Building A Simple Painting–The Red Painting

Here's a digital reenactment of an oil painting of a still life using the color red as the main influence. The red will be used throughout the painting and certain amounts of it will be added to all of the colors, as I go. This illustration shows the process of working dark, midtone and light... then, adding the darkest darks and the lightest lights at the very end of the painting.  

To begin, I started-off toning the entire surface with Red. I then let it dry for 20 minutes. I then sketched-in the drawing using mixtures of Red and Black (Black=French Ultramarine Blue & Transparent Brown Oxide). Turpentine is used to create these washes.
Tip: Do not use white paint just yet. During your washes, use transparent color and the white of the canvas to achieve a lighter tone. Using white paint in your washes may result in an undesirable or chalky affect. Think of this washy stage as if you're using watercolors. 

At the beginning, I'm concerned with large shapes, medium shapes...then, small shapes. After my child-like shapes were sketched-in, I painted the bowl and zucchini, using nearly full-strength, "full-chroma" red. Later on darker colors will be painted over it. See, I know that red is intrinsically a dark color, and, it will be a good under-painting for a darker color. It functions well beneath the blue of the bowl and the dark-green of the zucchini. Tip: the red and grays in this stage were painted with slightly less washy paint. In fact, you may want to add a touch of linseed oil or Liquin Original.

I could have painted the gray shapes of the foreground (triangle) and background in this manner. However, by just going directly to gray I saved a step by I mixing red directly with gray (And, I knew there was already an under-painting of pink/red toned canvas.).

Next, I blocked in the DARKS. I showed restraint by not painting them quite as dark as I could have (for the most part)...oops, maybe a little too dark on that zucchini, oh well. Let's move on...

Now, I'm focused on painting-in the MIDTONES. As I did with the bowl, if the shape is blue, then I paint it blue. If the apple is red, then I paint the apple red. I'm looking for overall impact, color and value of the apple. The next three steps I continue to block-in midtones, or, the overall midtone color of the objects.

I veer  on the side of painting a slightly darker tone than I want to end up with. Later on, I will paint a lighter more accurate value over it. But for now, it helps to see things simply, in generalizations. Painitng light tones over dark tones is called, "light over dark". A handy principle when painting with oils.

Basically, I want to understand and see more simply the basic color and value (tones) that these shapes have to offer. Really, this is their major contribution and function to the painting (not their details). I am evaluating their size, location, color and value (tone)–in respect to the other shape relationships. It will help make more clear their contribution to the painting overall.
I may choose to play-up or play-down the values and colors (based on my own preferences) and based-on what I am trying to say about the relationships or about the painting as a whole...

After my mid-tones are in, I paint-in the lights. These are not the highlights (please don't confuse). They are the simply the light shapes that I see. They just represent the next level of going lighter in the process. Simply, paint the light shapes.

Even with these light shapes, I didn't forget to mix-in the red color that is present through-out all my color mixing. I also took in consideration the warmth of the light source and made sure it was included in my mix, as well.

Next, saving the lightest-lights and darkest-darks for last, I painted the lights on the cut apples (bright yellowish color) and the slight green and orange/pink highlights on the background apples. Then...

Finally, I added my darkest-darks and my lightest-lights to finish-off the painting (not necessarily in that order.

breaking-down shapes and values

Here we have a painting done by Ken Howard. Let's break down the basic shapes with a quick sketch that measures about 3-4 inches. You'll see, by drawing the largest shapes first you will achieve very accurate results without trying that hard. You can take very complex compositions and simplify them down to one, then two and three shapes. Then, draw the progressively smaller shapes within the larger shapes. It's that simple!

Simplifying Values and Shapes to Create a Composition

This exercise shows how to simplify values and shapes within an image. Here we have a black/white photo of a basic head sculpture made from clay. In figure1 I took the photo and applied a filter to it using Adobe Photoshop. Using the filter, I broke the image down to the most basic 3 values (dark, mid-tone and light). Notice, I did not go as dark as I could have...or as light. I held-back (for now) from using my darkest darks or my lightest lights. You can do this as well by going to the "cutout" filter in the drop-down Filter menu in the menu bar: Filters>Artistic>Cutout. Try doing this in your sketchbook. Practice looking at complicated subjects and quickly sketching them in their most simplified reduced state. This skill will later help you with painting. It will help your brain more quickly identify the larger basic shapes. It will train your eye in seeing as an artist.

