Some insights and reverse engineering on the value structures them chinese wizards do that I found on facebook.
TL;DR It's all about comparison of values and their relationship to each other, rather than absolute values.
-shadows are lifted (A LOT)
-clarity is put all the way down
-darkest midtones are darkened, lighter midtones are lightened up.
-the black areas are filled with tiny value shift and large scale hue gradients (lighten mode in PS)
-hair is made entirely of soft edges, skin/hair transition is very very soft,
-light-on-dark value transition is slightly glowing, but sharp !
-emphasis on reddish skin area -nose cheeks, ears and lips
-reduced eye specularity
-WARMER
>>2285845
The reality we observe and experience can be restored into shapes of the different mental intensities on the plane. This point can be used as the ultimate basis for judgment when the reproduction of shape on the plane is conducted. There are two key words here, namely, are shape and mental intensity.
1. Shape can be either deep blocks on the light background or light blocks on the dark backgrounds. No matter what does it look like, it can be taken as a shape as long as the shape can be detected from the backgrounds. This is easy to understand and no more explanation is needed.
2. As to the mental intensity of shape, a good understanding of it can save you from a lot of sufferings. So please try to experience them with heart.
Here you need to notice that comparison is the most critical factor affecting the degrees of mental intensity.
An isolated shape may have absolute brightness values, but it can never be described as strong or weak. Once you describe it as strong or weak, it’s nothing but the outcome of your comparison of the shape with its surrounding. For example, a black shape can strike people with a strong mental intensity is simply because the background of the paper is usually white. If it appears on a grey paper, the mental intensity becomes weaker and even disappears if it shows on a black paper.
Thus, the concept of intensity actually includes at least two shapes so that it can be felt. In this respect, it doesn’t matter how deep the shape’s tone is. What matters is the gap between the colors of the shape and the background and how intense the shape is wrapped by the background. Therefore, the tone of the shape is determined by pairs. The background must be taken into consideration as the smallest unit of intensity is a pair. If this point is understood, we can further the following discussion.
Now you can find that every area of the world is combined by neighboring or interlocked shapes. If you compare the intensity of them one by one in pairs, the overall reality will be presented. Can you understand what I mean? The comparison between the weak and strong is most valuable. The absolute value of the tone equally matters as any decrease or increase of it also affects the color gamut. The package will be crushed, but the relationship may remain. Thus, those who are good at adjusting half tint can draw a very flat but perfectly formed package in a very narrow area. This also explains why the whole part is actual and real when you brighten or dim the picture as you are not tearing the package apart but simply crushing it. So when you feel the picture you are drawing is abrupt, it is certain that you strengthen a particular part of the package which leads to the cradle of it. What you should do is simply push it back.
Here is something more about shape and mental intensity.
1.Shape is the projection of structure on the plane. Thus, if you want to change the shape, the change of the structure is a must. So, please be cautious. In addition, the edge of the shape may be either clear or blurry. You can’t say here there is no shape if the edge is blurry just like you cannot deny that clouds have shapes. The shape is infinite and it can fade into lines and points gradually until it is difficult to observe.
Mental intensity is also influenced by the way you observe. For instance, if you
take a first glance at the deep inside of the drawer, the contrast between the shapes inside is definitely weak in respect of mental intensity. But if you stare at it, the contrast becomes distinct and the mental intensity turns strong accordingly. What should we do then? It is suggested to always take what you observe by narrowing eyes as the final. Observing with narrow eyes is brutal actually as the scattering of lights is eradicated with only the main lights left. In this way, the somatosensory and the overall sense obtained best reflects the relationship between the degrees of intensity in the full field. That is to say, if you ZOOM IN the deep of the drawer, you are cutting down the border and starting a new picture. It shouldn’t be done this way, right? Finally, mental intensity will present three grades of strong, medium and weak. The existence of differences between the degrees makes the existence of the area reasonable.
I hope these will be helpful.
And this Gurney Journey article.
http://gurneyjourney dot blogspot dot com.es/2008/04/windmill-principle.html
Really makes me want to study/replicate this and make sure a single subject will have that light against dark, dark against light, light on light and dark on dark (which have the softer edges).
Also the previous text talks about NOT reading too far into what you're looking at and keeping the dark areas simple, as when you stare at it you can distinguish differences better. But it's better to just keep it simple and "gestalt" like when you squint your eyes.
I don't know about you but I'm a huge offender of this and get way too caught up in the details.
So, it seems like you've come to understand stuff like certain lighting keys and how they actually work rather than taking it on what is said in a book. That's splendid to be honest. The shape intensity you are talking about is basically what shape/form design/modeling is about. I personally really like looking at industrial design and modern art for better insight and ideas.
The lighting thing you were talking about is called chiaroscuro. Used a lot by Carravagio, Rembrandt and pretty much every film noir. Really effective.
The soft edges you are talking about I think are likely lifted from masters of the same eras. Either that or influenced by people like John Singer Sargent.
