Category: Painting

“Painting with light”:

The main purpose of this Post is to explain what I mean by “Seurat’s new idea”. Most people would probably leap to the conclusion that I am referring to the “Pointillist method” that he developed, and for which he is justly renowned. But the method was never the main idea, which was to “paint with light” (as opposed to merely “painting light”). No previous artist had attempted to do this.

Artists that preceded the Impressionists, at least since the Italian Renaissance, had given priority to depicting effects of natural or artificial light on the appearance of objects and scenes in their paintings.  They made impressive progress with this project by conceiving matters in terms of whole-field lightness relations (chiaroscuro). Seurat’s new idea opened up the previously unexplored possibility of introducing the dimension of colour into the mix. In doing so, whether directly or indirectly, Seurat was responsible for opening the way for the exploration of new worlds of colour related experience.

Part of the reason for this was simply the huge increase in the number of colours that Seurat’s method brought to the notice of his contemporaries. Of particular interest for the Impressionist and for all artists coming after Seurat shared his method was that, from now on, chiaroscuro was no longer the only way of imbuing paintings with a sense of light. A main reason for this was that the same levels of nuance that had previously been obtained by means of lightness variations alone could now be achieved by compressing colour variations into much narrower ranges of lightnesses: By the 1960s, art school students were being taught that anyone aspiring to be a colourist should confine themselves to using equal lightness colours.

The idea of compressing lightness space played an important role in the remarkable explosion of colourfulness that is characteristic of innumerable paintings produced after Seurat exhibited “La Grande Jatte” in 1886. This revolutionary development been set on its way by the discovery by scientists in the late eighteenth and earlyy nineteenth century that colour is not a property of surfaces in the external world, but a creation of  eye/brain systems. In the wake of this mind blowing reality and the availability of an ever increasing range of pigment colours produced as spinoffs from the Industrial revolution, earlier Modernist artists were using brighter colours and juxtaposing complementary pairs before Seurat came on the scene. However, two requirements of the Pointillist method pushed matters significantly further. These were:

• The systematic use of  juxtaposed complementary colour pairs, within the optically mixed arrays of tiny dots that characterise Pointillism.
• The need to conceive of colour-mixing in terms of a colour circle with many more segments than the six segment one (consisting of three primaries and their three complementaries) favoured by the Impressionists. Seurat’s idea meant that he had to represent as many parts of the visible spectrum as possible. To do this he needed to make use of the widest range of the most fully saturated pigment colours available.

The ramifications of all this revolutionised painting, including the new understandings relating to the depiction of:

• “Illusory pictorial space”
• “Surface” and “surfacelessness”.

In summary, these innovations not only hugely increased the range and subtlety of colours, colour combinations and colour interactions that could be achieved in paintings, but also provided the possibility of enhancing all light-related qualities in them.

For more details click on the link below to Chapter 8 of my book “Painting with Light and Colour”. For those who have not read the previous four chapters, the next section provides a short resume of them (links to the chapters themselves can be found at the bottom of this page).

Short resume of previous chapters

• Chapter 4 : Describes the Renaissance approach to painting light, which centred on local and whole-field lightness relations with particular reference to finding the darkest and lightest regions in the scene (chiaroscuro) and gradations of lightness across surfaces. In this scheme of things the depiction of shadows was a matter of painting “what you see”, which seemed reasonable enough, but brought with it all sorts of unsuspected problems.
• Chapter 5 : Focuses on the scientific revolution in the understanding of light and colour that had its origins in the work of Isaac Newton and the insights of the numerous scientists who realised that all sensory experiences including those that relate to colour and effects of light are made in the head. Newton clarified the physical nature of light. The perceptual scientists introduced concepts like the“three primaries”, “induced colour”, “complementary colours” and “colour/lightness contrast effects”.
• Chapter 6 : Shows that the Impressionists had an agenda which included the idea of emphasising the reality of the picture surface and playing off  against one another the ephemeral and the permanent aspects of appearance.
• Chapter 7 : Uses photographs to elucidate the meaning of the words “opaque”, “translucent”, “glossy” and “matt”. Particular attention is given to effects on appearances of interreflections and viewing angles.

