? Mix 3 or 4 darks together, drag off a bit of that and then place that into my yellow admixture...a lot of work.

Now what if I want my "black" 3 days later to resume work on a painting. How do I get just that same dark color? I nearly never use pure black on my canvas-it's for mixing. i know what it will do and if I want a dark to be a little red I can add crimson or blue, ultramarine. For me it's nice to have around.

belladonna

06-22-2002, 07:48 PM

Originally posted by cobalt fingers

Several guys asked what did you use to get that neat gray? The answer; black and white. It only looked interesting in relationship to the other surrounding colors.

Good one. Color relationships. Wonderful stuff. Can make even the most boring color look great.

Originally posted by cobalt fingers

When you ask artists do you use red they would all say well yes. How about blue?

You cannot make something appear red without using red paint, same with blue.... You can make something appear black without using black paint. It’s not something you HAVE to have to get a good dark.

Originally posted by cobalt fingers

All but a hand full of the very famous artists in history including this century used black...across the boards.

They were masters and I am not. I have enough trouble handling 4 or 5 colors at a time! Perhaps when I get real good at it I will add more colors.

Originally posted by cobalt fingers

Now what if I want my "black" 3 days later to resume work on a painting. How do I get just that same dark color?

That is one of the reasons that I switched to a limited pallet in the first place. I don't have to guess what I used to mix what because I use so few colors in each painting. I have about 500 tubes of paint, to choose from, but use only 4 or 5 of them for each painting. Screw up proof. It will look cohesive no matter what I do. :D

BTW, your use of black is above reproach. You use it very well my friend.

"FEAR of the DARK" ...... Well... I guess maybe I still need a nightlight.
;)

DaveTooner

06-22-2002, 08:00 PM

I use Ivory black all the time, and it is beyond me what the advantages to using no blacks would be. Someone want to clue me in?

robinsn

06-22-2002, 09:51 PM

I use very little, but use both mars and ivory.

guillot

06-22-2002, 11:09 PM

I use Ivory and Mars, Depending on what I'm after, as Luis said earlier.............same reasons..........translucentcy. Often though, I'll mix the Ivory or Mars black with one of the main colors that I'm using for harmony, as in the painting below, the darkness was important in portraying the light, the symbolic shadows, and the isolation. Some may believe a "waste of canvas space", but was very important in capturing the essence of the moment in this particular piece. In this painting, I mixed Ivory Black with Prussian Blue for a really DEEP dark midnight blue, that somehow fit in the harmony of the painting for the shadows. Although a controversial subject, this is the best example I've to offer.

BTW.........:) :clap: So far, I've been offered $900 for this painting........should I take it???????

Tina

blondheim12

06-23-2002, 10:59 AM

A rule against using any color seems a little silly to me. Though I don't really need black, I have it in my paint box in case I would like to. Nothing wrong with it.

I think it is important to know how to mix colors without relying on easy formulas, but restrictions against using black seems a little silly to me.
Love,
Linda
http://dougie.net/epotw/

Luis Guerreiro

06-23-2002, 11:43 AM

Originally posted by guillot
I use Ivory and Mars, Depending on what I'm after, as Luis said earlier.............same reasons..........translucentcy. Often though, I'll mix the Ivory or Mars black with one of the main colors that I'm using for harmony, as in the painting below, the darkness was important in portraying the light, the symbolic shadows, and the isolation. Some may believe a "waste of canvas space", but was very important in capturing the essence of the moment in this particular piece. In this painting, I mixed Ivory Black with Prussian Blue for a really DEEP dark midnight blue, that somehow fit in the harmony of the painting for the shadows. Although a controversial subject, this is the best example I've to offer.

BTW.........:) :clap: So far, I've been offered $900 for this painting........should I take it???????

Tina

Hi Tina,

What value does the painting have to you? Only you can decide if US$ 900,00 is a fair price, given several factors such as size, time consumed producing it, degree of difficulty, and imprtantly enough how attached to it you are. There are paintings that painters would not sell, not even in exchange for the Crown Jewels! LOL!
A little note about black. In addition to Mars and Ivory blacks, I also have Paynes Grey, a very useful colour too.

guillot

06-23-2002, 12:09 PM

Hi Luis, Yes, you are so right. I'm rather attached to the painting, and I'm thinking of hanging on to it for a while, or at least until I can let go of it.

I use paynes grey too!!

Tina

ArtistEnigma

06-25-2002, 03:27 AM

I too use Ivory Black. For those who are afraid to use black or refuse to, I usually hit them with sticks and call them cowards. That usually changes their minds.

coolray

06-25-2002, 12:20 PM

To Black, or not to Black, that is the question!

Waaaay back in highschool, I was in a portrait class. I had been getting high marks for all my work that I had submitted. At one point we were to do a pastel portrait. Had the 44 box of Weber-Castell pastels. I just loved it! I proceeded to do a portrait of a girl that had dark hair. I got to the point where I needed to darken some of the hair tones, so I reeeached into my array of 44 colors, carefully running my finger down the various hues of the reds, then the blues, then the greens, until I finally came across a rich deep dark black!

I proceeded to take the black and gently blend it into the hair, taking care not to over do. Then I heard the clacking of my teacher's wheelchair as she approached my table. "Never use black to darken your colors! There are other ways to create dark tones!" To which I replied, " M'am, there are 44 colors in this box of pastels. The company put 44 colors for sale so some one would use them. One of those 44 colors is black! Had there been a ban on black being used in art, then the company would not have put it in there!" The teacher wheeled away without a word. Later I got the grade on my work. It was an A.

Now you say, "So use black all the time!" In fact what I found out through the years, is that black is not the cure all for creating dark areas. It tends to flatten the work you have done if used incorrectly. But I do use black. Mars and Ivory. The lesson was learned, but it was a long time before I gave credit to the teacher that tried to steer me in the right direction!

Live and learn!:D

Terry

Titanium

06-25-2002, 02:14 PM

Terry,

think of it this way,in the David and Goliath, your
doing [ yes, I lurk and watch ], if you use the Blue/black
as the darkener, white as lightener, [ here is where
we differ and a colour [ earth red or earth yellow ]
to first just note where shadows would be.

Then to model the shapes.[Here we differ again, I
keep the underpainting light - I am simplifying].

In the overpaint, no Blue Black, shifting to blues or
mixes of R.Y.B to create darkness.

You would notice the sparkle of life.
Titanium

* In a book I read on Composition, the authoress,
spoke of paintings using - Blue/black, white and a colour
[ tonal painting ] as Coloured Drawings.
The example shown was a Raphael Madonna.
North light effects?

I suppose that -
Later on Sunlight entered the world.
Blue, white and colours.

Luis Guerreiro

06-25-2002, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by guillot
Hi Luis, Yes, you are so right. I'm rather attached to the painting, and I'm thinking of hanging on to it for a while, or at least until I can let go of it.

I use paynes grey too!!

Tina

LOL :D LOL
Have we met before?!... :D
;)
Luis

Luis Guerreiro

06-25-2002, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by ArtistEnigma
I too use Ivory Black. For those who are afraid to use black or refuse to, I usually hit them with sticks and call them cowards. That usually changes their minds.

Oooooo :eek: Naughty naughty!
I AGREE! :D
There is a mis-conception about Black colours.

Black and yellow make delightful dark olive greens with lemon yellow, which in turn tinted with white make glorious greenish greys.

Black and ultramarine or cobalt blue make lovely cool greys when mixed with white

What about mixing black with viridian and tint the mix with white lead (flake or cremnitz white)? Delicious warm and luminous greys can be obtained this way. The same could be said of sap green.

The list is endless. So, please DO use black when apropriate to do so.

Luis :D

Luis Guerreiro

06-25-2002, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by coolray
To Black, or not to Black, that is the question!

Waaaay back in highschool, I was in a portrait class. I had been getting high marks for all my work that I had submitted. At one point we were to do a pastel portrait. Had the 44 box of Weber-Castell pastels. I just loved it! I proceeded to do a portrait of a girl that had dark hair. I got to the point where I needed to darken some of the hair tones, so I reeeached into my array of 44 colors, carefully running my finger down the various hues of the reds, then the blues, then the greens, until I finally came across a rich deep dark black!

I proceeded to take the black and gently blend it into the hair, taking care not to over do. Then I heard the clacking of my teacher's wheelchair as she approached my table. "Never use black to darken your colors! There are other ways to create dark tones!" To which I replied, " M'am, there are 44 colors in this box of pastels. The company put 44 colors for sale so some one would use them. One of those 44 colors is black! Had there been a ban on black being used in art, then the company would not have put it in there!" The teacher wheeled away without a word. Later I got the grade on my work. It was an A.

Now you say, "So use black all the time!" In fact what I found out through the years, is that black is not the cure all for creating dark areas. It tends to flatten the work you have done if used incorrectly. But I do use black. Mars and Ivory. The lesson was learned, but it was a long time before I gave credit to the teacher that tried to steer me in the right direction!

Live and learn!:D

Terry

:clap: Well said :clap:
In fact, there is no difference in which way to use blacks or any other oil colours. Handling of colour is a hard discipline in itself anyway.
Using black in the wrong circumstances is just the same as using cadmium red in the wrong circumstances.
I really don't see the difference.
Luis :)

Einion

06-26-2002, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro
Using black in the wrong circumstances is just the same as using cadmium red in the wrong circumstances.
Well put Luis. Black isn't this amorphous enemy painters need to be in fear of, you just need to learn to use it correctly. I well remember discussions I had years ago about fleshtones and like many I regurgitated the old saw, "don't use black in your fleshtones!" Now I know better :)

Einion

Luis Guerreiro

06-26-2002, 04:22 PM

Originally posted by Einion

Well put Luis. Black isn't this amorphous enemy painters need to be in fear of, you just need to learn to use it correctly. I well remember discussions I had years ago about fleshtones and like many I regurgitated the old saw, "don't use black in your fleshtones!" Now I know better :)

Einion

I thought at somepoint you'd be here soon ;)
I know colour is your favourite subject. The only blacks I use are Mars and Ivory, never tried other blacks, such as Lamp Black... Have you? If so, I'd like to have your comments, if you have a moment.
Kind regards
Luis :)

Doug Nykoe

06-26-2002, 07:28 PM

I guess it all depends on if you want to be an impressionist or not. Otherwise you would apply the more traditional way of creating form, using black as your base.

To be or not to be ...that is the question :) :D :)

Masterartworks

06-27-2002, 03:15 AM

I use black, but rarely strait out of the tube. Instead, I use it to mix with other colors.

When painting light, colorist/instructors will often tell a student "not to use black." This is for two reasons, one is because, this forces them to learn how to gray, darken a color, or mix a black, without the use of black. The second is, is that the student is compelled to learns how to mix color, by really getting to know it, and then their eye becomes more sensitive to all the nuances of a color. Once that is fully understood they can mix about any color they want. Then they can add if back to their palette, if they feel the need.

The reverse approach is, where the instructor will have the student do value studies in black and white, until they totally understand values. Then one, or two other colors will be introduced into their palette gradually until the full understanding of color's range is achieved.

I know of several well known instructors, who tell their students not to use black, but use it themselves. The difference is, they are using it as a compliment to their extensive mixing abilities, with a trained eye, and they can see that not all dark values are black.

If your painting tonal paintings, then these things are unimportant.

Luis Guerreiro

06-27-2002, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by Masterartworks
I use black, but rarely strait out of the tube. Instead, I use it to mix with other colors.

When painting light, colorist/instructors will often tell a student "not to use black." This is for two reasons, one is because, this forces them to learn how to gray, darken a color, or mix a black, without the use of black. The second is, is that the student is compelled to learns how to mix color, by really getting to know it, and then their eye becomes more sensitive to all the nuances of a color. Once that is fully understood they can mix about any color they want. Then they can add if back to their palette, if they feel the need.

The reverse approach is, where the instructor will have the student do value studies in black and white, until they totally understand values. Then one, or two other colors will be introduced into their palette gradually until the full understanding of color's range is achieved.

I know of several well known instructors, who tell their students not to use black, but use it themselves. The difference is, they are using it as a compliment to their extensive mixing abilities, with a trained eye, and they can see that not all dark values are black.

If your painting tonal paintings, then these things are unimportant.

With all due respect I find these and other "teaching" concepts rather patronising.
The best way to encourage students to improve their abilities in colour mixing is to allow them use any shade of black as much as any other colour. As I said before, applying black in the wrong circumstances is exactly the same as applying ANY other colour in the wrong circumstances.
I would like to add a further point to this discussion: Black being a rather difficult colour to deal with, should be recommended to students so they can learn how to use it wisely. To tell them not to use black is the first step to ensure they will in the future make all sorts of silly mistakes with it. The best way to learn how to ride a bike is to fall a few times, not to be told not to learn how to ride a bike.
Best regards
Luis :)

Masterartworks

06-27-2002, 04:49 PM

Luis

I agree that 'applying black in the wrong circumstance is exactly the same as applying any other color in the wrong circumstance,' that's a given.

The use of black, or not, comes down to personal preference. The teaching concepts, I discussed were simple examples of learning how to use color, and there are many.

