My Sargent Copy (8 step)

[kincept]

Largest simplest shapes..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/sargent copy-1-1.jpg

Broad color spots..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/sargent copy-1-2.jpg

Color spots (as simple as possible)..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/sargent copy-1-3.jpg

Smooth out edges...

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/sargent copy-1-4.jpg

Clean up shapes..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/sargent copy-1-5.jpg

Soften.. add smaller clean shapes..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/sargent copy-1-6.jpg

soften.. add smaller clean shapes...

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/sargent copy-1-7.jpg

soften... clean shapes.. blah blah blah.. done..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/sargent copy-1-final.jpg


www.kincept.com (http://www.kincept.com)

[Atmospheria]

nice tutorial...so usefull...
nice to see how others work :)

[AmadorL]

Nice! Good work on your website too!
Keep'em come'n man. WE could sure use more Tuts here on CA.

Amador

[MindCandyMan]

This is fantastic...great to see how you work. Thanks so much for posting!

[J.Mac]

Ah thank you for posting this kincept, it is great! i really enjoy seeing other peoples methods and ways that they work :D great stuff!

-Jesse

[kincept]

Just an added note.. although I'd like to think purely in shapes as I paint, I have a number of "questions" that pop up in my head as the process goes along..

here are some technical questions to ask...


First off.. where is the light source coming from?
this will set where the light and shadow shapes are going to be placed..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-5.jpg

In this particular case I painted a head.. So, for this painting, another basic question would be "what simple forms am I painting?"

Is it easier for me to think of it as round forms?

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-1.jpg

or more planar?

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-2.jpg

don't forget that hair has form too..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-3.jpg

Once I understand my value organization and light patterns, then I figure out what colors to mix..

one of my first color choices would be based on the light source.. if my light source is yellow, then I get purple shadows, red light =green shadows, etc...

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-6.jpg

Another big color choice for me is picking a local color for each object/form that I'm about to paint.. so here's a general local color chart of the head that I've acquired from observation of this painting...
Keep in mind that these are extremes, and natural color mixing is a lot more subtle than what is in this chart.

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-4.jpg

I felt that most step by steps don't tell you this kind of stuff, so I hope that helps..


www.kincept.com (http://www.kincept.com)

[Cashmere]

one of my first color choices would be based on the light source.. if my light source is yellow, then I get purple shadows, red light =green shadows, etc...

This is a point I often forget :rolleyes:

I felt that most step by steps don't tell you this kind of stuff, so I hope that helps..

Most of all this kind of stuff is a great help, I agree !!

[MindCandyMan]

That's awesome thanks for the tips man!!!

[madster]

Wonderful Sargent tut, Kincept, THANK YOU!

Regarding your side tips, the question about planar or round forms for the head reminded me of an old (and I mean around 1976 or so) technique a graphics drawing instructor gave us for heads.

Imagine and roughly sketch out an egg cup. That is the lower part of the head sitting on the neck. Now draw the egg in it. That is everthing from the bottom of the cheekbones and the top of the nostrils up.

It is the reshaping of the "cup" (chin angle, jowls, etc.) or the "egg" (forehead, hairline, ear placement, brow ridges) that determine characteristics and keep your proportions in general alignment.

Except for the bridge of the nose and the sides of the jaws, there really are no flat planes on a face. Everything is curved ever so slightly to ever so obvious, like the forehead to the eye sockets...(just my opinion).

This piece fascinates me, in that it reminds me more of the work of John Court (www.johncourt.com) than that of Sargent, per se. Please, would you be so kind as to give me a ref to the piece you are copying. I'm dying to try your tutorial!

[kincept]

madster: thanks for sharing your thoughts.. it's always cool to hear about new ways of thinking of the head.. as for the reference.. I got the image from the newer Sargent book, "John Singer Sargent - Portraits of the 1890's" pg. 41.. have fun!

mindycandyman, cashmere, and others: Let me know if there's any other questions you guys have.. I seem to be getting a lot of painting questions these days, so I thought this would be a good place to answer..