The diagrammatic origin of Seurat’s new idea

As it does not appear in Chapter 8, but earlier in the book, I am including in this Post the diagram from a physics book that kick started Seurat’s new idea. It was from this that he learnt that  the white daylight light that strikes a surface interacts with it in one of two ways:

• One part enters the surface and is scattered around inside, before being scattered back out again. While inside, some wavelengths are absorbed. The remainder are scattered-back-out again to produce the limited wavelength combinations that give us “body colour”.
• The remainder never enters the surface, but is reflected back directly from it (as from a mirror), such that it leaves it without changing its wavelength composition to produce “reflected light”.

The component that interested Seurat is the “reflected light”. By combining his understanding of this with the discoveries of perceptual scientists mentioned above, Seurat believed that he could represent it in paintings by means of mosaics of tiny dots containing juxtapositions of complementary, or near-complementary, pairs.

.

CHAPTER 8-SEURAT AND PAINTING WITH LIGHT

 .

The inspirational diagram

 

Posts relating to other chapters from “Painting with Light and Colour”:

• Introduction: the little known Science behind many of the original practical suggestions.
• Chapter 1 : The dogmas
• Chapter 2 : “doubts”.
• Chapter 3 : “The nature of painting”
• Chapter 4: Renaissance ideas
• Chapter 5 : New Science on offer
• Chapter 6 :  “Early Modernist Painters”
•  Chapter 7 : The Perception of surface.
• Chapter 8 – Seurat and painting with light
• Chapter 9 – Painting with light

Another Post that relate to painting reflected light:

• What are colourists (2): Difference between meaning of the word for Venetian Colourists and for Modernist Colourists?

List of all Posts so far

Got to top

Subtleties of reflected light

The purpose of this Post is to provide the link below to “The perception of surface”, Chapter 7 of my book “Painting with Light and Colour”. This provides illustrations and explanations of ways we perceive: (a) reflected light as opposed to transmitted light, (b) matt surfaces as opposed to glossy ones, and (c) the complexities of interreflections. Apart from their intrinsic interest, the function of these in the book is to prepare the ground for the next chapters, which explain how Georges Seurat’s ideas about “painting with light”, either directly or, more often, indirectly, were to revolutionise the use of colour in paintings in a multiplicity of ways. Thus, the next Post will provide a link to Chapter 8, which, after introducing Seurat’s ideas and methods, starts the process of going more deeply into their game-changing ramifications. What follows below gives a foretaste of the nature of these.

Game-changing ramifications

Not nearly enough importance is given to the impact of Georges Seurat’s ideas concerning the depiction of reflected light. Their significance lies in the fact that, either directly or indirectly, they were to have a transformative, game-changing influence on the way later artists:

• Painted reflected light.
• Approached the depiction of illusory pictorial space.
• Explored whole-field colour relations.
• Ramped up the colourfulness of their paintings.

Too often in the past the focus has been on Pointillism as a method, treating it as a fascinating, but not so very important phase in art history. In contrast, in my book, I show that the ideas behind Seurat’s innovations, as developed and transformed by his successors, were to open up possibilities of permanent value for anyone who makes paintings of virtually any kind. With hindsight we can see that Seurat’s ideas:

• Furnished one of the two pillars that underpin the transformative use of colour found in the work of numbers of progressive artists, including Gauguin and Bonnard. As we shall see in later chapters, when we come to the subject of whole-field colour relations, the artist primarily responsible for the other pillar was Cézanne. It was these two sets of ideas that were to be synthesised in the dogmas of Marian Bohusz-Szyszko.
• Opened the way to scientific experiments that supplied coherent insights into the working principles of the eye/brain systems that enable the perception of surface-solidity, surface-form, in front/behind relations and the qualities of light (reflected light and ambient illumination). Since it is the operation of these that make possible the only way  that artists can use colour/lightness relationships to deceive viewers into interpreting the content of paintings as existing in illusory pictorial space, it is hard to exaggerate the practical value for painters wishing to represent any of the above mentioned qualities in their work.