I feel that trial and error is the best teacher. Sometimes the absence of a specific tool (black in this case), can lead to an innovative discovery and/or a renewed appreciation of it's need.
Lei

Einion

06-27-2002, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by Masterartworks
When painting light, colorist/instructors will often tell a student "not to use black." This is for two reasons, one is because, this forces them to learn how to gray, darken a color, or mix a black, without the use of black. The second is, is that the student is compelled to learns how to mix color, by really getting to know it, and then their eye becomes more sensitive to all the nuances of a color. Once that is fully understood they can mix about any color they want.
Lei, while I appreciate what instructors might be trying to instil, this sort of thing should be seen for what it really is - sophistry. The same class 100 years ago would not have had any silly bias against black, it would have been treated as one of the paints the student needed to know how to handle, just like any other colour; as Luis put it, it should be recommended to students so they can learn how to use it wisely. The simple fact is that art instruction today generally doesn't include anything like the level or amount of colour-mixing theory it should have (otherwise Alizarin Crimson would have vanished from artists' paint long ago!)

Black is certainly is not the best way to grey many pigment colours, but it is the best all-round darkener. Comments like "don't use it to shade yellow, you'll get green!" are fine on the surface but they oversimplify the subject in people's minds. For instance, for some low-chroma yellows a mix of yellow, black and the right red makes an ideal neutral. And if you like to use complements to mix neutrals, how are you going to darken the halftone you mixed from yellow and violet? Well, black work perfectly well for that, thank you very much :)

Originally posted by Masterartworks
Then they can add if back to their palette, if they feel the need.
How can they feel the need if they don't know what black does? The instructors who use it do so because they have practiced using it, the student has to do the same. It would be far better for black to be available and for the instructor to give specific guidelines on its use and abuse, just as if the student were trying to mix a bright violet using scarlet or an orange from a crimson.

Originally posted by Masterartworks
I feel that trial and error is the best teacher.
Well, trial and error didn't show the flaws of traditional colour theory for centuries, how can the student hope to make any progress in a single lifetime?! There are many fields of endeavour where it is the worst possible way to learn something and a trial-and-error approach might not be able to achieve a specific goal, I can give many examples if you want.

Luis I only have Lamp Black in oils, but I have three I use for different effects in acrylics: Carbon Black - best covering power because of its stunning tinting strength and very black in masstone (similar to the best Lamp Blacks), Mars Black - best true opacity, slightly lighter in value - and Bone Black - fairly transparent, also very black in masstone.

Einion

guillot

06-27-2002, 08:58 PM

This is becoming a very interesting thread. I'm enjoying the read, and finding it very educational at the same time.

With my lack of formal training in art, besides 3 months of portraiture training with a MFA, I classify myself as more self-taught (and sometimes really ignorant :) ) than formally trained. But I have never been afraid, thought twice, or turned away from using blacks. For some reason, maybe intuition, I feel the need for their use. So, maybe I'm not doing something wrong afterall?? Not mindfully tarnished from teachers influence on their use.

Hey, maybe I'll actually do something right for a change!! A revelation.

Tina

belladonna

06-28-2002, 04:15 AM

Einion, I happen to like Alizarin Crimson.

I cannot understand why over my years here this subject of 'black' is such a big deal. What if someone said, "I don't like to use gray from a tube” or mars yellow? Would it cause such a flap? Ain't it nice that we are free to choose. (There is no such thing as the color police ... yet... right?) We all have our own preferences and they all lead to different effects. The great thing is that we can learn from each other and share ideas. I have used black in the past. For some years now I have not because at this point in time I have no use for it. So what? I don't look at a painting and say it is flawed because the artist used/didn't use black. Some use it to advantage and some do not. It's just another color. Is black some kind of religion? Believers and non-believers? Or is it like politicks? This party or that party? Is that the way it is? Some of you get so hot under the collar about it. Freedom to choose is a great gift. Why not just tell me how you use black and why, or, how you paint without black and why, but please don't get start getting all huffy. Color theories are so cool! We know so much more about color and light and how it all affects us these days then they did in the past. The more you know about the 'rules' the more fun they are to break, or to use. We can choose.

I like what Master works said.

Originally posted by Masterartworks

The use of black, or not, comes down to personal preference. The teaching concepts, I discussed were simple examples of learning how to use color, and there are many.

I feel that trial and error is the best teacher. Sometimes the absence of a specific tool (black in this case), can lead to an innovative discovery and/or a renewed appreciation of it's need.
Lei

:clap: Bravo :clap:

coolray

06-28-2002, 11:30 AM

The fact that the teacher (mentioned earlier) told me not to use black, without a solid reason for it caused me to have a bad reaction to learning from others for a long time. I mean, if someone says not to use a color and it is there in plain sight to use, what kind of credibility do they have? I think it becomes imparitive that we search out all avenues of what the potential is of each and every color that is presented to us. I find it very narrow-minded when someone is trying to delete a color in order for you to learn another way to do the same thing. Show them BOTH ways!

Out of all the things we can do wrong with a painting, color is one of the major blunders if not done properly. But each and every one of us has a different concept of what colors to use. I know alot of people prefer a limited pallet, while others want the whole rainbow at their fingertips. Either way is acceptable, and to try and sway another person to your way of thinking is just not right.

So to sum up my lil' brain spill here, black is just another color that treated with respect, can yeild as much enjoyment and satisfaction in a painting as any other color.

That's my story..... and you can change it to fit your needs!

:D
Terry

Doug Nykoe

06-28-2002, 01:47 PM

I think I should explain my opinion a little better why black got a bad rap and why the line got blurred in blacks use. It all started when the first painting “Impression-Sunrise by Monet 1872” was painted. This painting upset so many critics that Monet and others had to break away and form their own group called the Impressionist. Their paintings looked so different, why? Many reasons, too many to go into but foremost there were no blacks used in their work.

It wasn’t so much as black was not allowed, as it was more of an issue of being aesthetically wrong in their intended purpose. Impressionists did not build form in the way the traditionalist did with black but rather it was built with warm and cool colors. It had more to do with the play of light than all the details. Even the shadows had more to do with reflected light but as you can see the procedure was different in execution than the traditional approach. Black had no place in this type of painting.

Today we still paint in the traditional manner using black as its base and some paint in the ways of the impressionists but a third way of painting tries to fuse the two approaches together by taking a lesson from the impressionist and applying some of their techniques in the traditional manner. They mix a blend of three colors like Schmid would do to create black. This is not impressionism but more of a traditional manner of painting fraught with it’s own issues of creating harmony or unity.

So as you can see for yourself black has a long tradition of producing wonderful paintings and the impressionist showed us all a completely different approach full of color and lastly a fusion of the two methods each with their own executions, problems and eventual beauty. But I think we can agree that they are all beautiful in their own right.

So there is an intended reason to remove black from your pallet rather than simply being status quo.

belladonna

06-28-2002, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by Doug Nykoe

...black has a long tradition of producing wonderful paintings and the impressionist showed us all a completely different approach full of color and lastly a fusion of the two methods each with their own executions, problems and eventual beauty.
:clap: Well said Doug! :clap:
Originally posted by coolray
The fact that the teacher (mentioned earlier) told me not to use black, without a solid reason for it caused me to have a bad reaction to learning from others for a long time. ... Show them BOTH ways!

:clap: Bravo Terry! :clap: Teachers should be able to give students ALL the options, not just there personal favorites.
Originally posted by coolray

I know alot of people prefer a limited pallet, while others want the whole rainbow at their fingertips.

I like the entire rainbow at my finger tips too ( :) ), but not all in the same picture. When I first started painting, I tried to incorporate all of my favorite colors into all of my paintings and it didn't do them justice. Too much eye candy, to much competition, needed more subtlety, I didn't feel that I had enough controll. Sooooo I went to a limited pallet to control these wild urges and give each color a chance to shine. ;) I pick 3 or 4 plus white, and go to town with them to see what they can do all by themselves. I have fun with that. Picking ‘the perfect colors’ for the subject. I have at least a hundred colors in my drawer to make the initial choices from for each painting, and yes, black is still in there, but for me, adding black makes them die right there on my pallet. Perhaps one day I will use black as a toner again. Who knows, but for right now, I'll leave it out cause it doesn’t give me the effects that I want for my work.

I have seen paintings done completely under painted to nice effect using just black and white, (many of the Dutch masters did it this way. (Jan Van Eyck comes to mind) Then they glazed over using transparent colors. They are magnificent! Many great painters use black to advantage in many different ways. It’s not that I don’t admire these works, but I have tried both techniques and like what I do now better. I have nothing against using black, it just doesn’t fit in with what I am aiming for.

Using black is not right or wrong. It is just another choice. A strong, valid case can be built for either option.

cobalt fingers

06-28-2002, 07:47 PM

great replies from everyone users and non-users!!Educational

btopa

06-28-2002, 08:22 PM

Cobalt Fingers,

I use burnt sienna, and ultramarine blue. Heavier on the blue to go darker.

btopa

Einion

06-29-2002, 10:01 AM

Belladonna, sorry, I didn't make the context of my comment on Alizarin Crimson clear: it wasn't in relation to its hue (which I'd be the first to admit is very agreeable) but it's fugitive nature, which better training would largely remove a demand for among artists.

Originally posted by belladonna
I cannot understand why over my years here this subject of 'black' is such a big deal. What if someone said, "I don't like to use gray from a tube? or mars yellow? Would it cause such a flap?
Ah yes, the difference is in how you put it and how it is so often expressed "I don't like to", versus "you don't have to", or even worse "you shouldn't". And to be fair, in the present day, it is the users of black who are the besieged minority surrounding by a hostile enemy so it's hardly surprising the reaction sometimes! As you put it there are believers and non-believers and the non-believers often come across like ex-smokers, with a religious zeal against its use. They are, if you will, black atheists - they don't just not believe in its use, they actively campaign against it.

You said we all have our own preferences and they all lead to different effects which is key IMO. Mixed "blacks" should be thought of as darks, they are not black in reality (often not truly close). Mixes like Alizarin Crimson and Viridian or Ultramarine with Burnt Umber are preferred by some for the faint hint of colour still visible in these areas, which is fine but to then say that mixes like this are the same as, or just as good as, black (i.e. interchangeable with it) is simply not the case. Milt put it very well when he said "bottom line... all the colorists who are explaining how they can mix to black, never do and never use any such color in their palette, anyway, so for them it's a pointless exercise in theory and applicability...."

Einion

cobalt fingers

06-29-2002, 10:25 AM

i have thought about buying empty tubes and storing my special mixes for later use. I could make an expensive black AND MAY!

LarrySeiler

06-29-2002, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by belladonna
I cannot understand why over my years here this subject of 'black' is such a big deal.

If you have ever watched video instructionals on raising walls of clay vessels on a potter's wheel...the one thing you notice (and especially when you teach high school kids to throw pots), is that each instructor seems to favor AND TEACH a particular and peculiar way of holding their hands. What I've noticed each to have in common at least...is that the arms must be anchored to the thighs or hips so that there is no free movement to throw the pot off.

One instructional I watched last night featured a couple profs from a university in Arizona, and she was quite good at encouraging the students to find what will work for themselves because our bodies are not all equally configured physically, and thus holding the hands one way might work better for some, holding the hands another way for another.

How that relates to your question concerning black is like this...

I have attemted to work with many many students (or advise artists seeking help) that put on unconsciously a pair of glasses to look at their subject as well as how they order their working methods. It takes many many years for most artists to develop and adapt methods until it nearly flows and becomes for them intuitive in nature...thus, all that technical garbage out of the way so the artist is simply in tune with the subject and reacting/responding aesthetically and creatively with ease.

In the same way the body may physically be impeded such that one's position must adapt to work the clay, a type of thinking can prevent the mind, the mind's eye and physical eye from seeing and properly responding.

Not every artist will find themselves bound by the same challenges. The reason some artists that have been working a long time have this "hang up" against black, is in working and trying to help many novice to intermediate artists we know they would more ably understand color, what light is actually doing, learn to mix their palette capably, etc., except that for these persons they have a block that prevents them from seeing. They have learned when seeing darks to stop seeing deeper, think only in terms of values, and haul out the blacks.

Now...perhaps in a studio one does not learn nor appreciate the limitation of that. In fact, such limitation has created an order of working that is conveniently and thankfully quite productive and the works due to all the principles of harmony and design are quite wonderful. Yes, even masterful.

If your intention is not just to produce a master work, but to see and paint what you see...setting up to paint outdoors produces other problems and challenges. Out of doors, you CAN see into the shadows!

You will find in mixing black to attain the values while standing there before nature and natural light...that you cannot mix what you are seeing.

Now...for very good artists that know how to interpret what they are seeing to weave into their tried and true/testing working order...that will be no problem. They see the end from the beginning and have enough works under their belt to have the faith to work beyond what they are not seeing to instead create what they want the viewer to see.

For the novice, the intermediate...or the professional (colorist) where the desire to paint what the eye is capable of seeing- black and weaving this image for the viewer is either difficult to fathom or unacceptable.

Again...it is about adjusting to the physical capability of the artist to derive a working order that will work for you. However, black will not work for many artists when natural light simply does not accomodate black as working in a studio's lighting will. Thus, the problem isn't that those that are against using black are missing something, or those that are for using black. The problem is that we artists have missed the simple appreciation that we must all accomodate for our personal intricasies.

Sargent was a master at using black in his mix of figures and the landscape...and his paintings are wonderful. However, many cannot be a Sargent...and instead of being in control to weave a coherent painting knowing where their working order will take them, they have to learn to accomodate.