By simplifying what you are looking at (in terms of basic value and basic shape relationships) you are able to make better sense of and quickly get at what is important vs. what is less important. If done quickly and sketchy, not much time or effort is wasted for if/when things need to be adjusted. It helps to establish placement of objects within a composition and a value key you'll be working within. (In this case, the value key is rather dark and dramatic, much like Caravaggio.)

It helps to see things as being abstract. I'm drawing/painting abstract shapes. I'm not identifying this thing as a head, or anything else for that matter. It is an abstract thing. The image is a collection of abstract shapes. I want to get to know these basic shapes, what their function might be and how they relate to one another. I'm looking to understand their relationships. I can decide whether or not I choose to make them larger or smaller, darker or lighter and so on. I can, in a sense, warp reality and fashion it based on my likes or dislikes; to play it up or play it down based on what I think is important. Or, I can choose to accurately depict what I'm looking at as objectively as possible, without bias. 

Look to how you might arrange your composition into large, medium and small shapes. Arrange these shapes much like how a choreographer would go about orchestrating movement; or, how a curator might go about arranging the display of visuals; or, how an orator might go about presenting thoughts. The goal is, you are committing yourself to the placement of these shapes and where they are going to be located on the canvas–they are bigger or smaller, darker or lighter, to be moved up or down, they will run off the canvas or be contained within... and so-on.

Since you're in the business of arranging shapes, you might as well consider using foreground, mid-ground and background to your advantage. It is important to be aware of using shapes to express an idea or to strengthen a composition–whether it be a landscape or, in this case, a portrait. The portrait in the photo happens to have a foreground, mid-ground and background. However, think about how it would change if one of them were not there. You may make use of all three of these or leave one or two of them out (for example the mid-ground) and how that might express something different regarding the overall impact of the piece. The feeling you are trying to express, and what you are trying to say about your subject, will help guide you in your decision-making. These factors will influence you even at this stage in the art-making process. 

Tip: It is important to have confidence and commit to your decisions. Once you have finished sketching-in these basic value/shape relationships and you are finished adjusting them to where you want them, it is now time to fully commit and move-on to the next step.

Once the placement of shapes are decided and the 3-value field established, I can now commit to the decisions I've made and move-on. In figure 3 you can see that I've added my darkest-darks, now making it a 4-value drawing. Figure 4, I've added added my lightest lights, making it a 5-value drawing. I'm always considering which details are important and which are less important. 

sophisticated simplicity

Whether drawing or painting, first and foremost, an artist should be thinking of how to simplify what he/she is looking at. To simplify is to do-away with distracting details in order to see the larger sum. A helpful approach to simplification is to use, "the rule of 3’s". The rule of 3’s is a method used to simplify the infinite amount of possibilities for purposes of efficiency–to reduce what is complex down to it's most simple state, to make clear important relationships. It is a helpful approach for an artist to better understand the subject of design and image making.

With drawing, it is helpful to reduce the object (or image) to 3 values (dark, mid-tone, light). Later on, you may decide to add another value (or two) to help better strengthen the image or idea, if needed. However, for the sake of efficiency I suggest getting directly to-the-point of what is important vs. what is less important. Leaving out certain details is much needed in order to play-up a feeling, attitude or emotion. Besides, why spend time rendering every value when it’s not necessary.

The core of what you are looking at is not in the details. It is in the major shapes held together by their relationships to one another. It is boiled-down and reduced to, “what is necessary” vs. "what is not necessary”. From an aesthetic standpoint, if the image doesn’t hold-up with 3 basic values then it’s most likely not going to hold-up with 4 or 5 values, graphically or philosophically speaking. A stronger image and a stronger idea will be achieved.