To prepare for grappling with all this, it is helpful to be clear about the role that the light reflected from surfaces has in creating our sense of their solidity and our perception of both their form and their interconnectedness.

 

CHAPTER 7-THE PERCEPTION OF SURFACE

 

Three images by artists whose work and ideas contributed to the synthesis of Professor Bohusz-Szyszko

The two practical dogmas taught by the Professor are:

• No repeated colour.
• All colour must be mixtures containing a proportion, however small,  of complementaries.

 

 

 

 

——————————————————————————————

 

Posts relating to other chapters from “Painting with Light and Colour”:

• Introduction: the little known Science behind many of the original practical suggestions.
• Chapter 1 : The dogmas
• Chapter 2 : “doubts”.
• Chapter 3 : “The nature of painting”
• Chapter 4: Renaissance ideas
• Chapter 5 : New Science on offer
• Chapter 6 :  “Early Modernist Painters”
• Chapter 7 : Perception of surface.

Another Post that relate to painting reflected light:

• What are colourists (2): Difference between meaning of the word for Venetian Colourists and for Modernist Colourists?

List of all Posts so far

Got to top

 

Introducing Chapter 2

Chapter 1 of my book “Painting with Light and Colour” told of the dogmas of Professor Bohusz-Szyszko and his claim that they were “all you need to know about painting”. It also praised their value as a practical guide.

Chapter 2 is about doubts that arose concerning their theoretical basis. It was the experience of living with these that prepared me for a critical moment in my life. This came several years later while I was reading an article in the Scientific American that had been brought to my attention by one of my colleagues in the Psychology Department at the University of Stirling. The purpose of the article was to present what the author, Edwin Land, fervently believed to be a mould-breaking understanding of the neural computations used by the eye/brain to produce the phenomenon of “colour constancy”. Actually Gaspard Monge, a French mathematician, had beaten him to the post by nearly two hundred years. But this did not stop the contents of Land’s article from being the catalyst to the evaporation of my worries. More importantly, my efforts to better understand the significance of Land’s ideas were eventually to open the way for cooperations with colleagues in the The University of Stirling Vision Group (see link below*). Without their help, few of the new insights relating to the use of colour in paintings that can be found in my book would have materialised.

But this is jumping the gun. First click on the link below to access the chapter on the doubts that had haunted me and on the process of questioning they set in motion. Its function is to explain why there is a need for the new ways of thinking and doing that play such an important part in the chapters that follow.

 

CHAPTER 2 : “DOUBTS”

 

____________________

* Above and in many places in my books, I acknowledge the importance of the role of colleagues in the development of the new science-based ideas put forward in them. As well as acknowledging the help of various individual scientists at the University of Stirling,  I call attention to the role played by the University of Stirling Vision Group. For more on this please click here to access the Post I have written on its personnel and its activities.

______________________________

Posts relating to other chapters from “Painting with Light and Colour”:

• Introduction : the little known Science behind many of the original practical suggestions.
• Chapter 1 : “The dogmas”
• Chapter 2 : “Doubts”
• Chapter 3 – “The nature of painting”
• Chapter 4 : Renaissance ideas
• Chapter 6:  “Early Modernist Painters”

Other Posts on light and colour in painting:

• What are colourists (1): Some of the many meanings of the word?
• What are colourists (2): Difference between meaning of the word for Venetian Colourists and for Modernist Colourists?

List of all Posts so far 

Got to top

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction to Chapter 4

It is well known that the Impressionists and their immediate successors (often referred to in my books as the Early Modernists) reacted strongly against what they saw as the straitjacket of the traditional ideas taught in the academies. The purpose of this Post is to publish Chapter 4 of “Painting with Light and Colour”, which provides a short introduction to what these actually were, with comments on the pros and cons of following them uncritically. Normally, I have been writing a separate introduction for my Posts but on this occasion I have used the Introductory from the chapter itself. Accordingly, when you open the link to the chapter below, you may want avoid reading the same thing twice.

