Primary Colors

[Peggy Baumgaertner]

I was in Brazil when this thread started, but to answer your original question, Dawn Whitelaw, an outstanding artist, uses a limited palette in her plein air and portrait work. Her colors are:

Utrecht Cadmium Yellow light
Winton #6
Cadmium Red Deep Hue (Napthal Red)
Ultramarine Blue
Titanium White.

You can see examples of her landscape limited palette paintings at:

http://www.brazierfineart.com/whitelaw.shtml

Her Best of Show prize winning portrait (also limited palette) from the Portrait Society of America Conference, 2001:

http://www.portraitsociety.org/2001winners/whitelaw.htm

Stunning work.

Peggy

[Karin Wells]

I am really intrigued by such a limited palette...and I agree that Dawn's work is really wonderful....

...but what sort of color is "Winton #6"

[Douglas Drenkow]

Ms. Whitelaw's wonderful work has a great clarity to it, a clean feel like that often rendered in watercolor -- something of a dreamy quality, where your imagination or recollections are stimulated by visual clues (like the power of scents).

Some might say that such "purity" works particularly well for "innocent" subjects, like nature or children. But it can also for the portraits of powerful adults, as in this limited palette...

http://www.nga.gov/cgi-bin/pinfo?Object=46245+0+none

I'll bet Ms. Whitelaw's #6 is a black (as in the boy's hair or the tree trunk in the landscape on her homepage).

I'd worry, of course, about the permanence of a napthol red (but not a cadmium).

Limited palettes usually work well on one side of each primary -- for her choice of colors, one would expect the cool side of yellow; the cool side of red; and the warm side of blue -- although you don't get the feeling of any "omissions" from her work. I think that's the play of the mental "cues" she gives you, as I mentioned -- your imagination or recollections fill in the rest (as I believe Karin put it, your mind seeks out balance in the colors of a composition) -- color is, as we've said, a psychological as well as a physical phenomenon.

Here are some other rather interesting palettes (take a look at the bottom of the page)...

http://gamblincolors.com/howtp.html

I've "fallen in love" with their transparent earth shades -- more like the Old Masters' earth pigments than modern siennas etc.

Incidentally, the original question I had was about the limited palette used by printers and photographers (who ultimately "hold all our works hostage") -- cyan, magenta, and yellow -- that's blue on the cool side, red on the cool side, and yellow on (I believe) the cool side. I don't know what all that means, but it's interesting all the same.

[Douglas Drenkow]

I realize better why Ms. Whitelaw's palette works so well, with a "dreamlike" quality (to my mind), and why it contrasts so much with the limited palette in that Picasso I referenced.

Ms. Whitelaw's limited palette plays against the inherent nature of the colors: She chooses a warm version of the cool primary (ultramarine blue), and the cool versions of the warm primaries (red and yellow). She thus keeps things "toned down", in a sense.

By contrast, the Picasso plays to the "strengths" if you will of the colors (not that Ms. Whitelaw's paintings are in any way "weak" -- they are more subtle): His reds and yellows are fiery, his black (once again used to represent the blue family) relatively cool.

Now back to sleep...

[Juan Martinez]

What a fascinating topic: perception of colour. I doubt that I could add any profound knowledge to what has been already said. But, should we not keep in mind that when Karin is speaking of "blue" she means (if I may put words into your mouth, Karin, sorry): when something is to appear blue? That is, when we painters talk about colour, do we not usually mean the effect of the pigment(s) we choose, within a specific visual context? The black and white mixture would not look very blue if it were set against the wrong colours surrounding it, or if it were at the wrong value for the surround, or perhaps, if it were made up of Mars black and white. Of course, a blue swimming pool or a bright blue summer sky is impossible to paint without a blue pigment. But, when juxtaposing colours within the context of a dark, earth tone surrounds, it is often overkill to use a blue pigment--it can look too blue and thereby steal the thunder from the main theme. In the case of Karin's portrait example, that main theme--the portrait's subject--might be overshadowed by the use of a blue pigment. Blues are often a high chroma and have to be greyed-down if they are to be subservient to the main themes of a painting.

In the old days (Renaissance, say) blue was the third most expensive pigment after gold and royal purple. (The only blue available at the time was made of lapis lazuli.) So patrons would usually only ask the artist to use it sparingly--such as in the Madonna's drapery only--and the rest of the time, the artist had to use artifice to achieve the visual effect of a blue. If a patron were to be ostentatious, he would break the bank on blue and gold, just to show how wealthy and powerful he is. Everyone looking at the picture would get the message, because everyone knew these were very, very costly colours. They understood the language of painting much better than the average person does today. But, that's a different topic.

Good painting to all.

Juan

[Mike McCarty]

Juan, your paintings are stunning.

http://www.juanmartinez.com

[Douglas Drenkow]

Stunning!

[Juan Martinez]

Dear Mike and Doug

You are now two of my favourite people. Thanks for the unlooked-for compliments. Such are always appreciated and inspiring.

It seems that when I posted my note earlier, I had not read through the entire thread. I didn't realize that it was four pages long! We have been through a lot of territory, too.

In general, I would agree with the use of a limited palette.

However, on the subject of primary colours, is there not a qualitative difference between different media? This has already been touched upon by the use of terms such as "additive" and "subractive" colours. The cyan-magenta-yellow-black "primary" system uses the white of the paper for its white. Oil painters use white paint. This probably makes for a big distinction as to what is "primary". Also, which specific hues should be considered as primary? Not all reds are created equal, nor yellows, nor blues, nor blacks, nor whites, nor anythings, right? In the end, there are no pigments, nor combinations of pigments, that can match the full range of colours as we are able to perceive them in nature. So, we must use artifice or, in other words; the painter's craft. (Hooray for artifice!)

Anyway, for those who are extra keen on using colour theory to help in their picture-making, I would recommend finding a copy of Denman Ross's books. Is anyone aware of them? I have "The Painter's Palette: A Theory of Tone Relations; An Instrument of Expression". I won't go into explaining it because it is hugely complicated, but ultimately, fascinating. I have yet to attempt a picture based on his very precise instructions, but it is on my "someday-to-do" list.

Juan

[Douglas Drenkow]

I believe you've seized the core issue, Juan: The difference between color in theory and color in application (the former offering us guidance for the latter).

Here is a wonderful site exploring both, from a painter's perspective...

http://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/color10.html

And don't miss the link on that page to the wonderful "Artist's Color Wheel" (although the site is written for watercolorists, the pigments used are the same as those in oils etc.)...

http://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/wheel.html

You'll note the author's contention that value is more important than hue (both, as well as chroma, are all necessary components of color), in which he refers to the grayscale of Denman Ross.

By the way, you can find one of Mr. Ross's books at...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...strokeofgenius

As for me, I must get back to my palette -- my masstones are confusing my glazetones (This color business is deeper than meets the eye)!

[Juan Martinez]

Dear Doug,

The difference between color in theory and color in application (the former offering us guidance for the latter).

Well put.

Also, thanks for the link to the fascinating "handprint" site. That is a well thought out and informative page. I guess that I've been using the Denman Ross value scale all along without knowing it, too. Once I read his book, I realised that it was the same, but he doesn't use numbers for the values in his book, just names. And there I was, thinking I was using a "European" system. (It's a similar situation to that purse I carry around with me sometimes: I keep insisting that it's European, and therefore not a purse, but . . .)

All the best.

Juan