When observing an image from life, an artist can see that it is made up of an infinite amount of information (colors, tones, values, textures, details, etc.). Without simplifying, the artist will make complicated work and will lose sight of what’s truly important. There's a certain honesty and sophistication obtained through simplicity. If something becomes complicated, in a sense, it becomes less sincere. Mistakes are covered up. Weaknesses are masked and revisions make heed for filters. Or, instead, what needs to be said can be revised and reduced to it's basic meaning–to be more poignant, efficient. A certain simplicity of beauty is attained. Poets and writers do it. They understand the efficiency of words and to only use the amount necessary to achieve what needs to be said. Musicians know this. And so, some of the most beautiful well-known songs ever made, at their core, are made up of only three cords. 

Of course, this is just an approach and it could be argued that it is only one perspective. To say that what needs to be said with as few words as possible can be argued and, notably, that it can become a contentious argument. Beauty can be however you define it. Socrates would be proud of us if we were to think independently, creating our own definitions–to be an outlier, a fringe element and question everything. An artist may sometimes prescribe the opposite effect of simplicity. And, in which case, beauty may take on a different definition, one that is chaotic or complicated. But to pull even this off, I believe the artist would have a certain mastery and understanding of simplicity–an intelligence to hold all the chaos together, as a heart is to the cardiovascular system. This doesn't necessarily mean that what is simple isn't sophisticated and, by the same tolken, that what is complicated doesn't automatically have sophistication. Nonetheless, this is a good point to be aware of as an artist.

However an artist goes about creating values through line-making (or brush stroke), is entirely up to the artist so long as the artist retains the correct 3 values from afar. You may use chaotic strokes, edgy strokes, hatching, cross-hatching, or smoothed-out tonal strokes to build these value planes, so long as they read from far away as being within a prescribed value. No matter how complicated your line-work, it is ultimately held together, and made sense of, by-way-of the hierarchy of values.

Drawing done by artist, James Dietz

This example is by James Dietz (illustrator). He makes deliberate hatch-mark lines to build shapes and, ultimately, the image. When he thinks about building an object, he's thinking in terms of how dark to make a line, how hard of an edge it will have and how long it will be. Collectively, he knows the build-up of many similar lines next to one another, having slightly different shades, ultimately bundle together to represent a single shape. From a distance, these smaller shapes merge together to create a larger shape, compounded exponentially in this fashion. 

So when you squint your eyes or step back from the image, what do you see? I see an image made up of three basic shapes and 3 basic values. A foreground shape (jeep and people), a mid-ground shape (plane), and a background shape (sky). The foreground shape is the mid-tone value, the mid-ground shape is the dark value and the background is the light value. Basically, that’s 3 values (lights, mid-tones and darks).

His foundation began with an understanding of 3 basic tonal values and how they read from a distance. Technically, he added a fourth value (probably toward the end) to the wheel-well and grill of the jeep. By doing so, he helped bring the foreground objects closer to the viewer and create more interest. Where the artist ends-up and how dark to ultimately go will be dictated by the artist's needs. These needs will have the artist constantly pushing the parameters of the rules. The the darkest darks added toward the end of the drawing are minor notes, much needed supporting actors, if you will.

A day of sculpting...

Here's Helen's sculpture before smashing it.

Helen didn't seem to like her sculpture, as genius as it was, so she squashed it and, by doing so, created an interesting alternative. The squashed version is barely recognizable to it's 3-demensional counterpart (the photo above it).

Here's me helping Karen see form as a painter would.

A successful sculpture bust by Emily

This is a painting class. Yes, you got it, we're sculpting during painting class. This was a valuable exercise in seeing form, structure and mass from a new perspective, as a painter. I'm sure the new perspective on seeing three-dimensionally will be invaluable when returning to paint.

Nick bust

Painting with Clay

I sculpted a clay head using only my painting as a reference. I wanted to explore how painting related to sculpting and how my painting could benefit from a different perspective. I was relieved from the tediousness of mixing subtle values. Instead, I was able to concentrate strictly on the planes of head, mass, proportions and shape relationships–through adding and subtracting the clay. I appreciated being able to touch and feel the thing I was creating. I was able to see the head from all sides while creating it (unlike painting), giving me a dynamic perspective. I could apply the clay or remove it much like I would with paint strokes. The two are similar in this respect. A clear, deliberate and honest stroke must be made. If it is not preserved, much like painting, the life of the sculpture will lose a sense of energy and freshness. A stroke is made with conviction.