Some use black and yellow to mix greens...but, I have not seen any greens here in the upper north midwest that look like that black. I have not seen reds darkened with black outdoors, that look like that. For me to mix black with red to darken it for the sake of value when it will produce a dark red that does not match what the eyes see is to give precedence to a working order over responding to the subject purely. I can't leave black alone...because I've not seen black as pure black alone. Every dark has some reflective hint of color from its adjacent areas.... but simply mixing that color into black produces a very poor substitute for what the eyes are seeing. Instead, mixing pure color whose chromas already match the needed value will produce the darks out of doors.

So...either I am working as I am to accomodate my inability to see black out of doors, or others are using black to accomodate their inability to see the potential that color relationships can achieve out of doors. No different that how we hold our hands to raise a clay pot.

Further still...as I paint a stilllife indoors with natural lighting, I personally still do not see a pure black. I see no dark that cannot be made with a palette of ample colors.

With that in mind...perhaps we would be better off trying to correct or nurture other artists that would rather fight in this issue to see the differences then in our working order and approach. Differences that exist because of our need to accomodate our physical, intellectual, aesthetic accuities.

However, the reason it makes a difference to me is that I might be getting to know an individual's mental or physical requirements for accomodation as to how to instruct and assist that individual. Just when that person is getting to understand color...and claims to begin seeing things really for the first time, they might be getting corrected on the side to add black to their palette. Now...having used black for many years, I can appreciate how it is a great pigment for the way many artists use and intend to use it. However, if using it threatens to prevent the break thru that an artist is seeking, I will in that sense, come off as sounding adament against it.

Sorta like a doctor insisting to stay off a sprain and give it rest...while someone else gives the advice that the best way to work out that sprain is to stretch and exercise it.

Sure...the patient will have to figure out what will be the best advice. For the weekender...rest will no doubt be the best thing. For a professional NFL player on a $3million dollar contract, it might be best for his career to endure the pain, take some pain killers, put on some sort of restraint and get back out there and play.

Larry

belladonna

06-30-2002, 03:46 PM

Einion – Thank you for your patience with me. It gets my back up when people should or shouldn’t me more than almost anything that I can think of and it always seems to come off as a personal attack so I get what your saying. I am a ‘romantic realist’ painter and dislike people saying to me why don’t you just get a camera or ‘loosen up’? (Realism basher’s grrrrrr.) They don’t seem to realize that I alter what was there, to what I would like to be there when I paint, using reality and reference photos, as ‘references’. (Unless doing a commission where someone hands me a photo and says I want this exactly but in oils. The closest I get to ‘copying’ from nature or photos would be in a portrait.) Still, I do believe that there are several different blacks to be found, in tubes and in mixes and I continue to like alizarin crimson. :D See it up close on page 1 of this thread? (Part of my last painting) It’s a pretty color. Nice and transparent. Works well when used for a glaze.

(Gawd I love those transparent colors. They make my heart sing. Perhaps some day I will limit my palet even more and get rid of all the opaques. Really. Been seriously thinking about it the past year or so. Would be interesting to see what would happen if I tried that. But then there is always white. I need white. Is there a transparent white out there?) :D

Cobalt – *lol* It’s a lot easier than you think. No need to store them. Another reason I limit my palet. With only 4 colors at a time out of the drawer, the right darks are easy to mix when I need them again. I am sooooo lazy! ;)

Iseiler – Thank you also for your patience with me. I get what you’re saying even though I have been primarily a studio painter. Landscapes are very hard for me… my weekest spot. (All those leaves OMG! Where do I begin! OMG It’s all so beautiful that I have to narrow it down or I get sensory overload.) I do however see what you see in nature. I too think that the best way to capture the reality of light and color would be from life, in natural lighting, rather than in studio lighting with photos. But, landscapes are so much work and the light keeps moving! And… I am not quick about capturing. Time stops for me when I paint but the light outside keeps changing and so I am lost. I cannot keep up. There is a lot to be said for impressionist landscapes. They can ‘get it’ right away. What I need to do is learn how to do make quick color sketches. It’s here on my mental list, but I know it will take a lot of time and practice to get it right. A camera can help, but as you say, the subtle colors and lights are lost.

Something else for me to think about, this colorist/tonalist stuff… All of my paintings are, by nature of my limited pallet, tonalist paintings. I use very few pure colors, but the ones that I do not mix stand out as I intend that they should. I am very big on effect over reality, this includes color balance and harmony. I most often do not use the colors that I see for the sake of my limited pallet, and color composition, yet I do try to capture/achieve the same feeling of light and range of color. Still, I do not use black so I am in the colorist category?

My head is starting to hurt. Whatever I am, it works for me so I think I’ll just go paint and forget about the labels… sigh… I’m a painter. Much love to all of you. Colorists and Tonalists alike. (I always suspected that I was adopted…) ;D

belladonna

06-30-2002, 07:10 PM

O.K. started to paint but came back. Here is part of my reference photo and the pallet I chose for the painting I am working on now. My ‘black/not black’ is a mix of ‘Beaux Arts Burnt Sienna’, and ‘Grumbacher Thalo Blue’. The only other colors I am using for this painting are ‘Rembrandt Lemon Yellow’, and ‘Grumbacher Titanium White’. Should do the trick. :)

jocelynsart

07-02-2002, 01:33 PM

This thread is interesting. I guess I have to say, yes, I Guess I Do use black afterall, just not the ready tube of black. It is funny, the less I mix the colours on my pallette, the more rich and clean they are on the canvass, board, paper, whatever.
I feel black is an uneeded expense for me. Every other colour I use, even yellow, which I tend to shy away from if I can. Lol. Guess that determines my subject matter.
I have painted for over 20 years and I will never buy black paint for acrylic, watercolour or oil. If I wanted to I would though! I tend to be pretty stubborn! But, there are no rules to follow, it is all personal use and preference as well as a developed style of working. There are no do this do that right or wrongs.
Joss
Belladonna! I really like your work! The subject matter also are extremely intersting!

cobalt fingers

07-02-2002, 01:40 PM

That's way cool to see the pallette with the painting "to be" I think you have a thread idea. Ikinda like the way the pallette looks! Frame it

Masterartworks

07-02-2002, 07:24 PM

Did I use Black or did I mix Black in this watercolor?
I will tell you in a you in an up coming posts.

ElizaLeahy

07-02-2002, 09:25 PM

Payne Grey, plus whatever I have handy to mix it with. This usually means that whatever I have on my pallet gets mixed up - but as they are all colours that are in the painting anyway it seems to work :)

Eliza

cobalt fingers

07-02-2002, 10:39 PM

Zorns paintings hang together for the short pallette he used...the results are hard to agrue with... I think black was on it right?

impressionist2

07-03-2002, 07:49 AM

From Richard Schmid, author of "Alla Prima" :

Q. Have you stopped using black? (From Eugene V. in Australia.)
A. Yes. Long ago. Black, both Carbon Black and Ivory Black tend to crack. More importantly, I prefer to mix a black with Alizarin + Ultramarine Blue + Transparent Oxide Red, with one of them predominating. That way I get a black that belongs to a color family and has a specific color temperature.

On Alizarin Crimson's fugitive problem:
To reassure myself, I have subjected some of the new dark transparent reds (designed to replace the old Alizarin Crimson) to my own accelerated light tests—exposing color charts of them to intense sunlight for a year or more (a brutal thing to do to oil paint) to note any change. I'm happy to report that Gamblin™ Alizarin Permanent, and Windsor Newton™ Permanent Alizarin Crimson, have shown not the slightest signs of fading or cracking. I have added both to my current palette.

Renee

Andrew

07-03-2002, 10:01 AM

Whether I am using acrylic (mostly these days) or oils (which I feel a yearn for again as of late) I use umbers and siennas with ultra. blue, or use mixtures of compliments.

I have tubes of mars and lamp black, but both are barely touched. I use them for quick value studies and have tinted my gesso, but prefer a stone grey or blue grey mixed from other colors. It is a richer and more full bodied tone.

Although my choice to not use black may change. I have been studing the process of the Old Masters (Titian, Rembrant, Hals, Vermeer, etc) and they have lamp and/or Ivory black on their palette occassionally. As I try to duplicate their stylings, I may learn to appreciate black. But, like Larry, I see a lot of color even in fairly dark shadows. So mixing my "blacks" has more depth to the shadows than just blends with black.

Andrew

LarrySeiler

07-03-2002, 10:24 AM

I think one of the greater challenges for me with the advent of the internet is to express precisely what you "think" you are trying to say and be understood the same.

I get myself in trouble from time to time when I speak of tonalism, and just this morning in another forum I might have stated it such that I might make more sense. I know use of black tends to assist helping many artists be more tonal. I also know from personal experience that artists that are habitually prone to paint from photographs see more blacks in subjects simply because thru the lens metering and film chemistry poorly interprets what goes on in the shadows...often the result being black or shades of the same.

It is easy then to paint black where inherent in the artist psyche is the need to paint what one observes when it is a photo one is observing from.

Thus, I came up with an idea that perhaps there are two types of tonalists....and perhaps further the distinction is important for clarification sake and awareness.

A "tonalist by intent" and a "tonalist by default".....

A "tonalist by intent" would no doubt be a more mature artist with greater power of observation both of what works in a painting and of life itself. S/he might use a photo reference...but is able to interpret what is seen to create the ideal image they are after.

A "tonalist by intent" set before life to respond and interpret it .... perhaps even out of doors next to a plein air'ist colorist...set up with an easel, would no doubt see both artists easing themselves into the groove of painting; both making good pictures.

On the other hand, a "tonalist by default" is one that has resolved to confiding in simply copying photographs. They might paint their values and tonal ranges because that is what the film chemistry and limitations of the camera have provided them. In essence they could be a colorist waiting to happen, however painting what they see....the limitations set inherent in a photo control the outcome.

I would near wager then...that if you put a "tonalist by default" before a live setting with instructions to paint- the overwhelming barrage of information that is in constant flux and shift (going beyond the ease of simple copying), would have a paralyzing affect upon them. Unless, they would have developed their power to "copy" so efficiently that they could still work. However, at the finish of their painting...their works would present so much color as a result of what they saw, others that heretobefore thought of them as a tonalist would have good reason to question.

I don't offer this as a possible delineation for any purpose of malintent in degrading individuals, but to help separate in our minds what is at stake in the habit of copying pictures. Too much is being assumbed about the level of success one will have after having copied a picture so well. On the other hand, a "tonalist by intent" is not restricted nor is s/he limited by a photo reference, because experience and developed powers of observation possess and entertain the license to deviate and enhance what a photo is limited to reveal.

What do you think of this attempt to designate these two types? I think for the artist that is a copier only, a "tonalist by default" represents the poorer ambassador for this stylization.

Larry

LarrySeiler

07-03-2002, 10:39 AM

This then makes me wonder one more possibility....and that is enhancing digital imagery to compensate.

If we took the "tonalist by default" and presented a photo reference that was printed out after color balances, saturation and hues were tweaked and optimized (such as with photoshop) ...such that dominant shadows/darks and values were no more limited in revealing color....would we not see then a person forced to begin to learn more about color mixes to arrive at their values?

Again....however, a person would be yet depending upon simply copying.

Copying in and of itself is not bad....and it is a great way of learning. I think we all know and acknowledge that. However, it can have a negative side to it in enslaving the artist, creating a limitation in allowing their powers of observation and creative response to grow. At some point in time, artists tend by nature to wish to be less "reactive" and more "responsive." To have enough experience and facility to command their skills to dominate the image, and not the image to dominate their skills.

I think for the "tonalist by default" to grow...they will need to acknowledge why they are a tonalist at their particular stage of artistic growth. Not acknowledge themselves as poorer because of it.... (not speaking of a negative self-assessment here). The awareness of why they are at this point in time tonal will flag their need to not allow themselves to be limited or manipulated by a resource...and to see that ideally one day their position will be to instead have the resource manipulated by them.

Opting for tonalism instead as an ideal means for their own self-expression and a tool that best empowers them to create; ....having freed themselves of their works being tonal by default...freed from the habit of copying photos....to a "tonalist by intent" -as the best aesthetic vehicle for their expression.

Make sense?

Larry

LarrySeiler

07-03-2002, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by Andrew
But, like Larry, I see a lot of color even in fairly dark shadows. So mixing my "blacks" has more depth to the shadows than just blends with black.

Andrew

One habit that I am developing Andrew...as advice from Kevin MacPherson...is to peripherally judge a color area.

When we first see a scene that grabs us aesthetically, having not broken it down to analyze it as just yet...we are responding to the whole. Unfortunately as we set up to paint, it is so easy to lose this sense of the whole and the "ah-hah!'s" association to the necessity of the whole...and our particulars soon having us attempting to intricately weave individual parts together in hope of attaining harmony.

The painter's habit of squinting the eyes....eliminates unnecessary details, and makes more obvious the main elements that hold this composition together.

I have found, that by judging the color of the sky by not looking directly at the sky but at the horizon's mass of trees, (thus peripherally taking it in); I will see the hint of a color's presence that is not always so easy to discern when looking directly.

The relationship of that sky and color to the mass of the scene thus is more harmonizing.

When I look for hints of color in shadows....I find it also useful to look at adjacent areas of color and areas in light. Often, the darks appear even darker...yet the hint of color in those shadows becomes even more apparent.

