Lost Edges

[Celeste McCall]

I really enjoy seeing portraits either painted or drawn. However, I often fail to see life like transitions of lost edges with near values...where they bleed together...all over the entire portrait. I see plenty of hard lines for instance all the way down the side of a face where NOWHERE is there a match of values of skin and hair or hair highlight value matching skin...losing the edge...softening the face.

A highlight that falls across a hat or hood would transport across hat, hair and face in near values. There would be no hard line separating them. Where the light hits it will make values very very similar. And "lines" disappear. Where shadows fall on the shadow side of a face the values of hair (even blonde hair) and face become one and there is no LINE to differentiate the two.

I am not criticizing anyone's art, just that I am very surprised to encounter all over the Internet websites that contain beautiful pictures though flawed by their ignoring the above issue. I certainly cannot paint as well as many of these wonderful artists but I suppose that it bothers me that they have not discovered this yet. Is it because they are mostly using photographs? Still, one would think that using light to connect and soften lines would be instinctive. Maybe no one ever showed them this before. I learned this from Julian Robles of Taos.

If you want examples then please e-mail me and I'll post some pictures to explain what I am talking about.

I think that mostly it doesn't bother me that they don't do this, it just is rather surprising to see professional artists that haven't discovered this or perhaps have chosen to ignore it.

What are your thoughts on this? Anyone?

[Cynthia Daniel]

This is an old thread, but not threadbare:

http://forum.portraitartist.com/show...ighlight=edges

[Renee Price]

Celeste,

I would like to see more emphasis on edges and think that the topic should be revisited on the Forum. Would you post your pictures and share your observations in the techniques area?

Renee Price

[John de la Vega]

Thank you, Celeste, for posting very relevant questions, ideas and suggestions on such an important topic. I just read your thread tonight and it moves me to an immediate reply.

As I say often to my students, edges are the soul of a painting, edges are where the music plays - or does not play. As you say, there are many otherwise well executed works where 'the language of the edges' is totally absent, mostly, as you suggest, due to a lack of awareness of its importance and of the technical issues involved.

You very correctly emphasize the importance light plays on the perception and execution of edges. I'd like to add at least a couple of dimensions, namely the form itself, and perceptual dynamics.

The form of course is described differently depending upon how light hits it, but in general, the more rounded the form, the softer the edge. The sharper the turn of the form, the sharper the edge. Of course as in other aspects of painting, visual dynamics choices can change and contextualize the previous 'rule of thumb'. Essentially, edges are affected in their sharpness by the angle of the 'line' or 'curve' of the changing form itself and also by the speed at which our eyes are 'moved' or, if you wish, 'want to' be moved along the form. This is a complex subject, and i go into it in some depth at my workshops, especially the advanced portrait and figure workshop (hope you don't mind the plug here).

Our perception and the way our eyes move across the surface of the painting to create and re-create the image is crucial in shaping many of our choices, from color/value to design connections to, yes, edges. Attempting a sweeping generalization we can say that the eye will move faster or slower depending how the edge is modulated, not only in softness or sharpness, lost-and-found-kind of thing, but also in the 'straightness' or 'wavering' of the edges themselves. Big help, right? Well, we have to use our visual judgment on this one, the individual instance very much dictating how the particular edge should be treated.

These concepts apply from large to small areas, from serious canvas real estate to a mere square inch, differently, of course, because our perceptual resolution varies depending upon size and other factors, external (room light) and internal to the painting, such as color intensity, contrast, etc.

It also helps to keep in mind that there are edges absolutely everywhere, not just along 'contours', separations of hair/flesh, figure/background, material to different material, etc. There are edges between brushstroke and brushstroke, value to value, dab of color to dab of color that seriously affect the quality of our act of perception, ergo the quality of the experience of the work, ergo, in my opinion, the very quality of the work itself.

We have only scratched the surface on this most fascinating of painting issues, I hope other contributions keep augmenting our understanding of this topic, the all-present, all-important edges.

Happy painting,
John

[Celeste McCall]

Hi and thank you both for posting. I really enjoyed the explaination by John. Thank you so very much.

Here is an example of what I am talking about. This is a photo of the famous silent star, Mary Pickford. As I said previously, photographs will flatten both light and shadows so we are always starting with a flawed perception when we paint from photographs without using our knowledge of what would "really" happen.

In this picture the area on the lower right hand side of her face (the part of her jaw and neck that is in shadow)is almost as dark as the background. Correct? If this were true and someone painted the background a flat dark value such as navy, then this shadow would be painted almost as dark as the very dark almost black background color. Now, when in real life when posing models have you ever seen that shadow area "really" look as dark as black? or red black? It would not happen. The light from the shoulder would reflect enough light back onto the neck with the color added of course and you would see contours. The shadow on the jaw in that area would be a smoother transition from light to dark also. As I said the photo flattens and delineates and tends to make them look both darker and less fuzzy than they would appear in real life.

[Celeste McCall]

Hi again,

Also in the example above, the background looks black...completely black. Yet it would be much better to use the blue black/green black/red black combinations in that area to have the value not completely flat and also keep it interesting.

Have you ever taken a black and white photo outside in the sunshine? I suspect that one might even be able to discern a room or curtain back behind the subject in this photo. And that might add even more dimension and depth to the painting as opposed to painting it in black or solid dark colors. Although I realize that dark is sometimes interpreted as infinity.

Also, notice how her light, perhaps a pale to medium value dress, let's say it's a medium blue, will transition to shadow and matches the black backround. This blue will be painted almost navy in this background to match what you see in the picture. However, in real life you would not only see the back of the dress in some of this flat looking shadow area, you would also see some folds of material and you would see different colors perhpaps.

Now let's apply an "if" and what some painters still paint it. Let's say this dress was white. Would there be a white back of the dress showing? Well, yes and no. No, there will not be any perfectly white with it's bright color modulations on this side. And yes, there will be grays and colors indicating the white dress but they will be painted in darker values. Of course you would see some lighter ones in real life than show in the photo. Yet, many times on the internet and in shows I will see this painted the same value of "white" as on the highlighted side of the dress. Or, just as commonly they will paint it flat and colorless just as they see it in the photo.

This is fine if they are simplifying or abstracting but it muddies the message if they combine abstract shapes in their otherwise realistic painting. It's as if they are afraid that the common viewer will not understand if the "white" dress is not "white" also in the shadows, so they paint it a crisp white in the shadows also. The same goes for direct distinct lines.

Example: The lines caused by the left hand lower part of her cheek and jaw would be executed by some as complete light against complete dark and the background would be darkest all along that line. However, in real life, and even with taking the photo out into sunlight, the darkest area is under the chin and the remainder is modulated. Also, the shadow on the left cheek near the tip of her nose would almost perhaps soften that edge by it's matching of value more closely than it appears in the photo. It is also my opinion that this stark edge would be painted a smidgen darker along the chiseled edge than the highlight on the the nose or mouth chin area just so that it could "bend" that part of the face back around. However, some might indicate this to be cookie cutter edge lightest value because the photo has flattened and darkened the background and increased the contrast there.

One final statement. Notice the hair where it touches the face. All along you will find both lost and found edges. Also, many of the found "dark shadow" areas extend all the way back in skips and jumps to the back ground. The light on the hair does the same. Yet many painters make a complete blonde "hat" all the way around the outside edge of the hair. Never losing some of the lines which would make it look more real.

I sure hope that this explaination helps clarify what I am talking about. I think that we just need to keep in mind that photographs are going to appear like photographs when we paint them if we don't use our imaginations and intuition and knowledge of what the photo would really look like and then paint it that way.

As a porcelain artist I am not really "allowed" to use this knowledge as most artists that I teach do not understand this and therefore I would soon be out of a job if I didn't paint in the traditional porcelain portrait method. But I incorporate this in my other porcelain and acrylics and oils and watercolor paintings.

Well, maybe I just answered my own question. Those artists that I have observed on the internet are probably doing the same thing. Perhaps they are painting what their clients understand?

Also, thanks Cynthia for posting the thread information. I enjoyed reading it.

[Mike McCarty]

I was thinking about edges yesterday and came across this portrait by Steve Childs, an SOG member.

It is very instructive for me to study this painting. I don't know if I will ever have the courage to produce this kind of work (which I admire very much) but, it influences my thoughts to know that a work can be so effective with almost no edges.

[John de la Vega]

I concur in your admiration of this work, an interesting 'sketch', but I'd like to point out that a painting 'with almost no edges' would be, well, almost invisible. You probably mean 'with almost no outlines, or contours' because here, as in all paintings we can see, there are edges everywhere. The semantic nitpicking is important, I feel, because we DO want to make a sharp distinction between edges and outlines or contours, which of course are edges in themselves. But, in my view, it's important to see edges in ANY CHANGE between something and something else, between 'stroke and stroke, dab of color and dab of color', etc.

The more we become aware of edges as transitions, changes, no matter how subtle, between the contiguous elements of a painting, the more we can treat them with the loving care they deserve, greatly affecting, as I say in my previous post, the quality of what we paint as we affect the quality of what we see.

[Steven Sweeney]

Anyone with an expertise in edges and a willingness to contribute the hugely-appreciated time to post some exemplars of both effective and ineffective execution of edges would be well advised (and greatly admired and feted) to contact our demo area Moderator, Karin Wells, who will be effusively grateful for any efforts you wish to make.

This is one of those areas where a picture is indeed worth a thousand words.