Traditional ideas and their limitations

This chapter has four main purposes. These are to:

• Introduce some traditional ideas about the depiction of space and light.
• Discuss their limitations.
• Suggest that these are more comprehensive and satisfactory alternatives.
• Prepare the way for a better understanding of the significance of Seurat’s science and his colour based innovations.

The first of objectives is met by elaborating on three aspects of painting which, after being explored in some depth by the Renaissance artists, became embedded in the academic tradition. Although satisfactorily serving their purpose for the artists who followed them, it was these that were found wanting by the Impressionists. More importantly in the present context, it was also these that were given a new dimension by Seurat and those who built upon his ideas. The three aspects were detailed in the last chapter:

• Effects of the atmosphere on the appearance of distant hills (Aerial perspective (Leonardo da Vinci, Claude of Lorraine, Turner, etc.).
• Whole-field lightness relations (chiaroscuro) as a means of introducing a sense of the quality of light in the space that is being depicted (Leonardo da Vinci, Titian, Vermeer, Rembrandt, etc.).
• Shading, shadows, and highlights, used as a means of achieving of realism in paintings (Piero della Francesca, Caravaggio, Velasquez, etc.).

Significantly, as we shall see, it is only with respect to the first item on the list (atmosphere) that colour of any sort was seen as having a role to play. Even then only blue was required.

In contrast, the academic rules guiding the depiction of the quality of light and shading provided no function to colour. The practice of the Renaissance artists and the teaching of the Academies placed the emphasis exclusively on variations in “lightness” (what the English call “tone” and the Americans term “value”).

 

CHAPTER 4 : “RENAISSANCE IDEAS”

 ________________

3 images illustrating traditional ideas of aerial perspective

 

 

_________________________________

Posts relating to other chapters from “Painting with Light and Colour”:

• Introduction: the little known Science behind many of the original practical suggestions.
• Chapter 1 : The dogmas
• Chapter 2 : “doubts”.
• Chapter 3 : “The nature of painting”
• Chapter 4 : Renaissance ideas
• Chapter 5 : New Science on offer
• Chapter 6 :  “Early Modernist Painters”

Other Posts on light and colour in painting:

• What are colourists (1): Some of the many meanings of the word?
• What are colourists (2): Difference between meaning of the word for Venetian Colourists and for Modernist Colourists?

List of all Posts so far 

Got to top

Introduction

The science referred to in the title of this post had a lot to do with the revolution in the understanding that gave birth to what we now know as the science of “visual perception“. The first intimations that an important change was afoot came in the later part of the seventeenth century with Isaac Newton’s work on the composition of light. However, the paradigm shift came in the late eighteenth century when the work of Gaspard Monge and others made it clear that colour is not a property of surfaces but is made in the head. This completely new understanding of the nature of visual perception was to be fleshed out in the next century by a flood of confirmatory studies. A milestone was the publication by Herman van Helmholtz of a three-volume review of the new domain of study. It was a magisterial achievement that showed why, despite his considerable debt to others, he has been described as the “Father of the Psychology of Perception“. The third and last of these volumes was published in 1867, just in time to have a profound influence, first on the young Impressionists and, then, in the remainder of the nineteenth and in the early twentieth centuries, on many of their Modernist Painter successors.

The new science misrepresented

One of the purposes of “Painting with Light and Colour”, my book on the theory and practice painting, is to provide a better account of the hugely important role of the new sciences of vision and visual perception in the history of painting. In this post I am publishing Chapter 5, which continues the process of setting the scene started in the Introduction to the science at the beginning of the book. It does so by revisiting and shedding new light on important aspects of colour theory. It has four objectives:

• To question the widespread dissemination of half-truths and falsehoods in how-to-do-it books and articles on painting.
• To sort out misconceptions about colour theory that I have found to be common amongst my students.
• To show how well-known concepts are given new significance when considered in the context of the realisation that colour is not a property of surfaces but is made in the head.
• To introduce other more recent ideas that will play a key role in the chapters that follow. These are likely to be unfamiliar to most people, as they are the fruit of little known, late twentieth century experimental clarifications, which enable sense to be made of formerly unsolved mysteries.

