This is in response to Michelle's report of the lighting used in Tony Ryder's workshop.
Quote:
We're using standard household bulbs in fixtures on flexible necks. The lights are surrounded by cylindrical hoods made of aluminum foil, used to more narrowly focus the light. These lights are attached to the top of each easel to shine directly on each student's canvas. Another incandescent light is on an 8-foot stand shining on the model.
Tony feels that it is important to use the same type of light on the model as you use on the easel. The color studies look fine in daylight afterwards and the color on the skin looks as if it was painted in natural light.
This lighting approach allows him to work in any location at any time of the day with any type of weather going on outside. Those of us who have been relying on daylight (even north light) find it changes so much throughout the year and with the weather.
|
I question the validity of using incandescent bulbs due to the fact they reduce the sCount of colors that can be accurately seen by the eye. In natural light the eye perceives all colors.
Natural light has a Color Rendering Index (CRI) of 100. CRI refers to how well the light from the bulb reflects true colors. An incandescent bulb has a CRI of approximately 50. The lights I use in my studio have a CRI of 98. They are fluorescent tubes made by Lumichrome.
I totally agree with Mr. Ryder on the point that that the light source illuminating one's canvas should be equal to the one on the model. So I would caution anyone who was trying to emulate the work of Mr. Ryder from using those bulbs. A far better alternative would be to use bulbs made by Sunwave. These are compact fluorescent bulbs that can screw into any lamp and they have a CRI of 94, far better than thatof 50. The Sunwave bulbs generate far less heat and use much less electricity.