Class Two: Light and Shade in the Landscape

Reference Photos and Demo in Progress

Here was our projected reference.  A landscape of simple rock.  After our slideshow in which we looked at examples of how light and shade describes form we painted this and tried to analyse just what is happening in this apparently simple photograph below.  To sum up; the only area with direct light is the orange tainted light from a low rising sun on the far peaks.  That orange colour is a combination of the warm brown grey basalt rock being struck by the 'orange' warm light of a sun low on the horizon.  The foreground rock might appear lit, but it isn't; it is a slab of white marble which is totally different in colour than the basalt.  It's high value local colour is an example is yet another of how local colour can completely confuse an artist.  The blue tinge to the foreground, middleground and shadows in the far mountains is a result of light radiating down from the blue sky above.  It is a secondary light source of sorts.  The middle ground is dark...there might be several reasons for this.  The limestone might be in transition to the basalt rock, which is a different colour.  But the middle ground is also angled, cliff like.  That means it's surface is not catching the secondary blue light radiating down from the sky.  As well, it's surface is far more pocked; as Jack the Geologist pointed out, there is less 'bedding' of rock slabs as seen in the foreground, and this pock marked surface reflects less light (it has a low 'albedo'; a surface that absorbs light and therefore light energy will often become warm to the touch quickly) and so appears darker.

I didn't actually find the time to finish this, although I will continue to try and make it.  However, below I have a 'finished' sketch, about half the size,  that was developed in exactly the same manner.  I'll replace it with the finished version of the above if I can.

Separating Local Colour from the Effect of Light and Shade

 
To model form with paint it is a great help to be able to discriminate between the types of visual information we perceive when seeing.  It is very helpful for the artist, in the mind's eye, to be able to see light and shade playing on form seperately from the local colour of the object.  This series of photographs of will break away the local colour and value from light and shade.

photo one, optical reality, as we see things

In this photograph above we see the arranged fruit as they optically appear to us with a single main light source. What we are seeing here is a combination of the actual colour of the fruit- the local colour- in combination with the effect of light and shadow from the single light source, on their form. There is a lot going on in there. The concepts are at once simple but difficult to grasp.

photo two, optical reality without colour, as we see things in black and white

If we eliminate our ability to see colour or hue, so that we can only see black and white tones, we aren't just seeing light and shade on form. We are seeing light and shade on form in combination with the local colour of the objects translated into the local value of the forms. What was a particular red in the apple translates into the grey tone value of that colour, upon which the effect of light and shadow (and to confuse things slightly more, also a bit of reflection and secondary bounced light) plays over it's form.

It is important for a painter to be able to distinguish between the effect of local colour (in painting) or local value (in drawing or monochromatic painting) from the effect of light and shadow on form. So we need to further break down what it is we are actually seeing. This will help us with our understanding of painting form.

photo three, local colour, as we see things lit with multiple light sources and no shadow

Lets imagine we are not able to see the effect of light and shade on form. Perhaps light shines all around the objects from multiple sources so there is no shadow or highlights. We are only able to see the actual colour, the local colour, of objects. What we would see of our fruit arrangement would look something like the picture above. There are faintly lighter and darker areas of hue in the fruit, but they are where the pigmentation of the fruit surface is more concentrated, or where it has been altered as a result of ripeness, the start of rot, or being a different anatomical part, such as a green or brown stem. They have nothing to do with the effect of shade on the fruit which is non existent in this view because the light appears to strike the fruit from all aspects.

As an aside, in early television production, this is apparently how video/film sets were lit in order to save money and shoot scenes quickly and easily. The lack of drama with this kind of 'high key' lighting was also found useful to provide levity for comedy. Three strong light sources were used to eliminate light and shadow playing on form and flatten the scene out.

Alternatively, in higher quality film production there is more use of 'low key' lighting; single light sources with more contrast and chiaroscuro. Movie stills often resemble the theatrical sets created in the European classical oil painting tradition. Film noir used this dramatic form of lighting extensively.

photo four, local value, as we see things in black and white with multiple light sources and no shadow

Lets imagine that as well as not being able to see the effect of light and shadow on objects, that we are also unable to see the actual colour of things. We can only see in black and white, and also cannot perceive the effect of light and shadow on form. What we would see of our arrangement of fruit would look something similar to this image above.

It is a valuable tool for painters to be able to estimate the value of colour, to know exactly where a colour, translated into grey tone, lays on the value scale between black and white. It takes a lot of practice to judge the value of colour.

photo five, light and shadow, as we see things in the absence of local colour with a single light source

For our study of light and shade on form, the above image shows us how we need to be able to visualize objects that we are painting. If we could not see colour at all, could only perceive the effect of light and shadow from a main source playing over form, we would see our fruit arrangement as in the image above. It would be as if the whole world were made of plaster casts.