In the meantime, I'll try and think of some other typical problems that come up..

:chug:

[Lev_0]

Hey, how are you chosing the correct values for your colors digitally and are you painting using layers or all in one go?

Do you use a greyscale with punched holes in it to measure correct values when you paint with oils?

For some reason the "Smooth out edges..." step I like the most hehe. Thx for the tutorial.

[kincept]

One major step in the painting process for me was to learn how to organize my values... If I could simplify my painting into two to four values (max), then the color mixing would be a lot easier to do...

A good thing to do when painting is to squint.. it makes it a lot easier to see simple shapes, mass colors into value, and see which edges really stay sharp or soften up..

Here's a simple 2 value breakdown of the Sargent painting..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-7.jpg

With simple values alone, the painting should already have an impact..
..Here's a third value..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-8.jpg

If you can get these steps in you head first, then the color mixing will be a lot easier.. since they are all the same value, all you have to worry about is the color temperature, and the saturation.. try squinting at this part.. you'll see the colors match values, and only temperature changes are made...

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-9.jpg

Once this is established, a few minor adjustments can be made to make the colors and values a little more accurate..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-10.jpg

Next.. don't stop the squinting.. it's necessary for seeing the soft edges and value shifts.. paint the shapes you see and soften the areas that soften up as you squint..

Once you get the hang of doing these exercises, the painting process will be a little easier.. the next step would be to actually study the form and anatomy of what you are painting.. once you do this, the values, colors, shapes, and edges will start making more sense.. and after some time it will be easier to invent as well as paint even more accurately..

[kincept]

almost forgot.. as far as layers go.. I just painted on one layer.. I wanted to keep this master copy as true to oil as it could get..

The value scale helps, but I think its far more important to learn how to simplify the value scale to three for four steps..

Cheers!

[Cashmere]

Kincept, if you have to copy something from a 2D reference, do you imagine that reference as a 3D object? Or do you see the reference as a group of plane shapes? I would to know if I must imagine the object in front of me always as a 3D solid or not.

[kincept]

Cashmere: When painting from life (or even from imagination) I'll start from a shape that I either like, or that best represents what I'm painting.. so the initial thought would be to think of the 2d aspect...

However, at some point I have to start thinking about how the shape/object turns in space.. so it's also important for me to understand the 3d aspect..

The reason for this is that the highlights, shadows, edges.. everything that I am painting is based off of a 3d form..

In other words.. the corners of a box will determine where the highlights are going to be.. the sides of the box that are away from the light are going to be shadowy areas.. the softer rounder corners of the form will have softer edges, different planes of the box are going to have different color temperatures and values, etc..

Every value, color, edge that I paint will ultimately be based on the 3d structure of the object that I am painting..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-11.jpg

The reason I start with a 2d shape though is for likeness.. My very first layin should already look like (if not exactly, pretty close to) the person/object I am painting. If I started with a 3d drawing, the painting would (although it would be solid in structure) turn very stiff very fast..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-12.jpg

The next thing that goes on in my head is to make sure that the shape fits the 3d form.. This way I don't lose the initial reaction to what I am seeing or inventing..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-13.jpg

Finally, I will merge the two to make something that looks close to what I want it to look like, and has the structure to back it up..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/demo-14.jpg

The rest of the time I am just fixing things that I either don't like about the shape, that I don't like about the 3d quality of it, and also that I don't like about it compositionally..

To sum up, I have 3 mentalities when I attack anything that I am creating..
a 2d mentality, a 3d mentality, and a compositional mentality..

[Cashmere]

Thanks for the reply :)
You said:

different planes of the box are going to have different color temperatures and values,
could you explain better this concept ? It's very interesting...

[kincept]

Sure..

The head is made up of tons of planes.. one of the best ways to actually paint the head is to simplify it into its basics.. in other words, to think of it as a simple box or cylinder..