Now, many "colorists" are rightly judged I think in over exaggerating color....which I think tends to animate a scene much like a caricaturist animates a person's portrait. However, speaking of those colorists that strive yet for an accurate representation of realism...I would argue in defense of their having an ability to see particular color that others might not. Further, I think it is possible to develop a sensitivity. A sensitivity whose growth is hastened by use of this peripheral observation.

Peripherally....hints of cool colors in shadows are even that much more apparent.

Larry

Masterartworks

07-03-2002, 11:46 AM

Larry, I agree with the communcation thing.

Originally posted by lseiler

It is easy then to paint black where inherent in the artist psyche is the need to paint what one observes when it is a photo one is observing from.

Thus, I came up with an idea that perhaps there are two types of tonalists....and perhaps further the distinction is important for clarification sake and awareness.

A "tonalist by intent" and a "tonalist by default".....

This is an interesting line of thought. You could drop the word "tonalists" and just use "by intent" or "by default." Because, aren't you really just making a point about the value of working from life and it's benefits, rather than, a specific style.

LarrySeiler

07-03-2002, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by Masterartworks
Larry, I agree with the communcation thing.

This is an interesting line of thought. You could drop the word "tonalists" and just use "by intent" or "by default." Because, aren't you really just making a point about the value of working from life and it's benefits, rather than, a specific style.

In essence you are correct and it makes for further good discussion... because style ought to have little to do with the overall inherent power that a resource by which the artist will use will have over him/her. However, a style may be further augmented by one's limitations one imposes upon him/herself in the form of the resources one is working with. Great resource, great painting....poor resource, poor painting, etc;

The topic of using black as a pigment is often insisted on by artists that claim you can only get the proper values in a painting by its use, or by thinking in terms of tone. I find, that even a dark color (whether you are thinking in terms of value or not), is yet "a color!" and if you mix that right color which is at the moment seen/observed...you will inherently have the proper value.

In our ensuing discussions, my observations are that there is a tendency for people to take positions. An "us" versus "them" kinda thing. I think since colorists and tonalists tend to come to verbal blows every so often...it might help to weaken that line we actually think is separating us.

A colorist may be an artist that is doing nothing more than painting from life or what they see. Some tonalists that are cited as championing the cause of tonalists are not necessarily thinking in terms of tonalism, but in reality are painting only what they see. A "tonalist by default" is painting only what they see, which is a limitation by virtue of such limitations a photograph inherently carries. A "tonalist by intent" is using artistic judgments to override or augment resource information.

What I am saying is that such tonalists as this have handicapped and limited themselves not so much to what they can see as to what they choose not to see or don't know what is available to be seen because they do not look beyond their photo references for other possibilities.

I think there are some wonderful tonalist painters here using black, and our own WC's Milt is one of them. I don't believe Milt paints tonally because he cannot paint without black or any other way. He is on top of his game and chooses such methods to aesthetically arrive at the images he is creating.

To have better understanding then...I do not think it is fair for colorists to judge "tonalists by intent" (whom have every mature capability for the options they choose)...as they do, because I think they have "tonalists by default" in mind when they make such judgments.

I think such judgments put people on a defensive mode which then makes understanding that much harder to come by.

Colorists, or those in general who paint from life and direct observation are aware of seeing things they ordinarily would be barred from seeing in a photograph. They sometimes wrongly assume all tonalists are held prisoners of the photograph. Thus, I think in a discussion where the use of black is concerned, (a discussion that tends to naturally preclude tonalists to a great degree versus colorists), such designation and clarity may be useful.

Larry

belladonna

07-05-2002, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by lseiler
...I would near wager then...that if you put a "tonalist by default" before a live setting with instructions to paint- the overwhelming barrage of information that is in constant flux and shift (going beyond the ease of simple copying), would have a paralyzing affect upon them...
On the other hand, a "tonalist by intent" is not restricted nor is s/he limited by a photo reference, because experience and developed powers of observation possess and entertain the license to deviate and enhance what a photo is limited to reveal…

O.K. well… I am sometimes overwhelmed buy the barrage of information, (as I sometimes am by your posts! Hehehe Not a bad thing ). Because of this I find the need to simplify. Then again, I do not use exclusively photo references, as I don't like to be restricted/tied to the photo. In all of my best work, I have painted from a combination of photo references and life and imagination. The photo keeps me in mind of my original intent, and having the subject in front of me lets me examine it in more depth. This in turn enables me to change reality to suit my aesthetic values. It’s what I’m shooting for anyway. :D
Originally posted by lseiler
I have found, that by judging the color of the sky by not looking directly at the sky but at the horizon's mass of trees, (thus peripherally taking it in); I will see the hint of a color's presence that is not always so easy to discern when looking directly.

Would not the viewers eye do this when looking at the painting if you painted the color of the sky by looking at it directly, and the colour of the trees by looking at them directly, and put it down this way? Would it not give the viewers eye the job of seeing the colour effect that you saw. By editing it for them, would it not change the colour effect that you originally saw? This would probably enhance the effect, and would be a good thing in my book. (Tom Thompson comes to mind. Those coloured underpaintings showing through mmmmm nice. Makes his work shimmer.) True to nature or better than nature? I would try for better than nature every time. :D (Sometimes I don’t like the colour of the grass!)
Originally posted by lseiler The awareness of why they are at this point in time tonal will flag their need to not allow themselves to be limited or manipulated by a resource...and to see that ideally one day their position will be to instead have the resource manipulated by them…[/B]
I don’t know if Tom Thompson used black or not, or if he was a colourist, or tonal by intent. (I am still lost with all that despite the thorough explanations) But look what he did with what he saw! :D
Here is a sketch of his on location, (left), and his studio painting from that sketch, (right).

belladonna

07-05-2002, 12:21 PM

Originally posted by cobalt fingers
That's way cool to see the pallette with the painting "to be" I think you have a thread idea. Ikinda like the way the pallette looks! Frame it

Cobalt, I have one of those 'colour test pages' for every painting I've done over the past few years. You could have an idea there! *lol* I'd probably get more money from those 'test pages' in some galleries if I framed them, than I would for the paintings that came out of them! *lol*

LarrySeiler

07-05-2002, 12:30 PM

Originally posted by belladonna

Would not the viewers eye do this when looking at the painting if you painted the color of the sky by looking at it directly, and the colour of the trees by looking at them directly, and put it down this way? Would it not give the viewers eye the job of seeing the colour effect that you saw. By editing it for them, would it not change the colour effect that you originally saw? This would probably enhance the effect, and would be a good thing in my book. (Tom Thompson comes to mind. Those coloured underpaintings showing through mmmmm nice. Makes his work shimmer.) True to nature or better than nature? I would try for better than nature every time. (Sometimes I don’t like the colour of the grass!)

For one...I only wish that more of the general public would develop their eyes and mind's eye aesthetically. They are for the most part only sensitive enough to ask for the low down by the gallery clerk, who then tells them why they should or should not like the artist.

We as the artists are attempting to bring a harmonizing continuity to our work, and this is one method. Before we worry what the viewer might see, we need to at least be aware of what our own possibilities might be for seeing. At any rate, part of our job in making paintings is to bring things to the viewer's attention.

For one...we can take that which is mundane and ordinary, and cause the viewer to see it again for the very first time. By looking at good art works, even allowing purples to be seen more in shadows and raising questions in the viewer's mind as to whether or not such purples might be seen in the shadows...we assist their eyes to be that more open to seeing the world about them.

I remember the first time I saw a portrait (though I don't remember the artist) where the moisture of the cheek and jawline reflected the color and brightness of the shirt the sitter was wearing. That was a moment of revelation, and I was an artist! Thereafter, (and at first for confirmation's sake), I began more carefully to look at people when I would go about to see if indeed their lower face might reflect their shirts. Indeed, it happens most all the time.

By placing in the hint of color we sense, we may very well encourage others to see.

Secondly...what we perceive in natural light, from life... should not be confused to happen in suit with layers of pigment. Though we will experience this phenomena to a degree looking at a piece of art work, it happens to a greater more consistent degree in nature.

Remember those old Peters and Remington posters? Those thin rough and tough hunters with the lever action rifle in one hand, grasping onto rock ledges with the other? Usually a gnarly growling grizzly bear just above...?

I never used to quite understand those green skies and pink'ish rocky peaks. However...as I develop my eyes more to be sensitive I indeed am happy to report I am beginning to see such hints and direct color as I paint outdoor plein airs.

While not always obvious, such scenes do leave a certain emotive aesthetic impulse such that even though these Peter's posters at first appear overstated...that like emotive connection for which you remember your encounters outdoors becomes more vivid.

At any rate...one of the greatest values of understanding this phenomena is the empowerment to tweak and get more out of a color when you so desire it.

If I am feeling greater presence of warm intense chroma in trees glowing from a late afternoon's sun but just don't have a tube of such intense chroma pigment...remembering this phenomena reminds me that I can sense adjacent colors peripherally. All I know Bella, is that when I place some of that perceived color then in my paintings adjacently...it has the affect of intensifying that initial area of color that I had hoped for.

When you paint outdoors especially, you are quickly humbled to the feeble incapability of pigment to mimic nature's palette. Any little trick offers hope of getting one step closer.

peace,

Larry

belladonna

07-05-2002, 12:42 PM

Larry - In a nutshell then…using effect for enhancement. :clap:

LarrySeiler

07-05-2002, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by belladonna

I don’t know if Tom Thompson used black or not, or if he was a colourist, or tonal by intent. (I am still lost with all that despite the thorough explanations) But look what he did with what he saw! :D
Here is a sketch of his on location, (left), and his studio painting from that sketch, (right).

I've done that a few times too Bella, where you'll paint something that you see on location...but when you get home after a few days you realize that the painting does not accurately represent what you "felt" while painting and seeing.

The two do not coincide. So, then I would do another instudio painting using the first as a reference but experimenting how color might rise recognition in my artistic self that more aligned itself with how I felt.

The trick is...learning how to do that the very first time on location.

Some artists will always do the on location plein air as a reference, careful to copy everything. A "pochade" or oil sketch. Then, do another instudio painting. Clyde Aspevig is an example, and he is not known for putting his plein air studies out for public viewing.

Of course, Aspevig does very large instudio works, which would be harder to do as a plein air anyway.

Thus, some plein air artists attempt to do a bit more interpreting on location. That is, they try to interpret their own feelings. "Yes, I see the scene, but how is my mind's eye seeing this? What affect is it having on my aesthetics? Why did this scene leap out at me and demand to be painted?"

In attempting to answer those questions myself on location, some have lately begun to describe my work as being more "expressionist"...yet, I feel I am trying to paint realistically. But, seeing something is seen and taking in more than just the eyes the way a camera sees. The artist can attempt to soak in the whole thing with his whole being.

Here is one example, where I had been painting along the Rush River in Wisconsin, standing knee deep in snow. My experience was enhanced by having had nearly 40 Eastern Turkeys in one mass flight glide in about 15 feet over my head to cross this river and peck at the ground on the other side.

This was done about three years ago, and I painted first what I saw-
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Jul-2002/rushriver.jpg

..however, after a couple days then looking at it again I was very frustrated because it did not really register with me with what I saw. What I thought I "saw" inadvertently and necessarily included how the seeing of that moment affected me emotionally.
So, I then did a simple small impasto'ish experiment trying to more adequately represent the scene 'till it had the ability to conjur up what I had "felt" that day-
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/05-Jul-2002/rushriver2.jpg

Larry

LarrySeiler

07-05-2002, 01:00 PM

Originally posted by belladonna
Larry - In a nutshell then…using effect for enhancement. :clap:

true...

the perpheral explanation of how I go about this, might help others know how to technically go about it. Why the phenomena seems to exist.

Larry

belladonna

07-05-2002, 01:24 PM

And so it began. Artistic license. The intent to express/convey a feeling/mood/idea etc, rather than copy.

Linoxyn

07-05-2002, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by belladonna
And so it began. Artistic license. The intent to express/convey a feeling/mood/idea etc, rather than copy.

Very true! I would change the line "Artistic license" to - An earned artistic license.

guillot

07-05-2002, 07:06 PM

Pray tell Linoxyn, what is your interpretation of "earned"?

guillot

07-06-2002, 12:12 PM

Belladonna and Iseiler - I've enjoyed your feedback very much. I just wanted to say thanks for sharing your professional experiences, and giving me an eye opener.

Tina

belladonna

07-06-2002, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by Einion

And to be fair, in the present day, it is the users of black who are the besieged minority surrounding by a hostile enemy so it's hardly surprising the reaction sometimes!

Einion, get back in here! So far the pole says different. 37 artists say they use black and 19 say they don’t. I am the only artist that I personally know that doesn’t use black and I am a member of 2 groups with 30 members each! (They still love me. :angel: )

Guillot – Good to feel useful. There are so many ways of using colour. An open mind and lots of personal experimentation is always the best way to go.

