Q:Painting the Background in Landscapes

[athena]

Hello!

There is a saying that to ask a question, you have to almost know the answer. Well in this instance, I am so far removed from the facts, I almost don't know where do begin the question.

Maybe it should be remedial Backgrounds 101. . . [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img] But I've been thinking about the sometimes forgotten background. . .

ok here's what I know.

1. backgrounds are important
2. and here lies the paradox. . . a background is important but a good background stays exactly there. . . in the background barely taking your attention away from what is the focus of you image (or story. . . since they also say an image is worth 1000 words)
3. I specified Landscapes in the topic because it occurs to me that a picture of objects in outer space have no visible horizon. ... and all we are left with are the lights the objects (like planets and moons and asteroids and spacecraft) reflecting the lights. and the size and placement of the lights or objects reflecting the lights
4. and the paradox continues. . . without the background, the image looks Uni-dimensional or flat
5. I imagine that in the days before Photoshop, a person painting a landscape image had to plan a bit more before picking up the paint and brush. . .
6. Do we still do that? Should we?
7. Is there ever a time when you would not use more muted colors in the background of a landscape?
8. for example when I've bothered to notice the colors of things in the distance, they always seem a very muted blue/purple/grey. . . is that just because I'm not looking at things at dawn or at dusk?

I'm sorry that this question is so unfocused. . . I think part of the problem is that I have 50 questions rolled into one.. . . but I can't tell which question should be first. . .I thought I'd toss this beginning of a question out and see if anyone else can sculpt this heap of questions and ideas into a more meaninful question or discussion.


Just bursting with curiosity [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Athena

[athena]

Hello!

There is a saying that to ask a question, you have to almost know the answer. Well in this instance, I am so far removed from the facts, I almost don't know where do begin the question.

Maybe it should be remedial Backgrounds 101. . . [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img] But I've been thinking about the sometimes forgotten background. . .

ok here's what I know.

1. backgrounds are important
2. and here lies the paradox. . . a background is important but a good background stays exactly there. . . in the background barely taking your attention away from what is the focus of you image (or story. . . since they also say an image is worth 1000 words)
3. I specified Landscapes in the topic because it occurs to me that a picture of objects in outer space have no visible horizon. ... and all we are left with are the lights the objects (like planets and moons and asteroids and spacecraft) reflecting the lights. and the size and placement of the lights or objects reflecting the lights
4. and the paradox continues. . . without the background, the image looks Uni-dimensional or flat
5. I imagine that in the days before Photoshop, a person painting a landscape image had to plan a bit more before picking up the paint and brush. . .
6. Do we still do that? Should we?
7. Is there ever a time when you would not use more muted colors in the background of a landscape?
8. for example when I've bothered to notice the colors of things in the distance, they always seem a very muted blue/purple/grey. . . is that just because I'm not looking at things at dawn or at dusk?

I'm sorry that this question is so unfocused. . . I think part of the problem is that I have 50 questions rolled into one.. . . but I can't tell which question should be first. . .I thought I'd toss this beginning of a question out and see if anyone else can sculpt this heap of questions and ideas into a more meaninful question or discussion.


Just bursting with curiosity [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Athena

[gmotto]

Hi Athena,
You sure know how to load a question.

1. and here lies the paradox. . . a background is important but a good background stays exactly there. . . in the background barely taking your attention away from what is the focus of you image (or story. . . since they also say an image is worth 1000 words)

The background is what puts your subject in context and draws attention to your subject. Should the backgroud be planned out? Yes, if you want continuity in you composition(Story)

2.for example when I've bothered to notice the colors of things in the distance, they always seem a very muted blue/purple/grey. . . is that just because I'm not looking at things at dawn or at dusk?

The muted or greyed out look is the effect of the other Perspective, Aerial Perspective. This is refracted light through the atmosphere, over distance. The colors go to grey and you see less detail. I generally use three layers (sometimes four) of distance, Background, Midle and foreground, the colors getting stronger as you move forward.

Attached is a rough example of Aerial Perspective.

[Jinny Brown]

Hi Athena,

I think you know a lot more than you think you do.. or are letting us know you do. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

Elements can be made to appear distant by fading and/or muting color, using particular colors, making the elements smaller than other elements, or placing them behind other elements... or a combination of all of these.

One simple example of use of color, I recall from a color and design class I took almost 30 years ago.. (egads, I'm old!). The example "rule" was to use blue to indicate distance and bright magenta to indicate a forward element.

Of course if your palette doesn't include those colors, other colors would need to be used.. and of course this is not the only way to create a sense of distance/depth in an image or design.

"5.I imagine that in the days before Photoshop, a person painting a landscape image had to plan a bit more before picking up the paint and brush. . .

6.Do we still do that? Should we?"

