The Art of the Shadow: How Painters Have Gotten It Wrong for Centuries - Slashdo...
source link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/23/02/27/1231223/the-art-of-the-shadow-how-painters-have-gotten-it-wrong-for-centuries
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
The Art of the Shadow: How Painters Have Gotten It Wrong for Centuries
Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!
binspamdupenotthebestofftopicslownewsdaystalestupid freshfunnyinsightfulinterestingmaybe offtopicflamebaittrollredundantoverrated insightfulinterestinginformativefunnyunderrated descriptive typodupeerror
Sign up for the Slashdot newsletter! or check out the new Slashdot job board to browse remote jobs or jobs in your area.
Painters have long struggled with the difficulties of depicting shadows, so much so that shadows -- after a brief, spectacular showcase in ancient Roman paintings and mosaics -- are almost absent from pictorial art up to the Renaissance and then are hardly present outside traditional Western art. Here, we embark on a journey that takes us through a number of extraordinary pictorial experiments -- some successful, some less so, but all interesting. We have singled out some broad categories of solutions to pictorial problems: depicted shadows having trouble negotiating obstacles in their path; shadow shapes and colors that stretch credibility; inconsistent illumination in the scene; and shadow character getting lost. We also find some taboos, that is, self-inflicted limitations on where or what to depict of a shadow. [...]
LibreOffice is a free and powerful open source office suite.
LibreOffice is a free and powerful office suite. Word processor, spreadsheet, presentations, diagrams, databases, formula editors, charts, and more. Compatible with Windows, Mac, and Linux.
Download Now
-
›
I deal with shadows using ray tracing or just using shadow maps with polygon occlusion if you don't have the GPU power. EZ thanks goodnight.-
It hasn't always been so easy, though. I remember one game I made with an engine which didn't support textured polygons where I was subdividing triangles in real time to render some of them with a darker colour.
-
oh gosh why did you use that renderer.
-
-
-
Shadows are an artifact of the type of lighting in a scene. Sharp, point source lighting is a relatively recent development. So sharp, well defined shadows are rare. Window light tends to be more diffuse, so that's what painters had to deal with. Take a look at some of Vermeer's work for examples.
-
I saw a documentary on Vermeer's work that I understood to be arguing that his method was practically a 'manually generated mechanical photograph'.
-
"Tim's Vermeer", by Penn Jillette.
It's only speculation though.
-
-
-
by nagora ( 177841 ) on Monday February 27, 2023 @03:59PM (#63328125)
The article mostly looks at paintings where the artist has "done enough" to suggest lighting without confusing the composition or placing figures into darkness. There are a few that *are* just mistakes (like the cherub and the steps), but mostly these are artistic choices exactly analogous to a photographer placing lights to "fill in" areas or emphasise certain things. Nobody* is writing articles about how photographers have been getting it wrong for centuries.
*Of course somebody is. Probably on a blog.
-
it's news for shadowy nerds, but it's still interesting. i haven't read the full text so i don't know if the author has some spin, i just skim read and recognized most of the issues from the images. it is a nerdy inventory of failures, but it also illustrates.... how to put this... an intergenerational learning process
in early times painting was purely figurative, where artists just produce pictorial representations of concepts they had in their mind in a way that was recognizable by peers, but not necess
-
Or now-a-days for people who think they are photographers because they can afford an expensive camera, but have no clue about lighting or anything else about optics that affects the photographic image, to use lighroom, darkroom, or capture one to lighten shadows. And often making the photos weird looking/obviously manipulated.
-
-
-- The artist didn't pay attention to what they were painting.
-- "Our Amps go up to 11!"- They did it that way because that's the way they wanted to do it.The only way to find out for sure - ask the artist. Unless they left detailed notes on the painting, any other thought as to why is they did it that way nothing better more than a guess.
-
I've been seeing this trend, and not just here, in tech circles for a while now that anything done by humans is wrong, broken, imperfect, and usually the message includes a strong hint that we should probably let machines take it over because humans are fallible and weak. This story feeds right into that. It's not artistic choices, it's "wrong."
I keep hoping I get a natural check-out before we completely give in to the urge to have the machines run the world for us, but it seems we're speeding right along t
-
Yes, there is definitely a worldwide effort to make people feel bad about themselves by telling them how "wrong" they or their ancestors are/were. Countless articles about different subjects, from mundane things in everyday life to very technical things. The main purpose of the writer is to promote an agenda. It's all about agendas today. It's not simply some asshole venting, it's calculated and repeated again and again full force. Companies and other organizations have found that this method is extremely e
-
-
I'm an amateur artist, I quite often fudge shadows and shading away from realism to emphasize or de-emphasize something. Knowing how and where to rig realty is a big part of skillful art and illustration. (I can't claim I always fudge properly, if there is such a thing.)
While it is true that early artists had less published training material, their critics did also. Artists often have to please both customers and art critics to further their career, and art critics are more likely to know the state of the art of shading, so there is a bit of cat-and-mouse chase over history as art knowledge grew.
Sometimes I'll make token shadows/shading so I can say "see, it's there" to any detail-oriented critic, but otherwise mostly fog it up out to make the customer or intent (message) happy at the expense of accuracy.
Movie directors often admit they fudge the laws of physics and lighting. When fudging cliches become too obvious or common over time after over-use, directors move on the next fad or gimmick. Entertainment and accuracy are often not friends. Shares much in common with politics.
-
This is true. I just wanted to add a lil to what you said about adding details at the expense of accuracy:
The main reason this happens is is you're converting a 4-dimensional space into a a 2-dimensional medium. When you do that you throw a lot of information out, so what is left has to complete the story. If you have a character in your piece, for example, and their shirt is the same color as the wall in the background, in person you might see them just fine but through a viewfinder (or paintbrush) you
-
I think it was PIcasso who said, "painting is a lie that tells the truth". What we see with our eyes is a dynamic scene, mitigated by our brain processing light, color, and form in real time and interpreting it in various ways. We like to think vision is real, but it's really just as much a processed image as any false-color infrared picture you get from a space telescope.
Your paintings are static, and then they're going to be re-processed by human eyes and brains, and lit in various ways in your house or
-
Recommend
About Joyk
Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK