an exercize to help me understand b/w value?
Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 32

Thread: an exercize to help me understand b/w value?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 34 Times in 32 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0

    an exercize to help me understand b/w value?

    im trying to get good at conceptualizing in black and white first whatever it maybe.. but im having a tough time understanding value... sometimes i just get lost in what im doing.

    it seems easy enough to make things lighter and darker shades.. but in the process its tough..

    can any color have the same exact value? for instance brown and pink... can pink ever get as dark as a browns value?

    also, say im painting a womens shirt.. and her shirt is blue.. do i try to get the right value of the blue first as a mid tone? like to block in the value of that shirt...

    and more to the point... is there an excersize i can do to help develope this specific skill?? something i can do every day like how ppl using lifedrawing for anatomy...?

    please help me obiwan, your our only hope

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    199
    Thanks
    18
    Thanked 51 Times in 47 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I'm not sure what you are asking, but when I was drawing everything in pencils, I used the tone apperance to draw the shade. if the color was almost black I drew it as dark as I could. After a while I felt I could guess what color it was in a gray scale picture, but yellow, light blue, pink or tan could look the same. I colorized pictures, and I was never told I used the wrong color while it was just a guess, but I didn't change the grayscale much when I had the brush set on color to have control of the tones, and color blending. I would say if you want to get good at drawing grayscale don't look at the color, but look at the darkness, and lightness, and rememeber later yellow is a color that is lighter than it looks, but it is full all in the extra saturation.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 34 Times in 32 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    well the main question was what kinda excersizes can i do to train myself to be good at black and white concept drawings.. without references

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Near Brussels
    Posts
    1,290
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 154 Times in 100 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Trying to see the correct value of a certain color can indeed be very tricky and is a very common problem among student painters. To answer your question on the brown and pink... yes. All colors can be equally dark, even white objects. Because when we turn of the light at night and our room is void of any light beams everything becomes black.

    This excerpt is from Ted Jacobs's book 'Drawing with an open mind' which applies here:
    The absence of light obscures just as its presence illuminates and defines. Light is directional in that it arrives from a source. In a dim light, such as moonlight, definition is more limited than in a stronger source such as daylight. By moonlight it is difficult to distinguish the colors of things and not a great deal can be seen in the shadows. From the optical viewpoint, we find that things are not defined by their symbolic names but rather through the action of light. The eye does not see a white shirt, a black jacket and a face above them. It sees a collection of colored shapes revealed by the action of light.

    Most errors of drawing and painting arise from an attachment to the symbolic conception of things. When we draw named things, we forget to draw the effects of light. For example, we tend to render the white shirt light in tone, forgetting that in our totally darkened room it will become black. As the Zen aphorism says: "A white heron against the blue sky looks white but against the sunlit snow gray" In the same way a white shirt is not white but actually has a certain tonality depending upon the light. Gradations of light can be infinitely subtle, but ideas about the action of light are basically simple.
    Getting a good grasp of the fundamentals of the interaction of light and form is key. And it is best studied with simple still life setups. I suggest practicing such observational studies a lot from life before trying to conceptually construct it from imagination.
    Hope this helps some. Good luck

    www.tomvandewouwer.com

    "There is no such thing as 'accurate drawing'. There is beautiful
    drawing, and ugly, and nothing else." JAD Ingres, Ecrits sur l'art
    (1780-1865)"
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    289
    Thanks
    101
    Thanked 87 Times in 63 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I think the best way to train yourself to be able to understand tonal values to work without references, is to practice a lot with reference until it's second nature.

    Although work almost totally from my imagination, I recall an exercise set us at art college to do a monochrome painting of our bedroom under electric light conditions. We were encouraged to squint a lot to help understand the over all lighting patterns. It taught me a lot about tone and how it works.

    You asked about brown and pink and whether they can be as dark as each other. The answer in my books is yes, but not under the same lighting conditions, otherwise they would not read as brown and pink. Imagine a sphere painted in brown and pink stripes and lit from one side. If it were rendered in b/w the difference between the two colours' inherent value would still read until you get into the much darker, unlit area where our eyes would fail to make the distinction. If you carried out the same exercise with 'pure' red and green it would be a different story (colour blindness notwithstanding). They would be hard if not impossible to tell apart all the way round.