Anyway, it's good to see people actually studying around here lol I recommend you always try and look around to see if there is already a term for what you are finding. It is likely to lead you to further information that is of use to you. I know that's how it works for me all the time.
>>2285845
Thanks, OP. I'm not sure I fully understand all of this, but I'm going to read it over a few more times, and see if I can apply this to my next study.
>>2285845
thx for the heads up, reading it now.
This is the kind of stuff you read and think 'whoa yeah awesome'
but then never quite manage to incorporate it into your own work. I know I don't.
>clarity is put all the way down
>darkest midtones are darkened, lighter midtones are lightened up.
>the black areas are filled with tiny value shift and large scale hue gradients (lighten mode in PS)
Could someone put this into simpler words for a dumb guy like me? I can wrap my head around everything else in the article except these three points.
>>2285845
I've always thought of Master painters making a set, like in a theater. It's not entirely about accuracy, but what looks good, what draws the eye, and what makes the image clear. They can change the lighting, the color, and move bits around to make one concise image. Accuracy was not as important as the design of the resulting image.
Thank you OP!
>>2286210
Less clarity means relying more on suggestion and letting the imagination do the work. Look at the background of the woman's painting. It's mostly suggested, without any super clarity except for a few specific spots (some of the grasses, the branch right next to the woman's hand)
You could also add it in her hair where the curls are loosely suggested and kept soft so they look the part instead of being super defined.
The midtones thing is a way of creating more contrast and helping differentiate areas. A lot of paintings I've seen have this "fuzzy" look to them, either because of a lack of contrast or paint quality.
Having a flat dark area attracts the eye in a negative way, especially if everything around it has tonal shifts except it. It can also be used to provide contrast/backdrop to another area.
I hope I explained this ok, and if any anons want to add on that'd be great.
>>2285853
Not trying to be a dick but can someone translate this into english?
What the hell is "mental intensity"?
>>2286225
it seems to me they're basically referring to tonal contrast
>>2285845
I think there is some danger in finding a set of rules or formulas like this. Sure, the artists may have made that particular set of choices...in that specific scenario for that specific painting. It would be dangerous to apply that to every painting, for you will lose out on lots of opportunity to express yourself or the scenario properly.
You would probably be better off just going on some walks outside and REALLY observing the light and colours and values around you. Doing plein air is a good idea too.
>>2285845
instead of giving worthless advice, why dont you fuck off and actually paint.
>>2286244
That's the whole point of doing master studies - to study their method and how they achieved a particular result.
>>2286257
True, but I think you just need to be very aware of that. There is danger in always using someone else's solutions. Or misunderstanding when to use those solutions. OP is presenting this as a way to paint, but I think it is more like one of many ways to paint one specific thing.
>>2286267
Well, it is only dangerous if you accept this advice as the only method to creating an illustration.
The more you explore different artist's methods as well as general observation and come up with your own solutions...you'll be fine.
>>2286200
that's probably because you still need to concentrate about more basics stuff. Once you have a good grasp on the basics, values and colour then this will get more useful.You can't do everything at once. One step at a time.
>>2286244
It's not an either or scenario. Do both. You can gain a lot from understanding how other painter decided to translate nature.
>>2285864
wtf I did a written report about that windmill painting by rembrandt in college, i walked into the national gallery and picked it out randomly. WEIRD
>>2286396
I have a very solid grasp of the fundamentals I think. I think I'd need to see someone tackle these principles live and talk me through it. I mean you can watch Ruanjia paint on youtube a million times and learn nothing from it. Me that is.
>>2286758
Yuck. Her spine is too long/broken. This isn't a Ruanjia though, is it? Just generally a boring composition.
>>2286400
This a thousand times. If you have to pick one or the other, observing directly from nature and making your own decisions is more important.
But there's soooo much information in nature. Master studies will teach you great ways to approach difficult problems that you can build on or do differently later.
For example, go to a park on an overcast day and try to capture an area of tall grass in pen without using surrounding landscape features. It's fucking insanely difficult to get that to read well, but it's already been done. After some master studies, you'll have an idea how it's been done before, so if that's not the subject of your image, you can just do what worked before and focus on what you want. If it is the subject of your image, you know a couple ways that it has been done and you choose to find your own way to approach it- thus even if your attempt is completely novel and different, it is duly informed by the masters.
Doing write-ups like OP's are a great exercise as long as they're not taken as hard-and-fast rules, but as one of many successful approaches to the problem of translating the infinite detail of a subject to an appealingly limited amount of information in medium.
TL DR is this worth reading or just some /ic/ meme shit?
>>2286883
Never read walls in /ic/. NEVER. You don't need ability to draw for writing walls
>>2286857
>This isn't a Ruanjia though, is it?
Nope. Just some random Chinese art I picked up from Facebook.
>>2287081
>not realizing that the soulless Chinaman is nothing more than a human fascimile of an ant
>>2286857
>Her spine is too long/broken
you haven't seen asians, have you?