Once you do that step you can reference whether or not you are going too far off from the original idea (it will keep you in check as far as thinking of the bigger scheme of things)..

However, although thinking of the head as a simple box may be easy, the hard part is to turn a simple box of a head into a realistic head... and in order for someone to paint a head as real as possible, they have to know ALL the planes of the head..

When I say... different planes of the box are going to have different color temperatures and values
I mean that every portion of the head (nose, ears, eyes, mouth) will at some point have to be considered as a smaller box or form on top of the bigger box (the initial layin), and every plane of each of these forms would ideally have the following..

-a different color temperature

e.g. the front of the nose will be either warmer or cooler than the side of the nose... once the painter establishes that.. on the side of the nose, the nostril will be either cooler or warmer than the bridge... once that is established... the side plane of the nostril will be either warmer or cooler than the front plane of the nostril..etc etc.. until there is no possible way to paint an area that small on the canvas (ideally)..

-a different value

e.g. the front of the nose will be either darker or lighter than the side of the nose... once the painter establishes that.. on the side of the nose, the nostril will be either darker or lighter than the bridge... once that is established... the side plane of the nostril will be either darker or lighter than the front plane of the nostril..etc etc.. until there is no possible way to paint an area that small on the canvas (ideally)..

And that's one of the harder challenges of painting (for me at least).. since the head is so intricate in design, it's nearly impossible to paint everything that's in front of the artist given the amount of time he/she has to paint..

So one solution I've found is to (rather than paint exactly what's up there) learn how to simplify the head into it's basic forms (that being the box first), then learning to simplify the smaller forms (turning an eye into a box/sphere, a nose into a boxy triangle, the muzzle of the mouth into a sphere/box, etc)..

By doing this it forces me to do a couple of things...

-the obvious one.. simplify and see the biggest possible picture of what I'm painting
-think conceptually.. which unfortunately many aspiring artists I've seen don't do..
-understand what the heck I am painting and how I am painting it.. so I can learn and improve in the long run..

Another good aspect of this particular process is not only will I get better from it, but at any given point in time, I can stop painting, and it will be at a close-to-finished state... since the big impact of the painting was the first thing I established.. (another note- this is not an advertisement for a particular process... this is only one solution, and there are plenty of other just as satisfying "processes" out there)

Ok that's enough typing for now.. my carpel tunnel's starting to kick in..

[Lev_0]

Thx for answering all of that, was really helpful. The stuff you said about thinking in 2d shapes clears up a lot for me. What do you mean by think conceptually while painting?

I've done a few copies of sargent's charcoal drawings, although I only gave myself a few hours for each so the drawing is off but the idea of simplifying the 2d shapes is a lot more obvious there.

Once you've finished the 2d shape design of the portrait and you're thinking of the 3d stage, do you actually paint the structure lines onto the painting like in that image or are you just thinking about it in your head as you paint? I'm gona try and do some of these over the next few weeks.

[Cashmere]

Kincept, I can see that you often emphasize this idea: "think conceptually". It isn't simple, specially for the beginners but this method offer great results. Maybe thinking in that way bring the drawing to be, not a copy, but another original. (Do you understand what I mean? )

[kincept]

Lev_0: Thinking conceptually to me means having to visualize something that isn't really in front of me.. in this case, disregarding the head the head that I see for a moment and imagining it as a box in perspective..
When thinking in 3d mode, I personally don't actually draw the lines.. most of that logic is in my head.. but I would recommend it to someone who isn't comfortable thinking this way.. I see a lot of people who understand the basic concept and automatically think that it will naturally show in the drawings/paintings.. but that's hardly the case.... they try and skip steps, and the 3d part of the piece is simply non-existent.. It's tedious at first, but in the long run it will help..

Cashmere: I definitely understand what you mean, and I feel to some degree it's true what you are saying.. A "master copy" shouldn't be a complete copy of what you see.. I think it should be taking what you know and putting it to use by painting your own interpretation of the master's painting.. But I still personally think of it as a master copy because although you aren't copying the exact strokes (unless that's what you're going for), you ARE still trying to copy his/her thought process.. just a personal opinion..