    __________________________________________________ __________

    Nick Harris illustration http://nickillus.com/ SKETCHBOOK GALLERY
    __________________________________________________ __________
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,531
    Thanks
    104
    Thanked 1,848 Times in 598 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    One mistake made by quite a few beginner artists (I made it too) is to think that colour value (brightness) depends solely on the amount of light falling on the object. Therefore they'll paint, say, a brown overcoat with deep shadows that progress uniformally to bright yellow or white where the light strikes, making it look like metal. Few objects will possess the full range of colour values and many objects, even when lit directly by a strong light source, will not display patches of intense brightness.

    Look at this guy (I'm posting a lot of Phil Hale today!) - the giant has a relatively small value range even though he's lit by the same light source as the girl. He absorbs light. That makes his skin appear dark and very dry. The girl's skin and clothes are naturally light-coloured, reflecting more light, so the value range markedly increases.


    (c) Phil Hale

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Baron Impossible For This Useful Post:


  8. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Near Brussels
    Posts
    1,290
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 154 Times in 100 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Baron Impossible View Post
    One mistake made by quite a few beginner artists (I made it too) is to think that colour value (brightness) depends solely on the amount of light falling on the object. Therefore they'll paint, say, a brown overcoat with deep shadows that progress uniformally to bright yellow or white where the light strikes, making it look like metal. Few objects will possess the full range of colour values and many objects, even when lit directly by a strong light source, will not display patches of intense brightness.

    Look at this guy (I'm posting a lot of Phil Hale today!) - the giant has a relatively small value range even though he's lit by the same light source as the girl. He absorbs light. That makes his skin appear dark and very dry. The girl's skin and clothes are naturally light-coloured, reflecting more light, so the value range markedly increases.
    What I have found often is that people tend to understate the intensity of the light on darker colored objects and don't go dark enough there where the form fall's into shadow on lighter colored objects.
    The image of Phil Hale, while a very fine illustration, imo does not show both figures under the same lighting condition. I suspect he exaggerated the intensity of light on the girl to contrast her glowingness/ innocence ,.. etc.. versus the darker, more threatening figure that is holding her for narrative support. To my eye it's an idealization of the effect of the light, not a correct representation as we find in Nature.

    www.tomvandewouwer.com

    "There is no such thing as 'accurate drawing'. There is beautiful
    drawing, and ugly, and nothing else." JAD Ingres, Ecrits sur l'art
    (1780-1865)"
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Art_Addict For This Useful Post:


  10. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,531
    Thanks
    104
    Thanked 1,848 Times in 598 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Art_Addict View Post
    What I have found often is that people tend to understate the intensity of the light on darker colored objects and don't go dark enough there where the form fall's into shadow on lighter colored objects.
    Yes and no. For close up objects I'd agree that the latter does happen a lot but I find it's the opposite for more distant objects in that beginner artists often go too dark in the shadows (and put in too much detail) therefore destroying the illusion of depth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Art_Addict View Post
    The image of Phil Hale, while a very fine illustration, imo does not show both figures under the same lighting condition. I suspect he exaggerated the intensity of light on the girl to contrast her glowingness/ innocence ,.. etc.. versus the darker, more threatening figure that is holding her for narrative support. To my eye it's an idealization of the effect of the light, not a correct representation as we find in Nature.
    Of course, I picked this because it's been exaggerated. However, my point is we don't look at the giant and think, Hmm, where's the shadow coming from? Because we don't see it as a shadow, we see it as a function of his dry, dark skin, in this case exaggerated for narrative also as you say.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  11. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    2,081
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 968 Times in 519 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Bear in mind, everything is relative in an image. The vast majority of the time, you just won't be able to capture the same value range that you see because all the artistic media we have available to us are much more limited than what we can observe. Your white is not as intense as looking at the sun. Your black is not as dark as the depths of a cave. Once you realize that, it frees you up some. You aren't trying to guess an objects true value, you are trying to describe the value relationship of all of the objects in the scene.

