Edges

[Cynthia Daniel]

Chris,

Thank you so very much for the hard work you put into fulfilling my request for a post on edges. It was a subject that has been discussed only briefly here and there in the forum. It kept nagging at me that this very important subject had yet to be given the position it deserved.

[Chris Saper]

Because of the importance of edges in painting, and as the subject is woven thorough many other topics, Cynthia suggested a separate thread. I thought I would take a stab at starting out a general discussion, so please embellish.

Edges occur wherever shapes meet, whether between hair and background, ear and cheek, collar and throat. The painter's ability to manage edges effectively is, in my view, often a key element that differentiates the amateur from the accomplished painter.

Edges in a painting serve two important functions. First, they punctuate the path a viewer's eye takes as it scans your canvas. Sharp edges, along with elements like strong contrast, and saturated or discordant color, attract the viewer's eye like magnets.

Second, edges support your center of interest, the concept underlying the reason you picked up the brush to begin with. Used with purpose, edges of varying sharpness will force your viewer to see what you want him to see. Keeping your very sharpest edges near your focal point will reinforce it.

Edges can be either hard or soft, or lost, or found.

Hard edges are usually easy to find in places where light and shadow meet crisply, as in a strong cast shadow; where light and dark shapes meet, such as a white cuff against a dark sleeve; or where textures are smooth or metallic, to name a few.

Soft edges can be readily found where an object has a form (as opposed to a cast) shadow; where textures are fuzzy or uneven, like the silhouette or edges of hair, or folds in a fabric like mohair, as compared to pressed linen.

Edges become lost when adjacent shapes are similar in value, especially so when they are similar in both value and hue. They are found again when the value or color of one of the shapes changes.

When you paint from life it is far easier to see edges than when you paint from photos. From life, look at your center of interest, and close your eyes. You will be left with an impression of where the edges are most pronounced. Make judgements about the relative sharpness of other edges, as you are looking at your center of interest.

Find the edge which will be the sharpest in your painting, as well as the edge that is the softest, without becoming completely lost. Then you can compare every other edge you paint to the these two "bookends".

You cannot rely on photographs to help you with edges, because everything in focus will have an equally sharp edge. Paintings without edge differentiation very quickly bore viewers.

NOTE: Of all the discussions I have ever read on edges, none, in my opinion, is more thoughtful nor complete than Richard Schmid's text in "Alla Prima" (pages 91-110). I would also add that it is difficult to find better examples of masterful edge use than shown in his work. You can see his on line gallery at www.richardschmid.com.

As I find other examples, I will edit this post or add a new one.

Chris

[Chris Saper]

Here is an example of how different types of edges contirbute to the overall piece. I have picked out several ..

[Karin Wells]

You can also find something about edges here:
http://forum.portraitartist.com/show...=3522#post3522

[Karin Wells]

Here is is an illustration borrowed from Ingres to illustrate a "soft" edge"

If you were going to soften the following edges (even more and on a dry surface yet!) this is how you would do it...

Get the outside edge of the leg wet with thick paint (match exactly the color of the paint underneath).

Then get the background right next to the leg wet with thick paint (match exactly the color of the paint underneath).

Blend the two edges. In this case, vertical strokes would probably work the best.

It is even easier to get a soft edge when you paint a la prima, because everything is wet and blends easily.

This is a very important principle in painting: THERE ARE NO HARD EDGES IN NATURE!

[Karin Wells]

I paint from photographs too. But I think of them as only a "suggestion" of the reality that I am creating ("artistic license").

Lost and found edges don't always show up where you want them in photographs. You need to make them up when you have a logical opportunity to do so.

Utilizing a lost and found edge gives you a splendid compositional opportunity to integrate foreground, middle ground and/or background in a painting. Check out any of the Old Masters. They lost and found edges all the time.

[Karin Wells]

Here's a "quickie" example from a detail of a painting by Vermeer.

Note how the line of the models back in the foreground gets "lost" in the horizontal bar that is part of the background.

A lost edge is an illusion meant to fool the eye. Because the viewer knows where the line of her back is meant to be, it isn't really necessary to "see" the presence of that edge to understand what is happening.

"Found" edges are easy to spot. They look a little bit like "cut outs" that are pasted on (note the well defined "found" edge on the upper back that is above the "lost" one).

[Karin Wells]

There are lots and lots of "lost edges" in the example I posted...I only mentioned one of them.

Obvious: the book gets "lost" in the sleeve, the sleeve's back edge gets "lost" into the back of the dress.

Not so obvious: her curls and some areas of the leaf's edge (on the left).

Also, notice the way Vermeer connects his shadows into larger patterns that transcend form. They merge so well you cannot tell where one form ends and another begins.

"Edges" don't actually "get lost" in "real life", but the artist grabs the opportunity to make it happen in good painting.

I most especially love Vermeer. You can learn all you'll ever need to know about painting just from studying his work. His lessons are simple, clean and clear. He is a painter with both weight and substance.

Can you tell that Vermeer is my verrrrry favorite painter? Honestly, everything I know so far, I think that I learned from copying his work.

[Karin Wells]

More has been written about his methods than is known. But I disagree in that I feel he used an underpainting rather than a direct method.

In any event, it is the principles of painting that count, not the methods.

Vermeer's work can be copied and his lessons can be learned no matter which painting method is used.

[Peggy Baumgaertner]

Before you begin:

Everything I have read would indicate that Vermeer painted in the direct manner. In other words, he did not do a grisaille with glazing. He did a detailed drawing (cartoon), underpainted in tin yellow, and began immediately to paint the correct color and value. He would use some glazing in the final process as indicated, and would also do some impasto for emphasis. Titian, Velasquez, Hals, Rembrandt, as well as Sargent and the Bostonian painters also painted in the direct manner. I have seen the tendency to assume that the masters all painted in grisaille with glazing. Not necessarily. Then as now, the artist would pick the painting method that suited his/her temperament.

Peggy