[MindCandyMan]

Just wanted to say that this thread is fantastic...I'm learning a lot!

[Cashmere]

Another question, you said:

Every value, color, edge that I paint will ultimately be based on the 3d structure of the object that I am painting..
The next thing that goes on in my head is to make sure that the shape fits the 3d form..

How do you calculate the perspective? Do you draw 3d forms from imagination? Or do you consider the exact perspective with vanishing points, horizons, point of view...

[kincept]

As far as figurative painting/drawing goes, I keep the perspective fairly simple (i.e. features on a face should be parallel to each other on each side of the form).. no convergence lines, just what I know about a form in it's simplest state.

The only times I would consider using convergence personally would be:

-big scenes where there are multiple figures

(just to get the general scale of the figure(s) that I'm drawing.. once that's established then I just eyeball)

-Super foreshortened poses

(I usually eyeball this type of thing...but there is a certain understanding about perspective that has to be taken into consideration while drawing these poses)

-if I want to make a head, limb, or torso look twenty stories tall, or create a fisheye type perspective..


From life these thoughts are hard to carry out, since there are a ton of things beyond just the simple perspective that may spring up in the amount of time to draw them..

In any case.. whichever route I choose I would keep it consistent.. in other words.. if I'm going to converge, then I'm going to carry that out through the whole figure.. and if I keep it simple, then I simplify throughout the whole figure..

I've seen a lot of confusing drawings from people who mix these two ideas together.. which is ok if you're going for abstract art..

[kincept]

Here's a digital painting I did yesterday.. saved every break of the pose (roughly a half hour or so for each session)

Same process.. different situation..

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/figures/painting/digital tut/digital-5-1.jpg

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/figures/painting/digital tut/digital-5-2.jpg

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/figures/painting/digital tut/digital-5-3.jpg

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/figures/painting/digital tut/digital-5-4.jpg

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/figures/painting/digital tut/digital-5-5.jpg

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/figures/painting/digital tut/digital-5-6.jpg

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/figures/painting/digital tut/digital-5-7.jpg

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/figures/painting/digital-5.jpg

[Cashmere]

Different situation because this time is from life, isn't it?

[kincept]

that's part of it.. there are a couple of other things going on that are not like the sargent painting:

the light situation: although it's generally in the same direction, the light source in this case is more spotlit, creating harder edges where there are cast shadows..

Sargen'ts painting looks spotlit to me as well.. but since the transitions are softer it tells me that the spotlight he was using was probably further away than the situation that I had...

other observations: the model i was painting was younger, female, and of a different ethnicity (different local colors and muscle definitions); also the figure and the background in this situation were roughly the same value except for the hair (Sargent's was a light figure vs. a dark backgroud)

these different kinds of observations will change how the edges, values, and colors in a painting should be treated..

oh.. almost forgot one more observation.. Sargent was ten times better than me, which means he probably saw more than I did... :)

[Signature]

Very interesting thread. Thanks for the great explanations. :)
May we quote some of them in the conceptart middle class?

Is there anything (like an exercise) that can help with seeing different kinds of edges and analyzing them?
Something like the 2/3 value breakdown for values?

And how important do you think edges are?
I guess it's important to know the theory when you are working from imagination!?

[kincept]

I think correct edges are what either makes or breaks a painting, separating it from good to great.. the next step up from simply capturing a drawing and its values (but also extremely difficult to accurately achieve)

side note: the hardest thing about drawing or painting is recognizing that everything you learn is equally important, and nothing should be taken for granted.. 99.9999% of all the paintings that I have failed have failed because I forgot to think about:
a)the drawing
b)the values
c)the colors
d)the edges
e)the composition
f)all of the above

http://www.kincept.com/foundation images/master copy/sargent copy-edge.jpg

I don't think there really is a secret formula for seeing edges.. you kind of have to study the form for that and squint as you observe.. I can only generalize them for you..