If our fruit arrangement was in fact made out of plaster, we would only be able to see it if it were in fact lit from a single major light source. If we lit the above arrangement with a 'high key' lighting scheme as used on early television sets, our arrangement would all but disappear. We just wouldn't have the information we need to perceive it.

Rendering form with light and shadow is a question of priority. You must, in your mind's eye, first see form unaffected by local colour and value and understand how light plays on it's surface to reveal it's nature. This is especially the case in the simple painting exercises that we will be doing in the first few classes. We'll actually be imagining that our subject matter is made out of plaster and lacks colour. We need to be able to experiment with pure light and shadow on form before considering local colour. This can actually be quite liberating.

Being able to separate what we see into the constituent parts, as described above, is invaluable for the artist, as it allows the modulation of those parts for the purpose of expression. You can choose to exaggerate or suppress aspects of what you are seeing. You can choose to ignore local colour. Or choose to suppress the effect of light and shade in your painting by making it high key.

photo six, re-combining the parts

In this final image I've tried to digitally recreate the first photo by 'glazing' a saturated transparency of the local colour from photo three on top of photo five. The effect is not quite the same as in photograph one, however, it's getting into the same ball park. It has the effect of early or low quality photo-lithographic reproduction with less subtle colour separations. This photographic re-combination also mimics the 'glazing' of local colour on top of an under painting as done with traditional oil painting technique.

Traditional oil painting technique involved painting an underpainting of the picture as though the components were made of plaster, very much like the above fruit arrangment that has been gessoed.  There is just light and shade on form.  They would then 'glaze' transparent colour...the local colour of the objects... on top and make some adjustments and finish the painting. 

Perhaps as a result of the aesthetic associated with both marble sculpture and the drama of light in the underpainting, there was actually a tradition of painting called 'grisaille' in which the artist concentrated just on the effect of light and shade on form, as though painting figures and scenes made of plaster. 

Andrea Del Sarto

Above is an example of grisaille. Monochromatic treatments are also used extensively in animated film, as well as in live action film. We'll initially be studying light and dark in our landscapes by painting in monochrome.  By ignoring colour we can concentrate on light and shade and modelling with watercolour paint.

Light and Shade on Form

Here's a metaphor to help with the idea of light playing over form. I often have to struggle with the concept myself in a practical way when actually painting. This is partly because the observation of light playing on form is often camouflaged by the presence of local colour and multiple light sources in real world observation. We need to simplify and isolate aspects of what we perceive, especially when it comes to painting landscape. Here's three images that will illustrate the simple effect of a single light source playing over form.

Lets imagine we are in a very very dimly lit room. We have a sheet of black paper in front of us. Here's the sheet of black paperbelow...

We take the sheet of black paper, and we scrunch it up into a ball, creasing it mightily, and then we more or less flatten it out again. Of course, we can't make it flat. We can't see it very well, but feeling it in the dim room, we can tell that it now has relief, it has creases, parts coming towards us, parts receding. If we could see it clearly, it might actually look like the surface of the moon or a mountainous landscape viewed from high above. But, as you can see below, we can hardly see a thing...

We need a way of revealing, describing or imaging (as opposed to imagining) the topography, the relief, of the paper to make it visible. Lets imagine we have a can of white spray paint. We take it and spray it, left to right, at a low angle almost parallel to the bumpy surface of the paper. We spray and spray and the surface is revealed, even in the dim light of the room we are in...

Now we can clearly see the topography and it really does look like the surface of a planet viewed from The Mother Ship. There is no bounced light, but the multifaceted surface has many many planes facing in many many directions, a bit like a cut diamond or a disco ball but much more random. Depending on how they face, they catch the paint more or less directly. Any plane that catches the spraypaint more directly catches more paint and is therefore lighter. Planes that catch the light, ooops, I mean spraypaint, less directly receive less of it and are therefore darker. Planes completely hidden from the spray of paint, in the shadow of extreme relief, in the lee of the mountains, so to speak, receive no  paint at all and are left pure black. If that spraypaint were photons  it would be behaving in very much the same way as light itself on a landscape viewed from above.  Still life, the human face and body, are also topographies of sorts that can be revealed by having light rake across them and reveal form as a result of light and shadow.

In our exercise in class today, we are going to try and make ourselves more aware of what is in light and what is in shade.