Linoxyn

07-06-2002, 10:10 PM

Originally posted by guillot
Pray tell Linoxyn, what is your interpretation of "earned"?

guillot,

I did write an answer to this earlier but hitting the "back" button after I checked it out in "Preview Reply", I lost it all :(

Creating art has many components: skilled (conscience) and accidental (sub-conscience) with many variations in between. When a lack of skill, experience and/or talent does not get the artist through a problem area in their artwork, the artist along with the critics, historians, curators, etc, can place a blanket label upon this. Hence the term "artistic license". Which of course divulges to the layman the artist's intent to express/convey a feeling/mood/idea etc. In a pig's eye :D

I'm not saying the accidental or painterly effects (or the opposite - very controlled effects) within a painting are invalid, many great works have proven all these effects can be quite beautiful. When "artistic license" is tagged to the ignorant emotional manipulations of a brush, or whatever choices the artist makes I feel this can only sour this phrase. An "earned Artistic License" is best defined as how an artist can have the choice to make artworks that aren't defined as replicating life and/or photographs. Artwork can stand grandly on it's own.

In the same vain, pertaining to black, whether an artist mixes varying colour pigments to create a tonal range or uses the addition of black pigment to do so - it does not matter. When the artist's intent is being made through an "earned Artistic License", I believe it does not matter. Art is art :)

I hope I've made sense here? My first version of my response was much better, trust me :)

Luis Guerreiro

07-06-2002, 10:33 PM

Originally posted by belladonna

Einion, get back in here! So far the pole says different. 37 artists say they use black and 19 say they don’t. I am the only artist that I personally know that doesn’t use black and I am a member of 2 groups with 30 members each! (They still love me. :angel: )

Guillot – Good to feel useful. There are so many ways of using colour. An open mind and lots of personal experimentation is always the best way to go.

Belladonna,

I respect your art and I like the stuff you do, although different from the stuff I do. That's fine! It would be too boring if we all did the same thing. Diversity is a quality, not a defect.
In regads to the use of black pigments, I have to say that I don't see the point of all this "palavra" against it! For 500 years (Yes! Five hundred years!!!) the most important and proeminent artists have used black to some extent.
All of a sudden, black is bad. Achieve blacks and darks using other colours is the way to go!
Er... The issue isn't even technical to be true! There is no reason why one should not use black.
People arrived at this point about black colours because of the limitative and narrow-minded views of teachers (and artists) who decided that black is no good. These are exactly the same people who say that Titanium White is the best white around (which is not true!). The saga goes on and on and on! The best academics do recommend black for their readers and students palettes. To recommend students, beginners and alike to get black off their palettes is plainly BAD advice. Black shoud be there as much as any other colours.
The whole thing has disturbing similarities with those health "specialists" who decided that butter is bad, wine is bad, red meat is bad, etc is bad. Possibly the neighbours ginger cat is bad too. They all will shorten one's lofe expectancy... Pathetic! As if we don't all have to die one day of something.
Let them enjoy life,. let them enjoy the challenge of experimenting with black and all the marvellous mixes it can provide.
I am honestly nauseated with all these "smart" people who think that the best way to teach art is to use the "NO" language: Don't use black, don't this... don't that... The "don't" people are just too negative and self suppressed for my taste. I rather have people who speak for freadom of choice and look forward.
Luis

LarrySeiler

07-07-2002, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro
People arrived at this point about black colours because of the limitative and narrow-minded views of teachers (and artists) who decided that black is no good.
]

Umm...er, excuse me, I painted with black for 17 years and just the past seven years have I ceased to use black, and not because some narrow-minded "teacher" told me to. Furthermore, I have won major competitions during those "use of black" years. I certainly don't give a rip if artists wish to use black or not. Ssheesh!!! I thank God for diversity that makes this planet a bit more interesting.

On the other hand, if someone wishes to understand my method of painting....or why I do not use black, I think it civil, respectful, and honoring to esteem such an individual high enough to give them a thoughtful response.

If it becomes an argument, and some insist that I cannot do justice to a painting eliminating black, then at that point I have a right to give a defense for what I know. Its that simple!

I am honestly nauseated with all these "smart" people who think that the best way to teach art is to use the "NO" language: Don't use black, don't this... don't that... The "don't" people are just too negative and self suppressed for my taste. I rather have people who speak for freadom of choice and look forward.
Luis

You know, Luis...a train is made for a specific purpose. The tracks are admittedly rigid and fixed. At some venture, the train might wish to declare its freedom and jump the tracks....however, entrenched deeply in mud going nowhere...it may suddenly get a sense of its purpose. Freedom might be the enabling to do as one is designed to do...and perhaps those tracks aren't such a bad thing after all.

Some who come to a place in their creative lives appearing to be so rigid, have found great freedom to create as a result of such self-imposed observations and rules. Like the train, finding their purpose higher than jumping tracks to prove license. People might "speak for freedom of choice" but they might also be unaware of any sense of a higher purpose or direction that is best for themselves. They just might have to jump the tracks in order to appreciate in retrospect what was going on in their lives. Becareful not to assess clamoring for freedom to be more noble than those that appear self-restricted. The latter simply might be quite prolific....and understand another not so obvious dimension to what freedom means.

For one, I don't claim the transcendency to necessarily state with omnipotent authority what others should or shouldn't do. However, I will assume when a discussion is invited on the issue, that why one person does this and not that, and the other different....we don't have to assume its all negative or some are trying to suppress or control others.

Heck for that matter, your post here could be argued an attempt by one intelligent point of view to transfer a sense of indignation to rally support for your idea. By attacking the "don't" and the alleged "negative"....you are creating a "don't" yourself. Some reading along and finding sudden agreement are compelled to agree, seeing your negative point about "negativity" and thereafter are moved.

For Pete's sake...what is, simply is. Some use black. Some do not. Some would like to know why some do and do not. That's all that's going on here. Do people not have a right to consider it, and others not a right to question the response?

If you want to use a dump truck load of the stuff....so what! I know I could care less. In fact, I would prefer you painted as little the way I do as possible, which assures me a safer corner to my world and a more secure spot in the market, and more interesting diversity for everyone concerned.

sorry to hear you are so nauseated, or that I might have unintentionally contributed to that state. Hope you feel better soon!
Be at peace.....

Larry

belladonna

07-07-2002, 02:27 AM

Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro I respect your art and I like the stuff you do, although different from the stuff I do. That's fine! It would be too boring if we all did the same thing. Diversity is a quality, not a defect.
Thank you Louis, but was all the rest of that directed at me? If so I don’t get it.
Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro In regads to the use of black pigments, I have to say that I don't see the point of all this "palavra" against it! For 500 years (Yes! Five hundred years!!!) the most important and proeminent artists have used black to some extent. All of a sudden, black is bad.
I never said that black was bad. I said that I don’t use it and why. Just because something is done one way for 500 years doesn’t mean that I have to do it that way too. I will do as I please.
Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro People arrived at this point about black colours because of the limitative and narrow-minded views of teachers (and artists) who decided that black is no good.
The only art I took was in high school. My teacher, (who was a very good teacher), made us do value colour charts for almost a year… I still have them. Take the tube colour, add black to darken, add white to lighten… I was board out of my mind with it. (Perhaps the very reason, come to think of it, that I don’t use black now.) No one ever told me to stop using black. I stopped because I don’t like the way it reacts with the other colours.
Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro Black shoud be there as much as any other colours.
Why SHOULD black HAVE to be there? The colours on my pallet will be the colours that I choose.
Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro The whole thing has disturbing similarities with those health "specialists" who decided that butter is bad, wine is bad, red meat is bad, etc is bad. Possibly the neighbours ginger cat is bad too. They all will shorten one's lofe expectancy... Pathetic! As if we don't all have to die one day of something.
? Louis, once again I never said that black was bad… ? I said that I don’t like it.
Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro Let them enjoy life,. let them enjoy the challenge of experimenting with black and all the marvellous mixes it can provide. [/B]
I’ve put in my time experimenting with black. Use whatever you want to.
Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro I am honestly nauseated with all these "smart" people who think that the best way to teach art is to use the "NO" language: Don't use black, don't this... don't that... The "don't" people are just too negative and self suppressed for my taste. I rather have people who speak for freedom of choice and look forward.
I am an advocate of freedom Louis. Why do I feel the need here to defend my self?
Originally posted by lseiler if someone wishes to understand my method of painting....or why I do not use black….
Originally posted by cobalt fingers Do you use Black? If so which blacks? If not why? How, if not do you make your darks?
Isn’t this what the thread is about?

Geoff

07-07-2002, 03:28 AM

An extremely interesting thread, full of thoughts without too much angst (:D :rolleyes: ), everyone being civilised !!!!!.

Black is a pigment, as much as any other colour. Whether black exists in nature is a question that could prove awkward to ask.
( Does it ?? ).

Black and yellow gives a beautiful green, should one not use it in case it offends ???

Surely each artist uses pigments to create their paintings according to their own interpretation and experience. What I particularly find arrogant (??) is the " don't use that " statement without any real rhyme or reason to justify the statement.

Luis Guerreiro

07-07-2002, 06:30 AM

Hi,

Firstly I'd like to assure you all that I am not annoyed at all, but sometimes I feel like throwing a little "salt" at whatever is cooking in the pan.
I think everyone's ideas look now better defined, at least for me. Hopefully no one is offended by what I said, as most of you know me for long enough to know that I do not aim to offend, even when I write more "assertively".
The main point for me is to establish clearly that black is not a bad colour to have.
Also in reply to Belladona and Larry, I don't think I implied my wording was against any of you. The point though is that given what art schools are teaching in general, the results are that new artists have an array of pre-conceived ideas, one of them is the ever delightful case against the use of black pigments.
So yes, I felt I wanted to vent a wee bit about it precisely for the same reason Geoff pointed out. There is no excuse for the arrogance of saying "don't use that". Which is why I only vented but never said "Use IT!".
What goes for colour goes for so many other things in regards to the craftsmanship side of oil painting, the skills in dealing with what the painter uses to make pictures.
The issue is very real in Europe and unfortunately the United Kingdom is no exception. A very well known British painter with published work in art instruction could be seen in one of his videos demonstrating a technique of mixed media wet-in-wet of acrylics, oil sticks and oils... I smiled patiently and thought of giving him a quick ring just to say thanks for teaching people how to paint non-permanent pictures. A classic :evil:
Another classic taught around this side of the world is to tell people to thin their oils only with turps right through the layers and use pure oils in the last layer. Excellent notion! :evil:
Anyway, I don't want to divert from the main course of this discussion. All I wanted to say is that whether painters have a liking for blacks or not, such colours are useful. As I said in an earlier posting in this thread, black is as valuable as any other pigment, how and when to use it is all that matters.
And please keep in mind that whatever I write over the wire at wetcanvas, usually travels across the Atlantic in company of a warm friendly hug! ;)
Luis

Luis Guerreiro

07-07-2002, 06:55 AM

Hi Geoff,

Black is a pigment, as much as any other colour. Whether black exists in nature is a question that could prove awkward to ask.

Black does exist in Nature. Nature is where most black pigments come from anyway. As a colour, I can think of black in a number of things... volcanic types of rock, crude oil, certain types of marble, etc... Of course black in nature can be an array of gradations of black to grey or vice-versa.
And if you light up an oil lamp and leave it to burn for long enough, you will notice that black collects in the upper part of the glass chimney. Incidentally, that's where Lamp Black started its long life as an oil colour. The black residual dust from burning oil was collected and used as a pigment.

Black and yellow gives a beautiful green, should one not use it in case it offends ???

I have to agree! And until someone proves me wrong, the following still is, I believe, the best array of olive greens and olive greys available to the oil painter:

Lemon Yellow + Black
Cadmium Yellow + Black
Yellow Ochre + Black
Sap Green + Black

I am open to suggestions though, as how to make such beautiful olive greens and greys without the use of Black AND in-keeping with an important point in regards to colour mixes: in oils, mixes allow for an absolute maximum of 3 colours, because the more pigments get in the mix, the more muddy the result will be, the resulting olive tones will not be as clean, I think. Just a thought.

Luis

Luis Guerreiro

07-07-2002, 07:24 AM

I also would like to leave here a passage from the Artist and Academic H. Speed in regards to colour theory and the use of Black:

(...) "And there is another point with regard to the elimination of Black. Although it is perfectly true there is no black in the solar spectrum, visual phenomena are not entirely made up of light. There is the negation of light - darkness. There are places where the light does not fall, although there is probably no shadow so deep that some light is not reflected. But objects receive light in different degrees and black as a pigment has a power of lowering the intensity of a colour without changing its hue, such as no other pigment possesses."

I thought of transcribing the above passage as a further contribution to the discussion.

Luis

Geoff

07-07-2002, 07:37 AM

Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro
black as a pigment has a power of lowering the intensity of a colour without changing its hue, such as no other pigment possesses."

However, as we've already seen, black changes yellow to a green. Not necessarily at the expense of a 'brilliant' green.

guillot

07-07-2002, 10:53 AM

Well, I have to say, this has turned into a wonderful debate of some sorts, all coming to the final conclusion that the use of black solely depends on the user, their experiences and expertise. And black does exist in nature........My male doberman is "black" and tan.........very black :) Some of us have beautiful black hair....etc.

Belladonna - (I have a hard time with the quote thing, can't seem to get it to work the way you guys do) but you paint beautifully to have only had art in high school. You are my guiding light :D. I hope one day to be able to paint as wonderfully as you.

Linoxyn: Thanks for the reply! I understand you 100%. Thanks for your insight.

