MUNSELL´s SCALE SYSTEM

[Van der Hayden]

“Now, this sort of “blue” is what it truly requires to produce a neutral of this yellow. They are complementary colors, pure an simple, or else they would not do this–the production of gray.”

Bill, colors do not have their own neutrals, but they do have low-chroma variations. In your example the neutral does not look neutral; it looks fairly blue, although that could easily be the jpeg.

It is much easier, and more controllable, to mix neutrals from burnt umber, black and white than from compliments and the results are identical (assuming one can hit the neutral with compliments!) I watched Graydon mix a 5th value neutral with BU, B & W in about one minute; he also mixed the same color from diox purple and lemon yellow and it took more like 15 minutes. Again, the results were the same. Mixing compliments does not give a magical aspect to the result.

[Einion]

In practicality, finding a single tubed complement is not the case. Well, I suppose there actually MAY be some tubed color that is a perfect complement for a few given colors, but the great majority of true complements must be mixed.

Yes, it’s absolutely true that for a lot of palettes a tubed mixing complement is not available for some or even most of their paints, simply because most people don’t choose palettes for this.

However it is quite possible to build a palette based around complementary mixing pairs if one choses to and was willing to experiment to find them, or by using known complements other people have found.

Example pairs:
Cadmium Red Light + Phthalo Turquoise
Quinacridone Rose + Phthalo Green Yellow Shade
Dioxazine Purple + Chromium Oxide Green
As a rule there are no single-pigment mixing complements for the majority of yellow paints, so a mix of some sort is almost always required (or a tweak to the not-quite-neutral one does get from violet + yellow).

Please realize there are those who claim that there may be several complements to a given color. I don’t believe this to be true.

Sorry Bill, ample evidence that this is the case.

The very simplest example is one I’ve mentioned a number of times before and it’s something that many painters already knew without realising its significance: that certain red earths will neutralise more than one blue. There’s all the evidence one needs – those blues are all complements to that earth, ergo several complements to a given colour is possible.

But not only is it possible it’s actually quite common (proof here).

And it’s not just with single-pigment paints, it’s also true of mixed complements and split-complementary mixing, where a multitude of colours could be used to mix with the first paint. Additionally with any three painter’s primaries – neutral is always possible since neutral (the centre of the wheel) falls within the triangle they form on a colour wheel; that’s a truism of mixing.

It is much easier, and more controllable, to mix neutrals from burnt umber, black and white than from compliments and the results are identical (assuming one can hit the neutral with compliments!)

That’s often true, if the goal is just to get a neutral grey.

But the point with complementary mixing pairs is that each one drops the chroma of the other in a straight line toward neutral, so all the lower-chroma colours of the same hues as both starting paints are achievable in a straightforward manner.

I watched Graydon mix a 5th value neutral with BU, B & W in about one minute; he also mixed the same color from diox purple and lemon yellow and it took more like 15 minutes. Again, the results were the same. Mixing compliments does not give a magical aspect to the result.

First off, the low-chroma midpoint mixed with most green-yellows and Dioxazine Purple are not completely neutral. Assuming that one wants to dull the yellow down (rather than the other way around, where a number of greens would actually be better choices) it’s a good idea to tint the Diox before one begins for a couple of reasons.

Mixing pairs completely sidestep the issue of a shift in hue that can happen with the addition of neutral grey. Only requires two or at most three paints (the third being white, to adjust value if necessary) and no prior mixing, although of course it does suppose one has the paired paints to begin with. The neutral midpoint between them would require the same, or less, time to mix as with an umber, black and white.

Einion

Do you know if your colour is off in hue, value, chroma... or all three?

Colour Theory & Mixing forum WetCanvas Glossary Search Tips Advanced Search Acrylics forum Acrylics - Information Kiosk

[Van der Hayden]

That’s often true, if the goal is just to get a neutral grey.

But the point with complementary mixing pairs is that each one drops the chroma of the other in a straight line toward neutral, so all the lower-chroma colours of the same hues as both starting paints are achievable in a straightforward manner.

All colors shift in hue as they are brought to neutral, and some more than others. I suspect that your compliments are not shifting as much as other pairs, and that you would see the shift if you had a way of measuring it.

First off, the low-chroma midpoint mixed with most green-yellows and Dioxazine Purple are not completely neutral. Assuming that one wants to dull the yellow down (rather than the other way around, where a number of greens would actually be better choices) it’s a good idea to tint the Diox before one begins for a couple of reasons.