1. hard edges.. usually around the bony areas and/or extremely contrasty valued areas (Sargent knew the bone structure of this guys head pretty well.. that hard edge is the bony part of the eye socket).. also check the ear next to the background.. although the ear is softer in hardness than a bone, it is still very light next to the background, and deserves a hard edge (forgot to circle it oops)..

2. firm edges.. usually around cartilage, and not so prominent bony structures.. as you travel down the bridge of the nose, you hit bone first then cartilage (this particular example is a transition from a harder edge to a firm edge)

3. soft edges.. edges that are kind of unclear where one plane starts or stops.. but when you step back you should be able to tell.. the cheeck bone in this case has a firm edge.. but it turns into a soft edge as the eye travels down to the muscles..

4. lost edges.. simply put.. edges that are lost.. no beginning or end.. like the transition from the neck to the background..

5. Other thoughts..

-edges can be use to describe a form, separate forms, or merge forms.. it's the knowledge behind the forms (and observations of course) that will determine the edges..

-once you get passed the basic edges of form by using value.. then there is another degree of subtlety (e.g. planes can be separated by temperature as well, and different temperatures will have different edges when put next to each other)

...

Although these are knit picky things to examine, they really do make or break a painting.. and the true technical artists will know whether or not you are cheating your edges or seeing them..

Personally I think this is an advanced area, and I feel a beginner painter shouldn't focus on this (since it is so subtle).. but it will take a structurally solid form and make it look even more real..

key note: keep the edges simple at first.. technically, the head should read as a round ball or egg to begin with, along with the torso and limbs.. going too in depth into the edges at first will most likely destroy the painting (unless you have extensive experience with them)

hope that helps.. feel free to quote... it'll be a good reminder for myself.. :)

[Signature]

This is great. Thanks a lot! :bow:

I wouldn't have thought that example 1 is a typical example for a hard edge.
I think I thought in contrasts too much (that the ear was a perfect example)

Great ... now I have a lot to think about! Thanks again!

[jerO]

great foundations.
i LOVE the chick.
really nice portrait.
jerO

[behemot5]

your help is really usefull.... i try to retain all of this....
you said "yellow light= purple shadows" so prometheusanj in is tutorial " radiosity,specular, etc " say that shadows depend of the background ...i don't understand can you explain me a little bit more...

[kincept]

Some of the most important things to remember when painting:


UNDERSTAND THE BIG PICTURE AT ALL TIMES

-some people start with a detail and work outward from that detail, which is fine as long as they remember the relationship to the whole subject that they're painting

-the process I personally cater towards at the moment works the opposite way, starting with the bigger picture and working inward (a good reminder for me personally)


THINK IN EXTREMES AND RELATIONSHIPS

-a couple of questions to ask right at the beginning of a painting:

What's the main light source?
What's the darkest/lightest area(s)?
What's the most saturated/desaturated area(s)?
Hardest/softest edges?
Compositionally, what's the main focus of the painting?

-Do not forget to relate areas to other areas (i.e. just because an area looks bluish does not mean its blue, it depends what that particular color is next to)


PLAY WITH OPPOSITES

-if a light source is yellow-ish, it has purple-ish shadows (i.e. reference the color wheel for a second.. the shadow area will usually have mix of colors that are generally on the opposite side of the wheel than the light side)

basics:
-light vs. dark
-warms vs. cools
-hard vs. soft
-saturated vs. desaturated

advanced:
-balance vs. dominance
-large vs. small
-straights vs. curves
-graphic vs. spacial


Hope that helps... I couldn't understand the second part of the question, so I thought I'd try and sum up everything in its simplest form.. :chug:

[Tadao]

Extremely helpful information Kinman. Your work is solid but what's more impressive is your analytical approach to it. I share a similar attitude.

Thanks for your time spent and I'll keep an eye out for more of your posts.