Luis and Geoff: I've used black in the same way to create different ranges of greens. Look at my post WIP Sniper: It's GOD AWFUL!!! :D, but hey.......I'm trying. But blacks and different ranges of greens were a necessity. I think, but I'm not sure, that it just isn't the type of painting one would normally do. But, I never said I was normal either :evil: I'm still trying to find myself.

Luis - I love it when you get all worked up!! :D :angel: ((hugs))

Tina

LarrySeiler

07-07-2002, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by Luis Guerreiro
black as a pigment has a power of lowering the intensity of a colour without changing its hue, such as no other pigment possesses."
Luis [/B]

Now see, Luis, that's what I don't understand. You and Geoff site the wonderful greens you get with varied yellows and black. Due to the very reason that black alters changes in the hue. To me, painting outdoors surrounded by green all the time, I do not see greens that imitate any results you get with black and yellow. They look like dead lifeless spots of color.

I can see such greens made from black when copying from a photograph...but that is because film chemistry kills the life out of natural color. This is why for 17 years I had no qualms using black to mix in with my colors while painting instudio. I had no idea while painting, that greens didn't look that way, because my paint mixes did appear as those in the photographs. It was after 17 years when I got a French easel and got outdoors, that I saw the greens apart from the interpretation of film print chemistry. I simply could not mix the greens I was seeing from the 17 years of accumulated knowledge instudio.

Many people think of using black to get colors darker, but then don't understand the gaudy results, don't know why their yellow is turning to a green.

In fact, the reason I started first to move away from Black was because it very poorly lowers the intensity of a color while in fact does change the hue. So, I dont' understand the quote from your book you cited.

I can lower the intensity of a color very nicely by using that color's opposite or complementary...or, as I often refer to it as neutralizing. The practice of such very effectively lowers the chroma intensity of a color, but does nothing beyond what you want it to as far as damaging the hue.

I often have people asking me how I get certain colors that imitate color of light outdoors, and it comes as a result of learning to mix them. That means mixing them even to get your darks, your contrasts, values, etc., again, if someone wants to use black...that is there business, but many I know have a mental block preventing them from learning how to mix color effectively...and nine times out of ten, their thinking is to use black for darkening hues.

The key thing to making great paintings is any system that has a harmonious relationship and rhythm. If one sticks with black, the end result is...such adds to a consistent use thus one that will be harmonious. If one does NOT use black, one will have a consistent use that will lend toward a harmonious one. Now, if the question is not one of "good" pictures or of harmony....if one tells me they want to imitate colors they see in natural light to the greatest extent pigment will let them....THEN we are no longer talking about just good paintings or that people can use black or not. Such people are not seeing in their use of paint that which imitates what they are seeing.

From my own experience at that point, I have to clue them in that their black (once again...if they want to see and paint like I or others are that paint directly outdoors) is killing their color. If you are striving for "life" you don't want something on your palette that "kills."

To give you an example...I will post two paintings of the same site. One was done instudio where time was unrestricted, thus more photorealism was possible, however my color observation was restricted. Restricted by limitations of what a photograph was telling me. The other one was done set up on location. Granted, it is very painterly, but I did the whole painting in about one hour. The difference however was not so much should I use black or not use black....the difference was the "source." What I was using as a source did not have film chemistry limitation. My colors no longer looked like colors where black could be part of the mix. I had to develop a new method of mixing colors to imitate what I was seeing. Thus, if black in the mix is helping you paint what you are seeing....fine. If it will impede and be a defict fighting against what you are seeing...you have to throw it out!

Both paintings work, both have a harmonious consistency, black or no black...the paintings work. Now, if we want to decide however which painting looks more like you are standing there observing REAL color being affected by the real sun and not thru the interpretation of color killing film chemistry then the more painterly one is the ticket here. The green in the first looks lifeless compared to the greens in the second. No black.

If I could ever learn how to use black and get the same results...fine, but seeing I am doing what I'm doing without the black I don't know why I would want to bother. Its not like black is a little orphaned child....
-Larry

With black, instudio, photo reference-
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/07-Jul-2002/twelvefoot_fallsacrylic.jpg

No black, on location, nature itself as the reference-
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/07-Jul-2002/twelvefoot_falls2.jpg

LarrySeiler

07-07-2002, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by guillot
black does exist in nature........My male doberman is "black" and tan.........very black :) Some of us have beautiful black hair....etc.
Tina

I'm curious though Tina....

what does your male doberman look like standing out under the sky lit sun? Many varied shades of dark as well as lights? Does his flanks reflect any light off the ground?

IF a person is accustomed to painting indoors with photos, first look might assume "black." If you were to get him to sit and stay outdoors, and set up and paint....you would begin to see color relationships that do not happen indoors. Colors that might be very hard to mix.

Now mind you...Sargent painted many works out of doors using black, and was friends of a number of the Impressionists. Yet those outdoor works using black were yet of a portrait background combination subject. However, as he got older on the side he painted landscapes and watercolor landscapes and curiously enough...did not use black. Later at the peak of his career when fame and money were his, he walked away from portraits to do landscapes entirely...and from everything I know, this master of black uses black no more.

Its because we have to rectify eventually what we see with what we are doing. If you take a photo of your dog, and paint indoors, chances are due to film chemistry translating darks to black and taking life out of color...you will find no need to rectify or change. Painting in natural light...from life, your eyes develop more to see more. You can paint a spot black and forget about it, but wonder why the subject doesn't seem to breathe life. Or, you can mix a dark from color...and that spot not only contrasts by virtue of value, but by color temperature...etc., and you tweak more out of that spot. As such, it takes on more "life"....and "life" is what we are trying to imitate.

Indoors, photos....or by a working system- black...fine!
Outdoors, from life...direct light, reflected light, warmth and coolness...just don't see it myself.

Btw...I'm just adding ongoing thoughts to the discussion, I mean no mallace.
Larry

Titanium

07-07-2002, 11:37 AM

Larry,

someone who does not paint outdoors will have
little or no sensitivity to reflected light as you
understand it.

In fact my teacher's discussions on painting outdoors
often led to discussions on which colours [ other than
black ] were to dark for plain aire use.
He never used umber either, instead mixed the colour.

I tried to explain at the beginning of this topic that black
was used in the earlier days of painting as a tonal fixer
or for making browns.

People who work in a studio by North Light, especially
with shadow boxes, find black very convenient, and
these people don't use photographs.

I guess what you should be asking for is a show of hands
of those working outdoors and those working in the studio
or other.
[ Many also assume the Old Masters used Black the same
way, conservators have noted that the darks are often
black free or the copper based colours/varnishes have
turned to a black colour].
Titanium

LarrySeiler

07-07-2002, 12:38 PM

Originally posted by Titanium
I guess what you should be asking for is a show of hands
of those working outdoors and those working in the studio
or other.

I guess in a way, that is what I was eluding to when I was emphasizing the "what" of what your resource was. The artist is somewhat limited, sometimes self-limited....to paint what their source is revealing. Few paint better than their resource.

If a photo reveals and suggests colors are made with black in the mix, then using black will make perfect sense. If a source such as working outdoors in natural light shows colors where no black can be seen...then it will make little sense to use it in the mix. To use it inspite of what you see, is to more or less rely upon a system of painting that has worked for you, and making the system a greater priority than seeing. Again, I think Sargent did that for many years, and was a master at it.

Many also assume the Old Masters used Black the same
way, conservators have noted that the darks are often
black free or the copper based colours/varnishes have
turned to a black colour].
Titanium

something I never heard before....very interesting...thanks!

I always loved Rembrandt's work, and his work was very influential in my early beginnings of painting, learning values, the power of drama in concentrated lighting, etc; his painting of his father in the pose, "The Officer" is so rich, and the darks feel as though you could penetrate your hand in it.

No doubt he used plenty of black, and techniques for this,layers and layers of glazes, etc. Then again, he did not paint out of doors in natural light...but created worlds for us to imagine.

Larry

LarrySeiler

07-07-2002, 12:51 PM

You know...looking back over this page of the thread, my second on location plein air of Twelve Foot Falls still shows pretty dark darks don't they?

If the purpose of black is to make dark, let me ask...are the darks in those shadows not dark? I maintain I can make just as dark darks with Veridian and Alizarin Crimson, or Phtalo Blue and Crimson...a touch of Cadmium Yellow...that most would not know black was not used. Not having black, forced me to learn to mix such darks.

The difference, whether viewers are aesthetically astute enough to analyze it or not...is that I can control the character of that dark to bear a warm or cool nature to it such as to contrast and help adjacent colors pop out more. WE all know, or should know that pigments are a poor substitute for imitating real sunlight...so we have to tweak our palette to get as great a sense of that as is possible. To be able to control your darks like this helps those colors representing sun pop.

Also, not only warm and cool temperatures in those darks...but you can allow a hint of a color in it for other optical effects.

If I sound defensive...understand that in times past on other forums, I have had good and respected artists here on WC argue with me that dark enough darks are just not possible without black...and that colorists for the most part do not understand values. I have repeatedly asked them to spend time on my website, and instruct me to how the inclusion of black would improve any of my paintings. Also, show me where my understanding of color has interferred with my ability to suggest values.

Value rendering is a device that seeks to 3-dimensionalize our flatwork. Do my works appear flat and in need of rescue???

Every artist should want to improve, and I am no different. Remaining teachable is not always easy in the human psyche, but as an instructor I insist such humility and openess on my part. When the day comes you think you have arrived, you stop learning and stop growing. (note my Degas quote at the bottom of my post...which I believe is so so true!)

So, once again...in lieu of the discussion if anyone wishes to spend time on my website and critique and help me improve in the area of darks, color...please please...puleeeeze do so! -Larry

http://www.artlandishconcepts.org

guillot

07-07-2002, 04:16 PM

Hi Iseiler - Yes........you are definitely correct. Outdoors, my male doberman's shiny coat does pick up reflections of the grass, some blues, etc. But, the main base color beneath it all, is still black. Even a photo shot, because of his shiny coat, will pick up those reflections as well but of course, not as intense. However, even outdoors, there is still much black there, not a blue-black, not a gray-black, not brown-black, but a black-black, the base colour for all of those wonderful highlights that bring the color to life. Otherwise, of course, you would have nothing but a black, lifeless, flat dog on the canvas. I agree that working directly from photos cheats the artist of the true reflections, shadows, etc. I believe that's why one should not work from photos alone. I work from both, when necessary.

LOL, I didn't take anything as being malice, or malicious :angel: I'll admit I'm terrible with some things :D, but I am doing my best to learn every day ;).

While on the subject of photos, what about the contemporary-abstract artist who uses black? No photo reference material, no real life example - just strictly working from the imagination. Seeing objects with a "third eye", if you will. I have seen many uses of black there as well. So, I do not believe that the justification of the use of black, sometimes good and sometimes bad, lies only in the use of photographic references alone, or the artists inability to see "beyond the black". I believe that it is an individual artistic decision when black is used, either for definition, strategic placement, or just to flat out make a statement (whatever that may be).

Tina

Linoxyn

07-07-2002, 09:21 PM

taken from http://www.bartleby.com/65/pi/pigmenta.html

"The coloration of an organism may be caused by deposits of organic pigments in the tissues (as in human skin or in plant leaves), by optical effects of the refraction of light rays (as in mollusk shells and in some butterfly wings and bird feathers), or by a combination of both. The different modes are illustrated in the baboon and the mandrill: the predominantly brown coloring is due to melanin, but the red and blue markings are also caused by melanin, in the latter case by the refraction of light due to specific spatial arrangements of the pigment granules in the skin areas involved"

There is no black pigment in an animals hair, as there is no green pigment in a mallard's wings. Pigments are part of the artists tools. If the artist chooses to paint from life or from a photo and capture what's in front of them without interpreting it anew through their mind and then through their tools, then why is the artist painting?

When a music composer creates their rendition of cascading water, or a thunderous storm, would the composer argue with other composers whether it was correct to use one arrangement of instruments over another? Further yet to make judgment that the sounds they heard in nature were not properly rendered from the musical instruments or how they were arranged!

A artist can earn artistic license. Pigments like musical notes have infinite possibilities, so much so that it would take an artist many lifetimes to learn all that is possible. We only have a short time on this earth, make the most of what comes your way - with or without a black pigment :)

If any are wondering I love my black pigment and use it as if it were gold :)

guillot

07-07-2002, 11:00 PM

Where did pigment being in animal hair come in?? LOL Hey, I was only talking about what I "see", not what it's chemical makeup is, although that is some interesting information.

I see different colors there, yes...........but I also see black. You guys have had me taking him outside, putting him in the shade, everywhere except inside the closet and looking at him in every way except inside out, and I'm sorry, I still see black in there.

Linoxyn

07-07-2002, 11:54 PM

guillot,

I had hoped my points would come across better, I'm not very skilled with words.

When I said there is no pigment in natural hairs I was hoping to convey that it then becomes the artist's choice of what tools (pigment/colour) they use to describe what they see. Whether the artist takes up blue and brown, or red and green, or black to describe any function of form, local colour, or effect of light within their subject - it does not matter.

Look up information on thin film coatings. Like the rainbow colours seen when gasoline floats on top of a puddle - industrial coatings can more accurately create a colour based on thin films (using light) than using pigments or dyes. The old Masters understood similar effects within their paint. Rubens could paint a deep blue without any blue pigment - try it :)

guillot

07-08-2002, 10:08 AM

Linoxyn - Once again, I see your point. :cool: You are more skilled at "artistic language" than I. Sometimes I feel like a real dumb#@* when I reply to some things!