CHAPTER 5 – “NEW SCIENCE ON OFFER”

 

 

Posts relating to other chapters from “Painting with Light and Colour”:

• Introduction: the little known Science behind many of the original practical suggestions.
• Chapter 1 : The dogmas
• Chapter 2 : “doubts”.
• Chapter 3 : “The nature of painting”
• Chapter 4: Renaissance ideas
• Chapter 5 : New Science on offer
• Chapter 6 :  “Early Modernist Painters”

Other Posts on light and colour in painting:

• What are colourists (1): Some of the many meanings of the word?
• What are colourists (2): Difference between meaning of the word for Venetian Colourists and for Modernist Colourists?

List of all Posts so far 

Got to top

 

 

 

 

What science can now tell us

This “Post” makes available the introduction to my book “Painting with Light and Colour” (please find link blow). As is the case with all introductions, it comes at the beginning of the book. However, I have delayed publishing it on this “Posts  Page”, until after making available many of the chapters it introduces, as well as some additional material. As a result, when writing this “Posts Page” introduction to the actual book, it has been possible to to refer to what comes after it. As I can see that doing so may have many advantages for those who have read the previously published chapters and material and maybe even for new readers, I have not hesitated to do so.

Two earlier Posts draw attention to the historical importance of Seurat’s science-based ideas on the practice of painting light and colour. In the “Venetian Colourists” , it is argued that the artists known by this label and those who built upon their ideas were not “colourists” at all. Rather they were “lightists”, whose reputation as “colourists” was based on their mastery of whole-field lightness/darkness relations (“chiaroscuro“). Colour did not enter into the theory of painting light until Seurat introduced his idea of using optically-mixed arrays of separate dots of complementary pigment-colours to give a new kind of luminosity to his paintings. This step proved to be the precursor of a transformative jump from “lightists” to “colourists”.

The next steps, which were were taken by such artists as Cézanne, Gauguin and Bonnard, were later to inspire the synthesis of my teacher Marian Bohusz-Szyszko. It is these that provide the main subject matter of the first two chapters of  my book “Painting with Light and Colour”. Chapter 1, “the Dogmas” , along with my Posts Page introduction to  it, can be obtained by clicking on this link. In it I explain how, in addition to having an abiding influence on both my own painting and my teaching, the synthesis was to:

• Provide the questions that led to my scientific research into the perception of surface, space, light and harmony in paintings (see link below).
• Pique my curiosity about its origins in ways that led to my interest in the history of the influence of  science on the ideas and work of the Impressionists and their Early Modernist successors.
• Lead to the gamut of practical insights on the use of colour in painting that distinguish my books from others on the same subjects.

An introduction to key ideas

To help readers to navigate the considerable quantity of unfamiliar science-based ideas contained in my book “Painting with Light and Colour”, I decided to preface its main content with an “Introduction to the science”, which can be obtained by clicking below.

.

INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW SCIENCE – IN “PAINTING WITH LIGHT AND COLOUR”

.

 Posts relating to chapters from “Painting with Light and Colour”:

• Introduction: the little known Science behind the many innovative practical suggestions.
• Chapter 1 : The dogmas
• Chapter 2 : Doubts
• Chapter 3 : The nature of painting
• Chapter 4: Renaissance ideas
• Chapter 5 : New Science on offer
• Chapter 6 :  Early Modernist Painters
• Chapter 7 : The perception of surface
• Chapter 8 : Seurat and Painting with Light
• Chapter 9 : Seeing Light
• Chapter 10 : Illusory pictorial space and light
• Chapter 11 : Colour mixing – definitions and misconceptions
• Chapter 12: The colour circle: Misunderstandings
• Chapter 13 : Finding a maximum of colours
• Chapter 14 – Colour mixing made easy
• Chapter 15 – Colour mixing by layering

Other Posts on colour and light in painting:

• What are colourists? (1): Some of the many meanings of the word
• What are colourists? (2): Difference between meaning of the word for Venetian Colourists and for Modernist Colourists?
• What does the word “colour” mean?