-Craig

[jadedchron]

I love it all! :chug:

[Travis_Bourbeau]

One of the best tutorials ive seen nice work and thanks

! trav

[strych9ine]

I found this to be one of the most useful threads on this site, so I think it deserves a bump. :chug:

[kincept]

Thanks again!

Remember if there's anything anybody has questions on I'd be glad to answer it here...

[Judy Warner]

My biggest problem seems to be dealing with reflected light. When you are doing these "big value schemes" what do you do about the reflected light? Ignore it in the beginning? How do you keep it from confusing your value maps? Judy

[kincept]

When dealing with reflected light, one of the first things I'll ask myself is.. do I really need it in this situation?


A couple of situations to consider:


a. the subject is roughly 80-90% lit from the front:

-probably not too many signs of reflected light, so I'll leave it out.
-my focus then would be to find the planes of my subject within the light side, and leave the shadow a mere shape.

b. the subject is about 30-70% lit from the side roughly:

-reflected light must be considered.
-most of my attention will be focused on the more dominant between light and shadow (i.e. 70% light=more rendering in light, and maybe two subtle values in the shadow)
-remember, the big light shape and the big shadow shape are more important than any rendering I'm going to be doing (i.e. if I don't have the two or three subtle value shapes in my 30% shadow, then that's ok.. I should have the big shape laid in)

c. the subject is only 10-20% lit from behind:

-this is a painting about reflected light.
-I would probably keep the light side as a simple shape (or render it with caution)

d. reflection from an extremely bright or saturated object:

-if the reflecting object is bright enough, I'll think of it as a secondary light source.
-if the reflecting object is saturated, I'll try not to mistake values with saturation.

e. secondary lighting:

-my painting focus would be on the more dominant light area (i.e. the one that takes up more space on my canvas)

f. diffused lighting (3 or more light sources):

-this is probably a painting about the local color of my subject.
-no reflected light.



OTHER IDEAS... :


-I think it's safe to say that in general reflected light could be thought of a secondary light source (as long as you remember to ask yourself where the reflection is coming from)

-be aware of the materials you're painting... a matte object probably won't reflect as much as a metallic one.

-if it's metal on metal, then you'll probably see more of a mirror effect than reflective light

-I would place the importance of composition over what I see or want to paint. In other words, if the reflected light helps the design of my painting, then I'll paint it. If not, then I don't have to (according to the "official" right of me being an artist)



Hope that helps..

Confusion is always welcome. If you're not frustrated you're not learning...

Cheers!

[Judy Warner]

This gives me a lot to think about--and thank you for this and the whole thread. I'm finding it very helpful. I've been working with Seargeant's portrait drawings for a while now--they are simply amazing. Each time I look at them or try to copy, I see more about how he draws--your information gives me a lot of new insight. Judy

[kincept]

Thanks Judy..

It's always good to hear that this thread helps..

Sargent was insanely good.. the better you get the more you will understand his insanity.. not only was he a technical master, but he was also amazing compositionally...

[Silently Roaring]

Nice process thanks for sharing!

[Ichibanmaru]

I can never do it in like these "official steps" I just do it...sometimes it comes out a bit off though.

[kincept]

Actually, I find that the better I get at painting the easier it is to start off with different processes. Unfortunatley, if I were to post my paintings and say "you know you just do it.." I don't think people would learn as much.

But I do agree with you.. at some point you want to be able to paint like it's second nature.

[ksgant]

The pictures are not showing up for me. In either Firefox nor IE.

Don't know why.

[Idiot Apathy]

Because they are dead and almost two years old. What a shame.

[kincept]

yeah.. I agree with what Idiot Apathy said..

Sorry for the inconvenience. However, I have a book in the works, and the meat of this thread (along with the pictures) is in it. Stay tuned..

-kincept

[fayçalbennis]

plz i can't see the images can u help?

[kincept]

It's been 8 years.. I've decided to do a new Sargent copy.. please see on my blog:

www.sparetimer.blogspot.com

Cheers!
Kinman

[Dile_]

very cool blog man, would be cool if you started a sketchbook here as well!