It is very important to an artist to "see", and understand forms and interpret colours individually. I believe that may be what makes all artists different. I will try your experiment (Rubens technique), the next time a blue comes to mind :D

Although black is an achromatic tone, I find that it is very important to gain control over chromatically raw color. I was reading up on tonal values, Alex Kedzierski's Book, and found that Degas, Manet and Renoir all used black, "often lavishly", but with the awareness of the potential problems of it's use, and that Renoir was reported to have called black "the Queen of all Color!" It is also noted here that Goya, Rembrandt, Velazquez, and so many other Old Masters used black.

Now, my question is, are ALL blacks achromatic??? Lamp Black, Ivory Black, etc.? Or are these considered colors? And if Black is used to tone down, or neutralize another color, is the result also a tone, and not a color? Where is the use of black non-problematic, or accepted??

Whew..........I hope that all makes sense. These are some questions that have been lurking in the corner of my mind since this thread began.

I know that I answered the thread earlier, in its particular question - Yes, I use black. Why - because sometimes I see black, or see the need for it's use. Are my eyes tricking me???

Thanks

Tina

Linoxyn

07-08-2002, 11:26 AM

By definition black, white and grays are achromatic. Black pigments can vary in their colour temperature - cool to warm. Black pigment can be considered a colour if used alone or nearly on it's own as a local colour of an object - as you have pointed out some of these great Masters knew how to use their black paint in this manner - Velazquez maybe argueablely the best. There are many Rembrandts where there are only a few thin lines and/or small daubs of pure black showing, the next closest value would be that of brt. umber. Though to use only black mixed with another pigment(s) to describe light and form would be exceptionally difficult and could only rarely be used under certain circumstances. I come from an egg tempera background and just by virtue of the binder ivory black could be considered very much a colour right along with all the others - it's just more difficult to make mud in tempera. In oils there is a bit more to consider, black paint does add a complexity to the artists palette. Mud is easier to come by. Though in oils mud has it's place :) Yes, black can dull a colour, but then there are so many other choices, mixtures and techniques without black that can dull colours.

When and where is black non-problematic in it's use... do you have the patience to wait for my book to come out ;) Black, or any pigment used within a painting has to be set up, it has to have harmony, contrast, a foundation, a structure, a balance, and all those wonderful adjectives that go into anything that's worthwhile.

Read how well Shakespeare uses the word "black" - when a whole play, phrase, line, to the word gives black so many powerful meanings. He's using his skill to his best to make just one simple word work. As artists that's all we have to do too :D

Einion

07-09-2002, 12:32 AM

Originally posted by belladonna
Einion, get back in here!
No way! I'm hiding in my foxhole with my helmet pulled down below my ears :D

As for the poll results, in my defence I was speaking in general and as is always possible this is wrong in the specific, mea culpa. Still, I think it is the anti-black camp that have been the most vocal in the art world in the modern era.

Originally posted by lseiler
To me, painting outdoors surrounded by green all the time, I do not see greens that imitate any results you get with black and yellow.
Visit this part of the world and you'll see plenty! To be fair I would agree in many cases, but I remember trying to get a specific grass colour a while back and I needed it to be as opaque as possible and Cadmium Yellow and Mars Black, with a touch of Phthalo Blue GS to increase chroma, was perfectomundo. Sure you could mix an indistinguishable hue by another route but that doesn't make this one wrong ;)

Love your new tinyhead!

To be fair about the quote Luis provided, it doesn't say that it is true for all cases and we all know yellow is a pain to deal with because of the nature of that hue position - drops in value having such a profound effect on chroma and so forth. Anyway, it makes a good point that I have stated before (with the assumption that one is painting naturalistically) that black is necessary for certain lighting effects - ...visual phenomena are not entirely made up of light. There are places where the light does not fall... - even if you elect not to use it for colour mixing . Let me give a specific example to illustrate this point, take a cave mouth on an overcast day (so there is no glare to shift perception) in such a case the hole could be black - 100% absence of light, no ifs ands or buts (the same could hold on a sunny day if the sun was behind you incidentally). But this is not to say one can't or shouldn't paint it with a mixed dark if that's what one's artistic vision calls for - I could well see, say, a mix of Viridian and crimson working fine in the context of specific surrounding colours but is it technically accurate? No. Does it work visually? Certainly.

To go back to this point, ...black as a pigment has a power of lowering the intensity of a colour without changing its hue, such as no other pigment possesses.... is true for many colours (although it could be stated better, it would be more accurate to say it lowers value without changing hue, as intensity is vaguely used by artists). Or, as I put it, black is the best all-round darkener. A specific example of this: say you were painting an interior where one of your previous paintings was on the wall, in shadow, and there was a patch of what you knew to be pure Cadmium Red Medium in it. Now of course the same colour is the appropriate starting point but you have to lower value without changing the hue angle - try doing that without using black. I would go so far as to say it would be impossible for some people who don't use black (again speaking in terms of dead-on accurate colour matching) especially in the case of those who also eschew earths.

Larry's use of colour is very Impressionist and as such is geared in a certain way; even if we take his examples of high-chroma sunlit scenes I could easily see other painters - let's say Richard Sloane, Daniel Smith and Richard Bateman - tackling them entirely differently, another twenty artists would likely be similarly varied. In many cases they would be painting the colours in a more technically accurate manner (Larry is painting his reaction to the scene as much as the scene itself, yes?) while many of them try to depict colour purely in terms of what is there and nothing more, as I would myself.

If we take Tina's dog, I used to have two black and tan Cavaliers (for all intents and purposes exactly the same colours) and I can assure you that you would have to use black to paint them, indoors or out, in order to accurately match certain areas. Certainly in sunlight their backs could look bluish but far less so than is often depicted by painters (people with what is called blue-black hair are extremely rare indeed, even among naturally black-haired populations, which I grew up in).

It's unfair to consider reproductions of work when considering mixed darks versus blacks where others can't see the originals; even with the wide gamma of RGB (far larger than even the best art reproductions) it can't show many things naturalistically and low-value areas are notoriously prone to looking achromatic - I could take a digital photo of the masstone of Phthalo Blue GS and Dioxazine Purple and very likely they would both show up as featureless blacks on almost everyone's monitors. In reality of course it would be easy to see how chromatic they are, just as it would be for mixed darks which is why most people use them.

Originally posted by Linoxyn
Rubens could paint a deep blue without any blue pigment - try it
Yes, and he also had genuine ultramarine and smalt so are you sure he didn't use any in this case? :) Rubens would also have had access to vine black (which is largely unavailable today and possibly quite different from how it might have been in the past) and as I'm sure you know it is only in the context of the complete painting that it looks blue. The human vision system is very adroit at making corrections to suit a perceptual bias - just look at photos taken in incandescent light for a clear example, the photo is not wrong, what we see is - which is why people are so tolerant of yellowed varnish in old paintings.

Einion

belladonna

07-09-2002, 01:07 AM

O.K. well heres my 'black', not 'black' dog Daisy. Really, does it not look like black to you? I can mix as good a black as found in a tube when I need one.

guillot

07-09-2002, 01:06 PM

Originally posted by Einion

If we take Tina's dog.......I can assure you that you would have to use black, indoors or out, in order to acurately match them....
Einion

Thank you Einion! I was seriously considering getting my eyeballs checked. Thanks for the other information as well. Very enlightening.

Belladonna - very nice, mixed black. Cute dog too!!

Linoxyn - I will be anxiously awaiting your book ;) :D Thanks for the info!!

Tina

Linoxyn

07-09-2002, 02:17 PM

Originally posted by Einion

Yes, and he also had genuine ultramarine and smalt so are you sure he didn't use any in this case? :) Rubens would also have had access to vine black (which is largely unavailable today and possibly quite different from how it might have been in the past) and as I'm sure you know it is only in the context of the complete painting that it looks blue. The human vision system is very adroit at making corrections to suit a perceptual bias - just look at photos taken in incandescent light for a clear example, the photo is not wrong, what we see is - which is why people are so tolerant of yellowed varnish in old paintings.

Einion, the Rubens painting I had read about is "Samson and Delilah". The NG London has studied this painting in depth. The man behind who is holding up a lock of Samson's hair (there are some brilliant areas of black used within the hair!) is dressed in a dark blue cloak. This Ruben's example was mentioned just to illustrate what can be done with paint - that there are many, many possibilities, not just in choice of pigment to represent darks (black or colour) but as to how all pigments can be used for their unique properties.

I challenge any artist here at WC to be able to paint a blue object without the use of any blue pigment or bluish type pigment, yes you can have surrounding colour - but no blues.

Enion, my son's last school project for the year (grade 4) was on Optical Illusions. He and I did a lot of research in books and on the internet. So much of this information is valuable to the artist. It is true that the workings of human vision are not perfect. We carry a colour constancy with us when we go from bright daylight into a building with fluorescent lights and then maybe into incandescent - white is still white to our brains - we have a built in white balance (not like how cameras deal with this). It's only in comparative theory that a camera's view on film is right or wrong. There are very many colour theories out there that still haven't explained it all.

I bought Old Holland vine black oil paint a while back - it has it's uses :)

Luis Guerreiro

07-09-2002, 02:47 PM

I challenge any artist here at WC to be able to paint a blue object without the use of any blue pigment or bluish type pigment, yes you can have surrounding colour - but no blues.

The world is full of weird things... Margareth Thatcher?!... :evil:
Anyway, to paint blue without using a blue pigment of some description is to my knowledge, quite impossible. Blue is a primary colour, cannot be matched by any combination of other colours. Or as I should say it, blue cannot be matched by mixing the other 2 primary colours.
And for the sake of scientific acuracy, I am not considering the possibility of a "heavenly miracle" here.
Luis :)

Linoxyn

07-09-2002, 03:54 PM

What a first line Luis! LOL :D

This phenomena of creating a blue where no blue exists is no miracle. It is derived from becoming intimate with the properties of the pigments we use. I'm sure it's been mentioned often by artists that it is a good idea to make your own oil paint - not that this needs to become the habit of daily painting, but to become a way of understanding the tools with which we work.

Analogy time :) If an artist had only one brush, broken down, abused, missing too many hairs, and this was the only way the artist could get paint to canvas for the rest of their life... I'm very sure this artist would create miracles.

There are, as I said, an infinite amount of variances within our paints (tools), give them a bit of a chance, it will reward you.

When it comes to change I'm a bit of an old dog... hard to teach new tricks to, but when it comes to art I'm there jumping about, panting with the wet tongue and wagging tail :D

Titanium

07-09-2002, 03:54 PM

My fellow absence of light - ers,

If you examine - Ivory Black, Vine Black and Iron Oxide blue Black,
you will see with a white [ especially a cool white ] mixed, in the
mixture turns grey blue.

The more you surround this blue with greys/browns of the correct
notes you can enhance the blue. No mystery.

The reason Black is not the perfect darkener, is because it has
a bluish or brownish or other [ is the word ] undertone.

So if you dull yellow ochre with a black you normally get olive green.No mystery there.

Use a perfectly neutral black and the yellow ochre will become darker yellow ochre.
Touch the olive green with a little red ochre see what happens.

The reason the doggie appears not black in sunlight is noticeable if you hold a black object in your hand and stand doggie say 20 feet away.You can observe this at closer and further distances.
Doggie goes into darks.

Always take something BLACK out with you when Landscape painting.[ shoes are good ]

Some trees preserve a greater amount of red in their shadow side. Noticeable in Italian landscape around Florence.
This shadow side can be matched with black at times.

Does not happen on this island in the Caribbean. too much Cad yellow light and blue skies.
Even the Italian Cypress changes growth colour, and becomes lighter, less silvery.

Observation folks.
Let the debate continue, lets dance [ pronounced darrrrnce ]
Titanium

LarrySeiler

07-09-2002, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by Einion

Larry's use of colour is very Impressionist and as such is geared in a certain way; even if we take his examples of high-chroma sunlit scenes I could easily see other painters - let's say Richard Sloane, Daniel Smith and Richard Bateman - tackling them entirely differently, another twenty artists would likely be similarly varied. In many cases they would be painting the colours in a more technically accurate manner (Larry is painting his reaction to the scene as much as the scene itself, yes?) while many of them try to depict colour purely in terms of what is there and nothing more, as I would myself.
Einion

well...I am familiar with Robert Bateman, quite well...as he was at one time one of my favorite artists. I have his books, attended many many Birds In Art shows at the Leigh Yawkey Woodson Art Museum to see his and many others works. A museum that I myself have submitted works. I have shown in shows he has, rubbed shoulders with many of the artists...

While most of them have a great expertise in wildlife, natural environment, etc., the same use photographs generally as references. As for a "technically accurate manner"...I'm not sure I follow. Accurate to the photograph referred to in a studio lit with corrected lighting? Accurate to the photographs used in warm incandescent lighting? Accurate according to the memory of one's canoe outting? (as though the memory's eye is more apt to be technically accurate).

Again...its not so much "Impressionist" or not. I think if you look at the French Impressionist's work...then immediately after...spend time looking at mine...I believe my paintings tend to have a more naturalistic and less idealized look to them. The Impressionists by in large used more white, had a softer appearance. I have not sacrificed my darks I see in the contrasts of bold bright sunlit masses. Again....as I have said, see if my darks are not every bit as dark as if I had chosen to use black!