    As a general guideline, like most things in art, start by indicating the biggest areas of value. These large areas will be like guideposts, so try to get them to work well relative to each other. If, for example, your scene had 3 major elements, say the sky, the ground, and a tree, then block those in and try to get them to work well relative to each other. Now when you indicate the swing on the tree you have some guidelines on the value. Is it darker than the tree or lighter? By how much? How about relative to the ground or sky? Note, you aren't trying to make it the same value as the swing in front of you. You are trying to make it correct relative to the other elements in your image. If the swing is lighter than the tree, but darker than the sky, then that's what you are shooting for in your art.

    If you are looking for things to practice, I'd say start by working from photos or life, and try doing some studies, and begin by using a limited number of values. Only worry about the largest value changes. What you'll end up with is a somewhat abstract version of what you are looking at because all you'll be doing is trying to judge shapes and relative values. As you progress you can do studies with finer and finer value changes until you ar eusing your full value ranges.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  12. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Lakselv, Norway
    Posts
    2,119
    Thanks
    591
    Thanked 1,014 Times in 376 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The main thing is to understand the relativity of values. The darkest dark in a picture need not be black, and the brightest light need not be white. It all depends on on the overall scheme.

    Same with colors. What appears to be "blue" might have been laid down as a neutral grey in a field of orange.

    In the image below, squares A and B are the same value.



    It's all about the context.

    In the future, everyone will have 15 minutes of privacy.

    Portfolio
    Sketchblog
    Facebook art page
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to squidmonk3j For This Useful Post:

    sfa

  14. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 34 Times in 32 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by squidmonk3j View Post
    The main thing is to understand the relativity of values. The darkest dark in a picture need not be black, and the brightest light need not be white. It all depends on on the overall scheme.

    Same with colors. What appears to be "blue" might have been laid down as a neutral grey in a field of orange.

    In the image below, squares A and B are the same value.



    It's all about the context.
    wow thats really cool... i squinted and see that they are the same value..

    ok... so when u start off a drawing.. esp. from imagination do u just draw in the main value as if doing flats?? is that a good way to do things, like block in main big shapes with the overall tone of that shape...

    for example a snowman.. 3 stacks each a different color... do i just paint in say the main tones for each, then go in a refine? just like how ppl use flats with cellshading i guess..


    on a more important note.. would this be a great excerise to learn tones.. is using my HD movies.. just take a screen shot and paint the entire scene.. and then convert the movie screenshot to black and white to see what i did wrong and correct it.... ? i know some movies might not reflect real life but its pretty dam close

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  15. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 34 Times in 32 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by J Wilson View Post
    Bear in mind, everything is relative in an image. The vast majority of the time, you just won't be able to capture the same value range that you see because all the artistic media we have available to us are much more limited than what we can observe. Your white is not as intense as looking at the sun. Your black is not as dark as the depths of a cave. Once you realize that, it frees you up some. You aren't trying to guess an objects true value, you are trying to describe the value relationship of all of the objects in the scene.

    As a general guideline, like most things in art, start by indicating the biggest areas of value. These large areas will be like guideposts, so try to get them to work well relative to each other. If, for example, your scene had 3 major elements, say the sky, the ground, and a tree, then block those in and try to get them to work well relative to each other. Now when you indicate the swing on the tree you have some guidelines on the value. Is it darker than the tree or lighter? By how much? How about relative to the ground or sky? Note, you aren't trying to make it the same value as the swing in front of you. You are trying to make it correct relative to the other elements in your image. If the swing is lighter than the tree, but darker than the sky, then that's what you are shooting for in your art.

    If you are looking for things to practice, I'd say start by working from photos or life, and try doing some studies, and begin by using a limited number of values. Only worry about the largest value changes. What you'll end up with is a somewhat abstract version of what you are looking at because all you'll be doing is trying to judge shapes and relative values. As you progress you can do studies with finer and finer value changes until you ar eusing your full value ranges.
    thanks alot, u changed ur icon! didn't reconize u

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  16. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,008
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked 696 Times in 292 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Sounds like you need to read up on your color theory. I'd recommend looking into the Munsell Color System, which is probably the best available conception of color for artists:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munsell
    http://www.amazon.com/New-Munsell-St...5345953&sr=1-1

    Unfortunately Munsell is based on & most practical for physical paint and doesn't translate directly to monitors. People sometimes mistakenly think that HSB is pretty much the equivalent on the computer, which is only two-thirds correct- hue & saturation in HSB correspond fairly closely to hue & chroma in Munsell, but brightness has an important distinction from value: brightness represents the highest possible value for a given hue on a monitor, which is not necessarily the same as how the human eye interprets value. For example, given a blue-purple at 100% brightness & saturation and a yellow at 100% brightness & saturation, the blue will appear much darker than the yellow to the human eye despite the fact that both are at 100% brightness.