Other Posts on light and colour in painting:

• What are colourists (1): Some of the many meanings of the word?
• What are colourists (2): Difference between meaning of the word for Venetian Colourists and for Modernist Colourists?

List of all Posts so far

Go to the top of the page

The purpose of this Post is to make available “the nature of painting, “Chapter 3” of my book “Painting with Light and Colour”. It provides a quick run through some basic factors, which are so evident that some of their practical implications are too often overlooked. These are presented under four headings:

• Real surface/illusory pictorial space ambiguities.
• Whole-field colour/lightness interactions.
• What paintings can do that nature cannot.
• The human element.

All the chapters in my books have an “Introduction”. Below is the Introduction to Chapter 3. You can choose to read it now or when you click on the link to Chapter 3 that follows it.

Introduction

It is difficult to imagine a more useful first guide to painting than the dogmas of Professor Marian Bohusz-Szyszko. However, they have their limits. Fortunately, as I believe the remainder of this book will make clear, it is both possible and worthwhile to go much more deeply into the reasons for both their strengths and their limitations. One approach to doing this is to trace the roots of the Professor’s assertions by reference to the work and ideas of his artist predecessors. Another, is to focus on the history of science and how it illuminated the subject of picture perception. Whichever our choice, it is inevitable that there will be much overlapping. The reason is that, in the nineteenth century, a particularly high proportion of the ideas influencing the community of progressive artists were rooted in the new ways of thinking about the world we live in that were emerging from science.

To prepare the way for the combination of theory and practice which provides the subject matter of the remainder of this book, this chapter offers a first introduction to basic factors that are necessarily in play when selections of artists’ pigments, mixed with various mediums are arranged on a circumscribed, flat picture-surface in such a way as to excite the feelings of people. The main reason for starting with these fundamentals is because:

• Taking them into consideration can help artists to achieve a surprising number of widely sought after goals.
• They provide reference points and context for so much of what follows.
• Their importance is too often overlooked by practicing artists.

The basic factors in question will be presented under the headings,“real surface/illusory pictorial space ambiguities”, “whole-field colour/lightness interactions”, “what paintings can do that nature cannot” and “the human element”.

CHAPTER 3 – “THE NATURE OF PAINTING”

A selection of student work in which all  four of the basic factors listed above have been considered

Notice the range of:

• Subject matter, on the continuum between abstract and figurative.
• Depth of illusory pictorial space.
• Mark-making.
• Local and whole-field colour relationships.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For more Images of student work go to the main website and click on “student work“

 

_____________________________________

 

Posts relating to other chapters from “Painting with Light and Colour”:

• Inroduction: the little known Science behind many of the original practical suggestions.
• Chapter 1 : The dogmas
• Chapter 2 : “doubts”.
• Chapter 3 : “The nature of painting”
• Chapter 4: Renaissance ideas
• Chapter 5 : New Science on offer
• Chapter 6 :  “Early Modernist Painters”

Other Posts on light and colour in painting:

• What are colourists (1): Some of the many meanings of the word?
• What are colourists (2): Difference between meaning of the word for Venetian Colourists and for Modernist Colourists?

List of all Posts so far 

Got to top

 

Defining “Early Modernists”

In later posts, the subject of “Modernism” is discussed with special reference to its place in the history of painting. One conclusion that emerges is that “Modernism in Painting” has a very different history to other “Modernisms”. For example, despite all they have in common, it is significantly different from either Modernism in Literature or Modernism in Architecture. For this reason, in my books, where others might write “Early Modernists”, I use “Early Modernist Painters”.

Early Modernist Painters

The purpose of this Post is to share with you Chapter 6  of my book “Painting with Light and Colour”. In it I outline the social, economic, scientific and artistic context from which the Early Modernist Painters emerged. I also give plenty of reasons why Modernism in Painting is different from Modernism in other disciplines. To access what I have written about all this and more, please click on the link below.

