Sijun Forums :: View topic

dogfood · Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2001 5:25 am

Alright, I'm new to painting and am going straight to digital (less messy) after a long stint as a pencilist (not the kind that cures VD). I need more photo references, sure, but I tried to work without a net on this one and there's something amiss. SoMK was kind enough suggest this forum as it was full of sharp people who enjoyed helping others (smooge, smooge). It's only a light and shadow study, I was semi-ignoring proper face rules and the curtain with cracks. Thanks (I'm also looking for good Painter 6 tutorials) http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/loth/h/i/hibbetts/send_help..jpg.html

SoMK · Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2001 5:51 am

"Dogfood".. I could have searched for long :p

Someone asked about Painter tutorials a few days ago and got a few answers http://www.sijun.com/dhabih/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000928.html

First, I reiterate, I like your picts..
This is my try and I'm sure a few talented people will try too, welcome aboard :)

I didn't touch your drawing, I just played around with higlights and changed the colours of shadows

------------------
SoMK -----
Either way, you get your dog back. (Veterinary-taxidermist motto)

[This message has been edited by SoMK (edited March 27, 2001).]

Frost · Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2001 9:04 am

Nice touchup SoMK... it seems some people still beleive shadows are *always blue*, thanks to some old "great" master...

Nice drawing dogfood, welcome!

dogfood · Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2001 9:58 am

You're exactly right. I remember the very few times I've tried to put down shadows, there has been a lot of blue. This time it was due to the shirt and cloak, but there were no places from which it should have reflected. Doh!

Curi0us_George · junior member Member # Joined: 14 Mar 2001 Posts: 23

I hat to sound uneducated, but who is this 'old "great" master' you are referring to, Frost?

SoMK · Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2001 10:22 am

imho, the shadows are a matter of reaction to ambient light.. But I'm no jedi Master :p As your light was warm so should have been the shadows but I'm sure some of the guys here could come up with something drastically different and in a totally different mood...

------------------
SoMK -----
Either way, you get your dog back. (Veterinary-taxidermist motto)

Frost · Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2001 10:33 am

Curious_George: I don't know artists, but the topic has risen here a few times in these forums over the past year or so, and some older artists taught to make shadows cooler or blueish... which is a totally wrong approach in reality. Of course, art is art and you are free to do whatever you like... pink, orange, green, polkadots, etc...

Somk: Exactly. There are lot of influencing factors to shadows, but none of them are "Magic blue #8"...(at least not in MY book).

[This message has been edited by Frost (edited March 27, 2001).]

topeira · Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2001 1:09 am

somk did the pic good. it's a nice work in the original too. i think, though , u could emphasis details on the face more. thin darker lines on the lips, nose etc.

------------------
ToPeirA

SushiMaster · Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2001 10:40 am

Anyone got a good example of polkadot shadows? :-P

Daniel

Wiked Ewok · Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2001 5:04 pm

Wait..Frost, I've been under the impression that the lightside of a colored object shows its 'precieved' color while the darkside is not wholly, but slightly tinted with the complementary color. So shadows can be any color depending on the original color of he surface. I guess it just so happens that flesh being beige, has a blueish complementary color, thus giving the shadow a cooler, blueish tone. Is this how reality works? Or am I far from the mark?

Frost · Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2001 5:07 pm

Wiked: Where did you read THAT??? That just doesn't make sense to me.

(it's probably printed in some dude's art book... I know... (bwaha)... yeah, I know...)

edit:
Well, in relativity, and depending on the environment and ambiant or other lights in the surroundings, it might seem like it... but that's a wrong assumption if you ask me. I trust in radiosity renderers more than some guy's oppinion in a book... but again, that's just me being an asshole probably.

edit2:
dogfood... I really love your painting, PLEASE do not take what I say as an offense. =)

edit3:
Blah, I am an asshole. I should just shut up. =) But I think I'll write a few things about reflection approximation and stuff... since I'm kinda bored...

[This message has been edited by Frost (edited March 28, 2001).]

Wiked Ewok · Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2001 11:12 pm

then do so! hehe, What does it take to actually encourage you to write instead of saying you won't write because you'll sound like you're too critical:P You did that on my reflections post! hehe write, I dare you Frostie!

dogfood · Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2001 4:34 am

No offense taken; I'm suprised at how many responses there and stoked I've caused such a stir! So rules!

quaternius · Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2001 9:17 am

Go for it Frost!
My comment on blue shadows:
If my art history is remembered somewhat correctly it was the impressionists credited with painting outside (plein air) that "first" fully used all the colors for shadows, very often blue due to the blue sky's effect on shadows. This is all generalization, but up to that point most paintings were "studio" paintings completed in the traditional manner of a grayscale value painting - over which transparent glazes of pure oil color, (or opaque colors depending on the artist),were placed. Very often the traditional shadows would be gray and dead. When the impressionists started using more saturated color in the shadow areas they were originally derided and made fun of, (at least that's the story).

Long story short - today people have come to accept shadows as "blue" and you'll often see the impressionist "convention" of blue or purple shadows regardless of whether it's truly accurate or should be used in specific situations.

I think some of that is correct...

Q