That depends on the person doing the image.. whether or not they plan. Photoshop, and/or any other digital graphics program, has not changed the need for planning. If some thought, even if not conscious, isn't used when creating an image, it would have to be that the image is already there... a copy.. a preset background, for instance, as in Bryce.. or whatever.. which, by itself, really is not a piece created by an artist.. only by someone who knows how to manipulate a software program and choose a preset. The art was done by the person who created the preset.. or original image that was copied. The minute we insert our own touch, the image becomes reflective of some, even limited, "thought".. or intuitive response. Though some lovely things can come out of random, spontaneous choices and actions taken by the artist, most art.. I believe.. is the result of some degree of planning.. and many choices and decisions made either prior to beginning the work or during the creation process.

Should we plan? That's up to the creator of the image. Personally, and generally, I think a little planning makes for a far more satisfying final product, to say nothing of it being very likely a more professional looking piece.

"7.Is there ever a time when you would not use more muted colors in the background of a landscape?"

Of course! If the sky is on fire.. it would hardly come across that way with only muted colors.. would it?

"8.for example when I've bothered to notice the colors of things in the distance, they always seem a very muted blue/purple/grey. . . is that just because I'm not looking at things at dawn or at dusk?"

That's because you're looking at them when they appear muted blue/purple/grey. Try looking at a setting sun or rising sun.. or even during the middle of the day when the sun is breaking through storm clouds, hitting the hillsides with shafts of light. Distant hills will still be more faded than nearby ones but some colors would/could be intense and even brilliant.

"I'm sorry that this question is so unfocused. . . I think part of the problem is that I have 50 questions rolled into one.. . . but I can't tell which question should be first. . .I thought I'd toss this beginning of a question out and see if anyone else can sculpt this heap of questions and ideas into a more meaninful question or discussion."

The best way to learn how things look.. is to look.. a lot.. and look at real things... not just other people's work.. which is only a personal representation of how that person either saw the subject or chose to interpret it. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

It'll be interesting to read what others have to say on this subject....

Jinny Brown
http://www.pixelalley.com
________________________

[ghi stecyk]

trying not to do a background is the tough part for me. i love white backgrounds but seldom do them. for the most part, in my work, the background is a complimentary arrangement of juxtapositional symbols composed with a short depth of field. in some way the image of the background aids in defining meaning. the context of the subject.
the fact that a background is present in art is not a hard one to answer- this is what we observe, and have observed for millenia in our visual field. thus with the prehistoric development of the homo sapien image creator the instinct to reiterate visual data would have included both subject and background as pictorial elements. yet evidence in art history may illustrate a more peculiar emergence of depth.
i've just finish watching a program called 'secrets of the stone age' which, in one part, profiled cave paintings rendered 20,000 years ago. what is interesting with these cave paintings is the absence of background imagry all together. instead the SUBJECT is the sole pictorial element - ie. a horse, bird, human, buffalo etc.. perhaps the stone wall on which they were painted is itself the contextual background helping to define the subject's meaning. i don't know.
perspective in general is not a prevalent feature in native art, past or present. the only way to understand these graphical establishments is to investigate the way the brain interprets visual data and then how it constructs the symbolic language to 'redescribe' it. amazingly humans, along with a multitude of other species, have these binocular photon receivers called eyes designed to capture data from two visual angles at once and process a 3d conscious/subconscious experience. but the art we create to show how we 'see' this experience is flat, 2d and subject concentric in large part. and it doesn't seem to matter to us! it didn't matter to ancient artists for thousands of years either. seems as though we possess a kind of perceptual 'environment filter' that isolates and highlights the specific subject being observed. something to think about.

athena, interesting question. i've begun to see things a bit differently... my art in particular. ˇ

[Velen]

Hi Im new here but this may help some to
visualize there needs in a background.
a starting scetch.

http://chatsalot.com/ZBrush/winterforestscetch1.jpg

adding some detail.
http://chatsalot.com/ZBrush/winterforestscetch3.jpg

more detail and so on

http://chatsalot.com/ZBrush/winterforestscetch5.jpg
Finished picture
http://chatsalot.com/ZBrush/winterforest_jpg.jpg

hope this helps
Vel

[This message was edited by Velen on March 17, 2001 at 10:22 PM.]

[Jinny Brown]

Velen,

Your painting is beautiful! [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Jinny Brown
http://www.pixelalley.com
________________________

[gmotto]

Hi Velen,
Welcome to the forum. I just wanted to tell you that I very much like your work.

Greg.

[athena]

I have to agree that is just beautiful. Thank you for taking the trouble to post.

And WELCOME!

[img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

Athena

[BR]

since I posted.... been, thankfully, real busy.

Athena...
Just wanted to add my 2 cents in here about backgrounds and distance/depth effects. The thicker/denser the air from humidity/moisture, the more the background fade out to a blur. These same moisture/water droplets in the air and in the clouds will tend to reflect/refract the colors of the surrounding environment, depending on the angle of light. I'm looking forward to those warm summer evenings here where I live in the woods, when the humidity is high, the suns going down, and the air literally turns green!

stecyk...
Great illustration! Love it! Love the busyness of the background... all those critters, swirls, etc., etc., To quote Frank Z... it really makes it. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif[/img]

Velen...
Welcome to the Painter forum!
Maybe it's just the old cynical art critic in me, and be sure to kick me hard if I'm out of line, but do I detect some reverse engineering going on here? [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

BR....