    To accurately measure/judge values on the computer, our best option is to use L from Lab, which more accurately corresponds to value as the human eye perceives it. So, if you want to measure the value of something on the computer, make sure you look at its L value from Lab- not it's brightness. This is how you could measure if a pink and brown are the same value.

    Another important consequence of this comes into play when you turn images to grayscale in Photoshop. The Desaturate command uses HSB and thus messes up the values from a human's standpoint. Using Mode->Grayscale is much more tonally accurate (I assume it's using Lab). So if you're going to try your frame-grabbing thing make sure you're not using Desaturate to knock the frames to grayscale.

    Also, as J Wilson said- make sure you understand dynamic compression. The problem with your frame-grab idea is that the dynamic compression has already been taken care of for you by the movie camera & post-processing. The same problem is inherent in color-picking from reference photos. While color-picking can be enormously helpful to learn a lot about value & color, it also means that the dynamic compression has already been handled for you. Under certain lighting conditions this isn't a big issue, but you need to be able to understand when & why. You need to understand what kind of compression is happening (or not) in a given image.

    Hope this helps.

    Tim

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  17. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to dose For This Useful Post:


  18. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,232
    Thanks
    679
    Thanked 861 Times in 364 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by riceface View Post
    can any color have the same exact value? for instance brown and pink... can pink ever get as dark as a browns value?
    Yes and no, for most colors i would say yes but yellow for instance when darkened with black (you can test in photoshop) looks more green than anything because somehow our eyes need yellow to be bright to look good.
    However, in certain contexts that dark greenish yellow will look like a normal yellow and this goes with the what Squidmonk said (btw you can find more color illusions here).

    Seven years ago Craig mullins posted this tutorial at gfxartist.com.
    Unless you knew it already it should help you because the emphasis is less on colour than values hierarchy. Its basic but not as much as it seems and i think most beginner digi artists could use going through those steps once.

    (crossposted with Dose)

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to SM For This Useful Post:


  20. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    LAAFA!!!!!!!!!
    Posts
    542
    Thanks
    1,169
    Thanked 164 Times in 127 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    http://www.huevaluechroma.com/
    Best color theory tutorial ever!

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Aaron Death For This Useful Post:


  22. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 34 Times in 32 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    wow thanks for the awesome links gents.....

    so is my idea about the screen shot thing a good idea for practice?

    and to dose:
    what the heck is dynamic compression??

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  23. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    2,081
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 968 Times in 519 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by riceface View Post
    what the heck is dynamic compression??
    It's what I was talking about above. When you are using a more limited set of values to describe what you are seeing (compressing the values you see into that smaller range you have to work with).

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  24. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,008
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked 696 Times in 292 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    What J Wilson said. I think "value compression" is probably a better term for us artists- should have used that before.

    I think your frame grab idea is OK, but just doing a bunch of practice without understanding what you're doing isn't going to get you that far. You have to understand a few things here:

    - How values change & progress as form turns
    - How that progression changes for forms of different values
    - How that progression changes for different materials
    - Value compression

    Your frame grab idea can help you with the first three, provided you understand what you're looking at and understand that it may have been fiddled with in post-production. It can't do much for the fourth. For that you need to paint from life, or practice painting with a limited value range- but life will be much better.