I do not use black because of what it does to color mixes, and because I want my darks to have a particular character to it as regards color temperatures. But, my elimination of using black has not eliminated my creation of very dark darks. Have you looked??? http://www.artlandishconcepts.org

If my work appears "Impressionistic"....it perhaps is more due to the severe limitation of time a moment in the sun places upon me, and the painterliness such limitation of time demands.

I would imagine that if you took Bateman, Sloane, and Daniel Smith...and set us all along a water's edge with about less than two hours light left, that their results would look nothing like the marketed images that you are seeing. So again, "technically accurate" to what standard? To what light and color actually look like in a singular moment of time, under the sun. Or to what endless amounts of time allows for in an indoor situation?

Am I to presume by "technically accurate", that you mean if Robert Bateman and I were to stand shoulder to shoulder...while I was seeing color in shadows, he would still see milky misty layers of glaze pushing a space back in the distance?

I guess what I would challenge is....these artists you mention are using MORE artistic license to interpret reality to make an "idealized" commercial setting for their wildlife art to be marketed as prints with Mill Pond Press and Wild Wings than I am standing there on location. My painting is simply a pure response to what actually is.

If I sound defensive....I don't mean to be. I guess I'm just frustrated at my lack here to communicate effectively. I painted in the same venue or manner as these artists you have mentioned for seventeen of the past 22 years. I won my awards and accolades, and earned my right to be in Wild Wing's shows, the Midwest Western Heritage Wildlife show in Minneapolis, St Paul, etc., I sat at my booth watching some of these artists making their 4' x 6' paintings that would become a new limited edition print.

There was a stereotype representing a mood of nature...and they were by my own admission, very good painters. However, the technical methods they were using were for the purpose of creating a scene that held together compositionally, colors harmoniously, etc., yet....as for "accurate"....what I'm telling you is that I discovered for the most part that I was somewhat aesthetically naive and blind until I got an easel and set up and began to paint outdoors.

I realize now that for 17 years I interpreted....and now when some are saying that I am taking liberties to be more expressive, I have to report that I have never yearned so much in my life to be able to paint what my eyes are actually REALLY honestly seeing as now!

What I am wondering is...how many paintings have people here done onlocation?

You know...I have done both, and instudio for 17 years. I guess I am in a situation to make some accurate assessments about my studio approaches. I think though, that to make accurate assessments about what the eyes really see outdoors, and what color really looks like outdoors...and what relationships with pigment requires to imitate what colors really do outdoors...that one needs to spend a particular amount of time PAINTING OUTDOORS!

If you set up and begin the habit of painting outdoors...then some might understand that some of the honored painters of the past 30 years that have earned a reputation working indoors... have not been so technically accurate afterall. Great painters, yes...but, certainly not representing what the eyes truly see.

Now...I know of some wildlife artists, such as Greg Alexander from NW Wisconsin.... or Gary Moss, or Marc Hanson of Minnesota... or Jim Lamb...who have developed the habit some time ago to offset time spent in their studios painting to painting outdoors on location. The decisions they have made instudio to make what they believe are more accurate enhancements shows that they have spent time painting outdoors. More what I would call, "technically accurate."

Well...I'm riled up, but...hopefully didn't fluff anyone's feathers here. That is not my intent. Hopefully you can chuckle, and shrug a good shoulder in my direction. Hey...we are artists after all, and know about that thing called "artistic temperment!"

peace all....

Larry

guillot

07-09-2002, 05:04 PM

Hi Mr. Seiler,
I've looked at your work before, and I am an avid admirer of your wildlife paintings....they are gorgeous and moving.

I especially like "The Feisty Fisherman" - wonderful darks in there! Leads me to believe, and understand myself a little better, brings me to the conclusion that............Man I've got a lot to learn!!

I also like "Peshtigo River Road". Reminds me of a place back home in TN. Wonderful darks as well.

I'm not really given a chance, in the climate that I live in, to paint outdoors.........It's very hot, sometimes very, very windy, and always dusty (I mean in your eye kind of dusty)....... (desert area). I'm sure that does hold me back quite a bit. I can always take a sketch book along (if cacti, and brown, grassless mountains are of interest), and maybe some colored pencils to get quick sketches before a heat stroke sets in, (and I'm not trying to be sarcastic, this is for real) but I'm sure, by all means, that isn't the same as being on location, and working those oils. So, unfortunately, I'm bound to the indoors, with the exception of maybe 1 hour of morning calmness on the patio in which I do my best to take complete advantage of when afforded the privilege.

Thanks from me to you, for sharing your wonderful experiences!!!

Everyone has really made me think on blacks quite a bit now. Which way do I go?

Tina

LarrySeiler

07-09-2002, 05:17 PM

wow....that's a bummer Tina.

I was offered a high school position for this last year in Green River, Wyoming. Closer to a more vital market for what I do, and I was tempted. If it had been two hours further north, I would have probably jumped on that one.

They had a bronze factory though, in a high school! Wanted an artist/teacher too!

However...the constant colors would have been brown and gray, and I think coming from where I live...I'd either have to spend every weekend traveling north to the Teton area, or I'd get quite depressed.

Still....someone that is in my plein air group (NAPPAP) knows someone that cut a portion of floor out of his station wagon, and paints inside his vehicle. Crazy huh!

I'd have to get some kind of vehicle, perhaps even with A/C hee heee....but, shucks, I'd freak if I couldn't paint.

I did several paintings about three weeks ago on the windy beaches of Lake Superior. Got sand and black biting flies in my painting, so I understand. I brushed most particles of sand off the other day. That I didn't mind so much, but in folding up my easel...I had some abrasive sand get up in my collapsible wooden legs for which I wasn't too thrilled about. Oh well....guess what I'll do is buy a cheaper Yarka easel for such places that are going to be potentially harder on equipment. Take care...

Larry

guillot

07-09-2002, 05:43 PM

HAHA..........That's hilarious, cutting out the floor of a vehicle!! Hey, I guess it would work though. But, I'm so partial to standing up while I paint. It would have to be a van, or something!

Either way, for 3 years now, it has been a bummer (I don't like it here, I'm more prone to and happier in greener places). We move around quite a bit, or at least every 3 years it seems. But early next year, we're on our way back to Germany for 3 years. So I will be given a wonderful opportunity to learn and explore painting on location. I do have something to look forward to!! And, there are some beautiful places in Europe :). So maybe, while there, I will gain a better understanding of this issue with black and other colors as well.

So, at least you know what I mean about the dust :). Not a fun thing to mess around with.

Thanks!!

Tina

Linoxyn

07-09-2002, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by Titanium
If you examine - Ivory Black, Vine Black and Iron Oxide blue Black, you will see with a white [ especially a cool white ] mixed, in the mixture turns grey blue.The more you surround this blue with greys/browns of the correct notes you can enhance the blue. No mystery.

Titanium, that's close. It does not matter a lot which black or white pigment you choose. My preference is lead white and ivory black. There are a few more steps that are vital to get it to look bluer.

Titanium

07-09-2002, 08:30 PM

Okay Linoxyn,

you have me biting my nails.I am more or less
an opaque painter.Is there some glazing going
on as well ?

I will understand if it is a trade secret.
Just type - Trade Secret.
Thanks for responding, I thought I was talking
to the wind for a while.
Titanium

Linoxyn

07-09-2002, 10:18 PM

LOL Titanium, it's not a trade secret. It's a task I believe should be discovered by the artist on their own. It's not a parlor trick to impress an artist's pals over a brewsky. It's a way of revealing what pigments are capable of beyond picking colours to mix and placing it down on canvas. Isn't this what this thread is all about, why and how we choose to use the colour on the end of our brush? It does not matter if the artist uses black in their palette or not - plain and simple. It's all about what artists can do with what they have in front of them... most artists barely scratch the surface of possibilities.

Tina, now that I've given away the ending of my book I fear I've lost your purchasing it :D

Larry, I really enjoyed reading through your "artistic temperment!" :)

guillot

07-09-2002, 11:08 PM

Ha..........Titanium. I thought this much as well. Been pondering the question in my mind all day........"But how??" I will still have to give it a try myself.

Linoxyn.........:D If you can uncover these "black mysteries - Fear of the Dark..........when to use it...........when not to use it.........why you use it....etc." in a way that makes perfect sense, regardless if they are here or not, I would still buy your book, along with many others I'm sure as well !!! Valuable reference material!!! Though, I imagine a book could be processed from this thread alone.....(BTW......where are you Cobalt???)....it's like the Duracell Bunny......it keeps going..and going.....

And I'm at least 1 step closer to the understanding the phenomena of the dark..........

WONDERFUL INFORMATION!!!!! And, mind candy at it's best!!! I don't believe that I've actually pondered one subject so intensely for this length of time........"the ultimate eternal question........why?" Maybe this thread will actually make it into the Hall of Fame!! I do believe it is warranted. :angel:

Tina

cobalt fingers

07-10-2002, 09:15 AM

When painting blue eyes I start with ivory and "mixed white" I'll add touches of this and that to push the hue where it needs to go but I get a cool grey/ blue really early from which I can shift.

Thanks everyone this is getting deep...in a good way.

LarrySeiler

07-10-2002, 11:16 AM

Originally posted by Linoxyn
Isn't this what this thread is all about, why and how we choose to use the colour on the end of our brush? It does not matter if the artist uses black in their palette or not - plain and simple.

I'd have to certainly agree with this! In fact, the reason I end up getting into this discussion elsewhere is some painting outdoors for the first time are absolutely overwhelmed with color....with shifting light or light that intensifies...and ask me what it is that I'm doing. Evidently believing I'm doing something right.

I give an account of myself, which really isn't an attempt to go on a crusade against black or whatever. My interest really is only to relieve frustration and rectify with pigment what is happening in front of the painter.

Truth is...if I could get the color I need to match what I'm seeing with black in the mix, I would. I don't have a vendetta against black. I used it...and do admire Sargent's use of it.

Again, I'm not against the darkest of darks. Not against "values" and using them. I just want a harmony on my canvas when finished that pulls everything together...and yet mimics what I see color doing in natural light.

I have never personally labored to do these endless swatches of color mixes and charts....but if it would help another, I'd certainly be for it.

It's all about what artists can do with what they have in front of them... most artists barely scratch the surface of possibilities.

Not only what they do with what they have in front of them (ie., "palette of paint"), but ways of seeing in front of you what others do not see....

That too will dictate and accelerate what you then do with that paint thereafter.

I personally believe if you limit yourself to working one way, you sentence yourself sometimes to seeing in only one way...therefore painting in one way. If the market is waiting and ready, you have justification to continue doing so.

I was lucky. After years of successful wildlife art and public demand, it died. The market was oversaturated. Galleries were no longer interested, publishers were showing signs of signing artists doing other things.

Having my market cut off...took away my justification. (I had a wife and two boys to provide for). I figured as long as I was failing....I may as well fail painting something else...thus, I went outdoors back to nature itself. It demanded a new way of seeing, and a new way of seeing will do something to your palette let me assure you!

But...Linoxyn, you are definitely right! I realized then and there that there was much I had yet to learn and I had only scratched the surface of what allowed me to do what I had before.

Mixing color and learning opens doors to new understanding. A lighter value is also a color. A darker adjacent area can help that lighter value stand out, but so can understanding that area as a color using its opposite.

Really...I think its about "contrasts"

In a way, is that not what we are talking about? The means to push, to pull, and to hold together spaces and masses, to create a harmony and working composition.

If we could make a list...I think we would see that, you know like-

CONTRASTS-
Light versus dark
texture versus lack of texture
edges versus broken incidence
warm color versus cool color
horizontals versus verticles/diagonals, etc;
...and so on

When I look down at my palette, I do not want to be "value" driven in my approach to painting. I do not even want to be "color" driven.

I want to be "contrast" driven. I want to take advantage of every possibility to orchestrate elements in my painting, seeing my palette as the tools to make that happen.

Depending upon your "resource"...you will discover that particular tools will assist you to satisfy your emphasis....and that "resource" will vary to appear as though you are this kind of painter, or that.

It would be an absolute gas for me...to see everyone here clamoring for black to gather together for a paint out. Where artists set up on location for five days and paint together outdoors in natural light. I would like to see if any, like me... having left the studio would not see that their palette would have to adjust and what adjustments would be made.

It reminds me of the martial artist Bruce Lee....who when challenged by Asian Kung Fu masters for his lack of respect for katas or "forms" took out a wallet from his back pocket and tossed it at a master.

The master simply reached out and snatched it in the air. "What form did you just use in catching the wallet?" Bruce asked. "So it is when you are suddenly attacked by a man. You had better simply react!"

Again....I had no agenda against black or anything. I was standing there before nature in all its glory, and the new task was to "react." I reacted and continue to react until my image rectifies what I am seeing...and if the painting touches in me aesthetically what that scene did. When I bring the painting home, days later looking at it....does it perform as the ample conduit that brings back remembrance of standing there that day?

Larry, I really enjoyed reading through your "artistic temperment!" :)

hahaha...well, thanks. I really enjoy the commaraderie of all you fine people here, and certainly don't want to be misunderstood that in my ramblings to sort things thru or make a point that I am in any way wishing to intentionally aggravate or attack others.

painting is a passion....that's for sure, and we speak about it passionately! Peace,

Larry