The point was that Graydon hit the target color by using neutrals much faster than when using compliments. In the end the target mixes were identical, but the compliment mix was very tricky to hit.

Mixing pairs completely sidestep the issue of a shift in hue that can happen with the addition of neutral grey. Only requires two or at most three paints (the third being white, to adjust value if necessary) and no prior mixing, although of course it does suppose one has the paired paints to begin with. The neutral midpoint between them would require the same, or less, time to mix as with an umber, black and white.
Einion

Again, I have not found a color that does not shift in hue as value and/or chroma are adjusted.

[Einion]

All colors shift in hue as they are brought to neutral, and some more than others.

With complementary mixing pairs the change in colour is a straight line toward neutral; this is shown in the link in my previous post (done by measurement :))

The point was that Graydon hit the target color by using neutrals much faster than when using compliments. In the end the target mixes were identical, but the compliment mix was very tricky to hit.

Yes we see that. My point was that it is an extreme example due to the great value difference and because PV23 is an immensely strong tinter – it tends to obscure that other complementary mixing pairs are much easier to manage than this one, as well as other benefits.

For mixing lower-chroma colours (not pure grey, which is rarely needed on the canvas itself) it’s really more a matter of philosophy or outlook rather than a right/wrong thing – as long as the desired end result is achieved that can be all the matters. However if speed and efficiency come into play then the two methods do need to be pitted directly against each other in a broad range of examples to more fairly compare their strengths and weaknesses.

In terms of seeing a shift in hue when two complements are mixed I think there are two possible explanations, the first being that the two paints are not exact mixing complements.

Let’s look at it schematically (in 2D for simiplicity). If we take it that the midpoint mixture is completely neutral, not just close, in order for there to be a shift in hue the mixing line would have to curve off to one side and then curve back in toward the centre. This would require the line to curve twice (like a very flattened McD’s M) in many cases. While many mixing lines are curved they aren’t curved twice as far as I know.

This may seem needlessly geekish but the underlying point is important: in many cases shadows are just low-chroma versions of what we loosely call the local colour and for those painters that want to depict them that way the best method to mix them is important for ease and efficiency.

The second possibility is just that the hue appears to change but has not. For those that don’t know, for many hues darker value and/or lower chroma often makes colours appear to be different hues to the ‘parent colour’ of the high-chroma paint we started with. Yellows for example are particularly noted for this as when darker and duller they appear to be quite greenish to most people:

Similarly turquoise or cyan can look more greenish in dull examples. Dull red, crimson or rose appears to be much more violet. And for some colour categories the low-chroma versions are hard to pin down as to hue – few of us, without knowing it’s the case already, can see milky coffee as orange.

Coupled with this, the closer we get to grey the harder it is to accurately distinguish hue, even for trained observers. This is especially true in context where simultaneous-contrast illusions are very prevalent.

Einion

Do you know if your colour is off in hue, value, chroma... or all three?

Colour Theory & Mixing forum WetCanvas Glossary Search Tips Advanced Search Acrylics forum Acrylics - Information Kiosk

[Alex Sunder]

I´m trying to follow you guys… too much info.

The point was that Graydon hit the target color by using neutrals much faster than when using compliments.

I wanna make sure i got that right: If i have a huge area of flesh (im painting a portrait), lets say, in yellow ochre. I wanna subdue and make a more neutral yellow ochre. So, instead of mixing a little bit of some blue (complimentary), I would mix with what? The combination you´re talking about of BU, W + BK (gray)?

I really wanna understand this…

[Einion]

Hi Alex, previous thread you might like to look at Complement to yellow ochre

Because you probably don’t have a paint or paints that will work as mixing complements for your Yellow Ochre you have two basic options:
mix a complement using a blue and red, crimson or rose, then adjust value as necessary with a little white;
mix in a neutral grey of the right value, then adjust the hue if necessary (as it may go greenish).

It’s worth looking at the number of pigments used in either method.
1 + 1 + 1 + 1
1 + 3 (+ 2, possible red + white)

Einion

Do you know if your colour is off in hue, value, chroma... or all three?

Colour Theory & Mixing forum WetCanvas Glossary Search Tips Advanced Search Acrylics forum Acrylics - Information Kiosk

[gunzorro]

Einion — I just wanted to expand your statement of: “Coupled with this, the closer we get to grey the harder it is to accurately distinguish hue, even for trained observers.”