    I'd recommend the following:

    - paint from life
    - use the eyedropper tool to examine the progression of values on photos of forms. Try to use photos (or frame grabs) with simple lighting where it's obvious what direction the light is coming from. Make sure you're looking at the L value from Lab.
    - make yourself some swatches of grays in steps of 10 or 5 from 0-100 and then try painting a simple photo (or framegrab) using the swatches and estimating the values of what you're looking at. Use the eyedropper to test yourself.
    - check out this post with some breakdowns of values in different situations using "swatches" of real paint in 10 even value steps (often called a "value string" or a "string"). It corresponds roughly to painting with swatches in steps of 10 in L (you can multiply the numbers in the diagrams by ten to get an approximate L value):
    http://conceptart.org/forums/showpos...60&postcount=5
    - paint from life using swatches like in the post above.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to dose For This Useful Post:


  26. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Near Brussels
    Posts
    1,290
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 154 Times in 100 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Good post Dose. I very much second the need for understanding these principles rather then merely trying to copy them from observation.

    I would also add : - how value changes according to a form's proximity to the lightsource.

    Another thing to keep in mind is that photo's most often show washed out values in the light or in the shadow.

    www.tomvandewouwer.com

    "There is no such thing as 'accurate drawing'. There is beautiful
    drawing, and ugly, and nothing else." JAD Ingres, Ecrits sur l'art
    (1780-1865)"
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  27. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Art_Addict For This Useful Post:


  28. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Near Brussels
    Posts
    1,290
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 154 Times in 100 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Good post Dose. I very much second the need for understanding these principles rather then merely trying to copy them from observation.

    I would also add : - how value changes according to a form's proximity to the lightsource.

    Another thing to keep in mind is that photo's most often show washed out values in the light or in the shadow.

    www.tomvandewouwer.com

    "There is no such thing as 'accurate drawing'. There is beautiful
    drawing, and ugly, and nothing else." JAD Ingres, Ecrits sur l'art
    (1780-1865)"
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  29. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,008
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked 696 Times in 292 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Ah- good point Art Addict!

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  30. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    2,081
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 968 Times in 519 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Art_Addict View Post
    Another thing to keep in mind is that photo's most often show washed out values in the light or in the shadow.
    That is a good point. Cameras already do what we are talking about, compressing values into the range they can use. However cameras can't do it intelligently. If you take a light reading in the light areas, the camera will adjust to try to capture the most detail in the light areas, and the shadows will become very dark and lose detail. If you expose for the shadows, you'll gain detail there, but lose it in the light. A photographer has to decide which end of the spectrum they will shoot for (this is of course a simplified explanation, photographers have some good tools and skills to get what they want out of an image too). The value that is assigned to the bright day sky in one photo might be the same value assigned to a grey wall in another photo.

    An artist has the option to make judgement calls all along the process, and attempt to keep detail in both ends of the spectrum if they feel it is important to their image. The artist can also be very selective and simplify some areas so they can reserve those value ranges for other areas.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to J Wilson For This Useful Post:


  32. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,008
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked 696 Times in 292 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Interestingly, though- HDR photography can bring some of the decision making about value compression back into the hands of the photographer. Further, understanding HDR photography techniques can be pretty informative for a painter since they mimic a lot of the decision making that goes into making a painting.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  33. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    2,081
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 968 Times in 519 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    You know, I've seen some photos shot with High Dynamic Range technology, but I don't know a damn thing about how it works. Does it essentially shoot multiple photos at the same instant (bracketed up and down) and allow you to composite them how you like?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  34. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,008
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked 696 Times in 292 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    That's basically it, except that right now most cameras available to consumers can't shoot the multiple exposures at once- you need to shoot them separately, although some cameras have settings or can be programmed to do this automatically. So, most HDR photography requires a tripod. The general idea goes like this:

    - shoot multiple exposures with a regular digital camera (usually more exposures over a wider range is better)
    - Merge the exposures to an HDR format, which allows for a wider value range than can be displayed on a monitor, so you can't view all the values at once- you can only view a portion that will fit into the monitor's dynamic range.
    - Use a special app to map the HDR image to a new image with a range the monitor can display. There a bunch of ways to achieve the mapping. I've only tried one of these apps and it gave me the impression that it's still kinda technical to map the tones with some control. There were a bunch of presets which yielded nice results, but I wasn't sure what was happening. There lots of settings to mess with but I didn't have the time to really understand what they were doing.