 

CHAPTER 6 – “EARLY MODERNIST PAINTERS”

 

Some examples of Early Modernist paintings

To give some visual context to what I have written, please scroll down to the nine images below of the work of some key Early Modernist Painters. Notice that these include:

• Eduard Manet, Berthe Morisot, Claude Monet and Paul Cézanne from the first generation, all of whom knew each other well from meetings in the home of Berthe Morisot and/or the Café Guerbois where they were joined by Auguste Renoir, Edgar Degas, Henri Fantin-Latour and Alphonse Legros (both students of the influential teacher Horace Lecoq Boisbaudran).
• Emile Bernard, Van Gogh and Toulouse-Lautrec who, in 1886, met in the studio of Fernand Cormon and remained lifelong friends. Not long afterwards, they were joined by John Peter Russel the Australian artist. A big part of his importance to them and others was that, via the teaching of Alphonse Legros, he provided a link with Horace Lecoq Boisbaudran and his ideas on painting from memory.
• Paul Gauguin who, with Emile Bernard, was co-founder of the the Pont-Aven School.  Gauguin also had links with Pissaro, Cézanne and Van Gogh, with whom he spent time in Arles.

Something to keep in mind when you scroll down to the images

We all know that reproductions of paintings whether in books or on websites are very different from the originals when we see them in galleries. However, what is less widely appreciated is the degree of difference between the paintings as they are now and the same paintings when first exhibited.  Thus, among the Early Modernists, Van Gogh used fugitive reds when mixing purples, with the result that the many purples he made by mixing reds with blues now appear as blues.

But the paintings that suffer the most are those of Seurat. The main reason for this is his extensive use of chemically unstable zinc yellows that have since turned brown. Because Seurat’s theory meant that most of the colours he used had to be, at least in part, mixtures between adjacent colours on the colour circle, these yellows occur in virtually all the greens, yellows and oranges in many of his paintings. The result has been catastrophic changes in appearances.

No wonder it is often difficult to fully connect what we see in some of Seurat’s pointillist paintings (for example, the one found below) with the contemporary descriptions of the excitements produced by the Pointillist method, such as those we find in the writings of Felix Fénéon, the admiring contemporary critic. For example, he writes:

• “A pigment-based hue is weak and drab compared to a hue born of optical mixture: the latter, mysteriously vivified by a perpetual process of recombination, shimmers, elastic, opulent, lustrous” .
• “The multicoloured specks melt into undulant, luminous masses”.
• “The technique vanishes and the eye is no longer attracted by anything but that which is essentially painting” (incidentally, one of the first descriptions of paintings described in purely abstract terms).
  

While acknowledging the many admirable qualities of Seurat’s paintings as they appear to us today, these comments would now seem a bit over the top.

For more on Seurat’s mould-breaking ideas, see my POST on the Venetian Colourists  and in future Posts.

The nine images by Early Modernists

An early Modernist painting by Manet, whom many consider to be the Father Figure of the Early Modernist Painters

Berthe Morisot – woman and child in meadow at Bougival

Monet – Woman with Umbrella

Georges Seurat – Bridge at Courbevoie

Emile Bernard – Breton Women

Vincent van Gogh – Starry Night

Toulouse – Lautrec – Portrait of Jane Avril

Paul Gauguin – Manao Tupapau

Paul Cézanne – Portrait of Hortense his wife

–

Posts relating to other chapters from “Painting with Light and Colour”:

• Introduction: the little known Science behind many of the original practical suggestions.
• Chapter 1 : The dogmas
• Chapter 2 : “doubts”.
• Chapter 3 : “The nature of painting”
• Chapter 4: Renaissance ideas
• Chapter 5 : New Science on offer
• Chapter 6 :  “Early Modernist Painters”

Other Posts on painting light and colour:

• What are colourists (1): Some of the many meanings of the word?
• What are colourists (2): Difference between meaning of the word for Venetian Colourists and for Modernist Colourists?

Click here for lists of other Posts

Return to top