This is also true when we get to the extreme values — it’s very hard to distinquish the hue in a near-white or near-black color.

[Van der Hayden]

“This may seem needlessly geekish but the underlying point is important: in many cases shadows are just low-chroma versions of what we loosely call the local colour and for those painters that want to depict them that way the best method to mix them is important for ease and efficiency.”

Einion, I have not found this to be true.

[winecountry]

OK I’ve been lurking, and I’m coming out of the shadows just this once to speak to Alex since he seems to be open minded in asking about Munsell

First I have to say I started right where Bill is and agreed with all he says. But over time looking at other’s works who use Munsell and listening in, my true nature of skeptic showed, ie I neither believe nor disbelive, I want to try it out for results. So I bought the student book $24, and glued in the chips and read the exercises, tho only did a few so far…I thought I knew a lot about color, I’ve worked with some really difficult and esoteric theories, as well as the usual ones taught in University, and some by other artists.

The Munsell student book was a real education, and in the process it trained my eye to see in a painless natural way. I then bought the Munsell value scale $60, and did the spheres and blocks mentioned on one of the posts. This is by far the most valuable painting exercise I’ve ever done, tho I’ve painted plenty of scales, doing the Munsell was much harder and far more rewarding in training my eye and understanding.

The proof of worth of Munsell, to me, is that my painting suddenly improved several levels in a few weeks, not just my assesment either, but of fellow artists who noticed it too. I told no one, why? most people just want agreement with their own ways, and I’d heard that mentioning Munsell lift the lids off of some people.

So this is for Alex, for under $100 I got the best training, that paid off in spades in my work. I did not have to travel to a seminar, take a class or spend for a whole new set of paints. I don’t know if it will do that for you, you’d have to try it yourself. Will I buy the big book($400) maybe not, unless I have to start producing a lot of work for some gallery and efficiency is paramount.

I did buy Multi-Brand Color Chart by Huechroval, one of the partners of WC,($40) which has the entire “color space” of Munsell colors printed in “flights” laid out like the student book in Jim’s post, but far more extensive and the pages have the value and chroma # listed with the hue# from the Munsell. It is a way to see all the relationships, I purchased it as I work in pastel and this book lists the HVC and all the brands of pastel, a correlation to all the colors so I don’t needlessly buy colors I don’t need. I’ve already saved the cost of the book. It was written for this purpose. I use it for more than that, and do mix colors sometimes like people use the Big Book. Since it cost 1/10th the cost of the Big Book, is readily available here on WC, and can be shipped etc. maybe that might work for you as a way into the realm of Munsell. They have a site you can go look. But I recommend the Student book or if you can only do one thing then I suggest the Value Scale fan,if you can afford it, its small about 3×8 and can be mailed, get the glossy one and you can mix and test color right on it and wipe off with oil. the RP site has all the information where to get it, I did amazon.com for the student book, I don’t know if you can get it for what I did last year, $24 I have the old edition.

So lots of people here have chimed in, but it might be good to listen most to the people who have actually used the system and applied actual experience to their work. Sort of like someone talking on and on about apples and how they taste and look, compared to what you find out if you just bite into one for yourself.;)

Constructive critiques and comments welcome.

[Paul F]

my true nature of skeptic showed, ie I neither believe nor disbelive, I want to try it out for results.

I think that’s absolutely the right way to aproach anything like this. It’s the approach I took too. I think sometimes we’re too inclined to take other peoples’ word for what works and what doesn’t, partly because painting is so difficult. In a world where we have access to so much information, the only way to sift the good from the bad, the useful from the not-so-useful, is through direct experience.

Munsell is a tool, one that I believe can be a great aid in investigating what we see and finding ways to translate it into paint. It won’t be for everyone perhaps, but personally I’ve found it extremely useful. I believe that the most important and effective tool we can have is an open and enquiring mind. Opinions which don’t reflect that and which don’t stem from practical, first hand experience of the topic in hand should be treated with a certain amount of circumspection I think.

I then bought the Munsell value scale $60, and did the spheres and blocks mentioned on one of the posts. This is by far the most valuable painting exercise I’ve ever done, tho I’ve painted plenty of scales, doing the Munsell was much harder and far more rewarding in training my eye and understanding.

The proof of worth of Munsell, to me, is that my painting suddenly improved several levels in a few weeks, not just my assesment either, but of fellow artists who noticed it too.

That was exactly my experience too.

it might be good to listen most to the people who have actually used the system and applied actual experience to their work.

Well said. But the only way to know for sure is to get the paints and brushes out. It’s not terribly difficult to try out this stuff, the Student book is enough to get you started and doesn’t require a huge investment. I worked with it for months and learned an awful lot about relative value, value compression, how light affects colour on forms. I only got the ‘big book’ after I’d figured out a practical way to work with it and was convinced of its usefulness to me. I’d urge anyone to get their hands dirty with it before coming to any conclusions on its usefulness or otherwise. Knowledge can only ever be a good thing, and tools can be used in whatever way suits you.

[Van der Hayden]

The proof of worth of Munsell, to me, is that my painting suddenly improved several levels in a few weeks, not just my assesment either, but of fellow artists who noticed it too.

My experience also.

So lots of people here have chimed in, but it might be good to listen most to the people who have actually used the system and applied actual experience to their work.

I often wonder why there is so much condemnation without experience of it. I understand that for many the expense of the book is too great a barrier, but I jumped in just on Graydon’s recommendation (as well as his ability to paint!) and the book has paid for itself many times over. I am now getting ready to buy my second set.

The other effect that I continue to experience is now that I am seeing color correctly, and mixing it correctly, I am freed up to challenge myself to more ambitious, deeper, more beautiful work because I am no longer struggling with color. Since my goals are to make the maximum number of the best paintings I can, and exhibit in the best galleries, practical mastery of color has been a critical component. And although I still have far to go in terms of ambition, I am now exhibiting in my dream gallery and my work is on an evolutionary fast-track.

[gunzorro]

Thanks for these last three posts, as they parallel the experience I’m still having going through the Student Book. It is well written and concise, but so packed with theoretical knowledge it demands practical exercises of some kind to keep it aligned and not turned into hodge-podge of words.

I found mine for about $27 on eBay, which I thought an exceptionally good deal for a new Second Edition.

It seems part of the Munsell theory resistence comes from two areas:

1) “Know best” people assume they already know the Munsell work or are already possessed of superior knowledge and don’t pursue Munsell with a genuine desire to understand, and

2) Genuinely interested people, that get bogged down in the terminology and concepts, don’t do the exercises, or skimming through the book, rather than buckling down and ensuring complete comprehension and mastery of the concepts.

This doesn’t mean the “experts” don’t know anything — they do. But if their knowledge is a closed door to new ideas, it is limited knowledge.

And it doesn’t mean that people who truly want to learn and have difficulty intergrating the theory and practice have ADD or something! It is hard work getting all this stuff straight, and presupposes some knowledge of color theory on a basic level.

All that said, it isn’t really terribly hard to get through the Student Book. That gives us all a commonly held set of foundation principles and nomenclature, and clears the decks of many unnecessary debates/discussions, and on to more practical matters. Like color choice . . . and . . . painting!

[Alex Sunder]

Gunzorro, yes I did.

To find the RIGHT complementary was really hard, and all the ones I tried seemed to change the value in some way.

Tried the neutral grey, using black, white… turned out immediatly in something kinda greenish… poured some burnt umber… took my digital camera and shooted my yellow ochre and this neutral grey in the black and white mode… found out that the grey needed more white (the value were not matching the yellow ochre)… after that, the result misture of both was very nice, a duller yellow ochre, kinda greysh, but definetly NOT a dead color.

So, at the end, it was kinda faster and easyer to use the neutral grey.

Im sure I would have ended with the same result if I had a better comprehension of color, knowing the exact complimentary for this particular yellow ochre i have…

Thanks for everyone in this thread and all the suggestions guys!

[Anonymous]

This is also true when we get to the extreme values — it’s very hard to distinquish the hue in a near-white or near-black color.

This supports something I read regarding real paint colors, “Ivory black is not black, it is a very dark value of a blue, white is not white it is a very light value of blue.”
Do you agree with that? thanks

[Van der Hayden]

Different blacks tend toward different hues, as do different whites. Lead White is a yellow-orange, not blue. Ivory Black is more of a purple-blue than blue. I should say that the above is true of the Williamsburg paints I use. Other brands may have different hue tendencies.

[Author]

Posts