    Last I heard there were a few digital camera chip manufacturers who had made prototypes of image sensors that had extra sensors for the lower light levels and could write directly to an HDR format. Not quite as powerful as many exposures blended by a human, but still presumably an improvement in a lot of situations. It's also my understanding that more and more movies are being shot in HDR.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  35. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 34 Times in 32 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by S.M View Post
    Yes and no, for most colors i would say yes but yellow for instance when darkened with black (you can test in photoshop) looks more green than anything because somehow our eyes need yellow to be bright to look good.
    However, in certain contexts that dark greenish yellow will look like a normal yellow and this goes with the what Squidmonk said (btw you can find more color illusions here).

    Seven years ago Craig mullins posted this tutorial at gfxartist.com.
    Unless you knew it already it should help you because the emphasis is less on colour than values hierarchy. Its basic but not as much as it seems and i think most beginner digi artists could use going through those steps once.

    (crossposted with Dose)
    hey i was right about something... u block in shapes with mid-tones! of that right tone of the color...

    thanks everyone im reading up everyting..

    that dam munsell book cost like 80 bucks! wtf

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  36. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    1,766
    Thanks
    178
    Thanked 275 Times in 172 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Not sure why you are needing help from others. Many many many artists have been self taught. All it requires is to draw and paint from life. Observe your surroundings and study it.

    Other than that look around this site, all your questions and more have already been answered in the best way they can for free.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  37. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Near Brussels
    Posts
    1,290
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 154 Times in 100 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by riceface View Post
    that dam munsell book cost like 80 bucks! wtf
    Actually, that's just the student version I think you're referring too. The full book is much more expensive. I think around 600-700 $.
    But the student version has a good amount of info in there.

    dose, have you seen HDR examples that actually come a lot closer to what we perceive? I mean, all of the examples I've seen so far still look either really weird in terms of chroma or value relationships. Either the chroma looks too intensified everywhere or the intensity of light is lost. Probably just because of the way it was tweaked by the photographer but it would be nice to see an example that actually tries to get closer to the way it's perceived by the eye/brain.

    www.tomvandewouwer.com

    "There is no such thing as 'accurate drawing'. There is beautiful
    drawing, and ugly, and nothing else." JAD Ingres, Ecrits sur l'art
    (1780-1865)"
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  38. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    2,447
    Thanks
    359
    Thanked 667 Times in 419 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rist View Post
    Not sure why you are needing help from others. Many many many artists have been self taught. All it requires is to draw and paint from life. Observe your surroundings and study it.

    Other than that look around this site, all your questions and more have already been answered in the best way they can for free.
    No artist is self taught. No one can make up all these important concepts by themself from thin air, these concepts are handed down through tradition. The Munsell system was only formulated in the last century. Drawing and painting from life is only part of it, it would be ineffective if it were not for tradition, and noone would practice it if it were not for that tradition. The people that progress without technical study are really only copying tricks from the artists they see who do have the theoretical background. Most of the good answers on this site are obscure, and a beginner doesn't know the right questions to ask.

    Sketchbook

    "Beliefs are rules for action"
    "Knowledge is proven in action."
    "It's use is it's meaning."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  39. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    604
    Thanks
    159
    Thanked 536 Times in 220 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Art_Addict View Post
    Actually, that's just the student version I think you're referring too. The full book is much more expensive. I think around 600-700 $.
    But the student version has a good amount of info in there.
    The Munsell Student Color Set is the one which riceface ought to be considering at this point, not the "Big Book".

    While $80 for the Student book is expensive, what it contains is:
    (i) a set of colour chips which will teach the way that colour-space is organised, and can be used to do the various exercises in the text of the book, together with some real-world painting exercises we could suggest (best done in oils or, at a push, acrylics) to get improved understanding of colour.
    (ii) a very thorough textbook on colour-theory, together with practical exercises using the set of chips.

    If you look around, it is possible to get the Student Book less expensively - sometimes its available at lower prices from 3rd-party dealers on Amazon, or on other bookselling sites, but I'd emphasise you ought to get it new, not used, because a valuable part of the educational experience is sorting and (reversibly) gluing in the colour chips for yourself.

    (The "Big Book" contains a full set of 1600 colour chips, and only a few pages of introductory text. It is, as Tom said, around $700. Its mainly intended for industry, but there's also interest in exploring its uses for accurate colour-control in the context of advanced oil painting).

    Dave

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •