|
Speaking of jumping in late...! I started reading this thread before it really took off, and since my palette is by no means limited (nor do I have any immediate plans to limit it) I felt I had not much to say on the subject.
But I've been reading all this with interest, and it occurs to me that we've all whittled down our palettes to serve us well. Not that we don't ever change--I'm always interested in trying a new color--but only time will tell whether I continue using the new color, replace an old color with a new one, or stop using it and go back to the old color.
You were talking about high chroma colors. I was looking at the new newsletter from PSoA and the article on Jacob Collins. Though I admire the restrained colors in his work, I realize that his palette (or maybe his way of using the colors on his palette) would not work for me because I basically see color in a totally different way. And the way I see color is consistent across the board for portraits and landscapes. I do a lot of both genre, and my palette is a result of what works for both. High chroma colors work for me for two reasons.
One reason is that, when complementaries are mixed together, they make neutrals that can be as dark or as light as I need.
The other reason is that I try to find (and this is an ongoing process) colors that are the most versatile. For instance, thalo green is in some ways the most annoying color in existence. But it (and thalo blue) mixed with tons of white makes in my opinion the best light-filled sky color near the horizon, and also an excellent dark green (when mixed with the appropriate other colors) in nature, or in certain colors of clothing, etc.
So I'm thinking of "limited palette" also in terms of color efficiency. I'm sure with all our different ways of seeing, we are trying to find the most efficient palette for our needs.
|
Threaded Mode
