Color theory books?
Kenneth Beyer
One of the best books I found on colour was by a 'Michael Wilcox' - 'Blue and Yellow Don't Make Green'. I unfortunately don't have the ISBN number to hand (but it was published by 'Collins') you should be able to find it in you local book store. It's quite an eye opener.
Ken Beyer
UK based Artist Painter
http://www.telinco.co.uk/beyer/splash.htm
"Hemant D. Tagare" wrote:
Could someone recommend a good book on color
theory in art for self study? I am interested in
something that balances theoretical rhetoric
with practical examples and is written in
plain english.Thanks,
Hemant
Charles Eicher
>
>Could someone recommend a good book on color
>theory in art for self study? I am interested in
>something that balances theoretical rhetoric
>with practical examples and is written in
>plain english.
Hmm... most of the good books on the subject are heavy on one end or the other.
For example, the classic book "Interactions of Color" by Josef Albers is almost
100% practical examples. Another excellent book, "Art and Visual Perception" by
Rudolf Arnheim, has a few excellent chapters on color, but its all strictly
theoretical (however, it has immediate practical application).
Someone mentioned the Itten book already, it seems to tread the middle ground,
but some of his theory is considered a bit odd.. I remember one excellent book I
read during a painting class, I think I finally re-located it. I think (and I
emphasise, I am not sure) the book is "Creative Color" by Faber Birren.
Aster Iske
>
>Could someone recommend a good book on color
>theory in art for self study? I am interested in
>something that balances theoretical rhetoric
>with practical examples and is written in
>plain english.
The required text for the beginning painting
class at the University where I teach is
Nita Leland's EXPLORING COLOR. You can purchase
it directly from Nita Leland at her web site or
at any of the bookseller web sites or a local
bookseller near you. Her book is just the ticket
for easy reading, examples and excercises and she had
the advantage of having studied all the former
color theorists like Albers, Itten, etc.
Alison A Raimes
writes
>
>The required text for the beginning painting
>class at the University where I teach is
>Nita Leland's EXPLORING COLOR. You can purchase
>it directly from Nita Leland at her web site or
>at any of the bookseller web sites or a local
>bookseller near you. Her book is just the ticket
>for easy reading, examples and excercises and she had
>the advantage of having studied all the former
>color theorists like Albers, Itten, etc.
>
Can you get a place at a University in the US without a portfolio of
work showing you can paint and draw ? You certainly cannot in the UK.
I don't know what sort of class *Aster* Flowery Showers teaches at
University but maybe that is why they can't sit through one of her
canvas stretching classes without walking out half way.
This book is written for Sunday painters and seven year olds who just
got their first paint set - who have never had a basic lesson in
painting. The author even claims to be the inventor of the colour wheel.
The promotional website has COMMERCIAL written right across it - its for
the gullible not for serious artists... if you fit into either category
then buy it. Otherwise take Mark and Charles' advise.
However, if you want to sing along to YMCA as you read NL's biography
then that is fun - especially when one considers that song is the
flagship of the homosexual liberation. Good for her supporting that
cause. Round of applause starts now **********
--
Alison
Kay
Alison A Raimes wrote in message ...
:In article <37c7d...@oracle.zianet.com>, Aster Iske <do...@emailme.com>
:writes
:
:>
:>The required text for the beginning painting
:>class at the University where I teach is
:>Nita Leland's EXPLORING COLOR. You can purchase
:>it directly from Nita Leland at her web site or
:>at any of the bookseller web sites or a local
:>bookseller near you. Her book is just the ticket
:>for easy reading, examples and excercises and she had
:>the advantage of having studied all the former
:>color theorists like Albers, Itten, etc.
Likely she did if she went to college at all. The best instructors
recommend them, I think Dik had a superb list here about this. However,
Nita Leland (whom I have never heard of) is, from what I understand one of
those "North Light" book hobby artists teachers. These are taught at NO
Universities that I am aware of. Universities must be accredited and have
acceptable materials no matter where they are. The only University that
might use her text would be one that is not for college credit, sort of a
Parks and Recreation adult ed. class.
:Can you get a place at a University in the US without a portfolio of
:work showing you can paint and draw ? You certainly cannot in the UK.
Here either. You have to have a BFA with international exhibition record or
MFA with decent exhibition record although lately, with tenure-track being
so difficult to obtain, even the BFA famous artists are having to go back to
obtain their MFAs in order to teach at the University level.
:I don't know what sort of class *Aster* Flowery Showers teaches at
:University but maybe that is why they can't sit through one of her
:canvas stretching classes without walking out half way.
I missed that. I would drop them from the class if they did that!
:This book is written for Sunday painters and seven year olds who just
:got their first paint set - who have never had a basic lesson in
:painting.
And those types of books are excellent for these types of painters!
: The author even claims to be the inventor of the colour wheel.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
:The promotional website has COMMERCIAL written right across it - its for
:the gullible not for serious artists... if you fit into either category
:then buy it. Otherwise take Mark and Charles' advise.
Even the beginning hobby painter would actually benefit more from the Itten,
Aalbers, etc. books. They aren't about pretty and easy. They are proven and
factual and if they aren't easy reading, then take an English class and go
back and read it again.
:However, if you want to sing along to YMCA as you read NL's biography
:then that is fun - especially when one considers that song is the
:flagship of the homosexual liberation. Good for her supporting that
:cause. Round of applause starts now **********
Is she from San Francisco? What is this YMCA thing on her site? Huh?
Kay
:Alison
:
:ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
:http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
Andries
I recommend the famous book of Johannes (already mentioned). But Itten took
many ideas from Goethe. So it's very interesting to read his book: Entwurf
einer Farbenlehre (I don't know the name in English). I have red the book in
Dutch (''Kleurenleer''). This book gives also a very interesting point in
historical colour-theory. So read it with a '19 century eye'. In the same
context you could read: Kandinsky's 'Uber das Geistige in der Kunst'.
Itten and Kandinsky were both teachers on the Bauhaus. There are some good
books about the lessons at the Bauhaus. They probably subscribe methods and
techniques. I don't know the names but you could ask someone else.
tstp
How about Chevreul? I found him the best.
Nancy
Nita Leland
own art, then I recommend my book, Exploring Color Revised. I've researched
much of the literature going back to Newton and have culled what I believe
to be most useful to artists, both as building a foundation of knowledge in
color and practical application of principles that allow you to expand your
thinking and use of color in your work. From a purely theoretical
standpoint, I recommend Chevreul, Itten, Birren and Sargent. There is a good
bibliography of books on color in my book, as well. Most of these books are
available in public libraries.
--
Nita
nle...@erinet.com
Nita Leland Studio
Please visit my Exploring Color Web Site at http://www.nitaleland.com
Hemant D. Tagare <hd...@koan.med.yale.edu> wrote in message
news:37C6C650...@koan.med.yale.edu...
> Could someone recommend a good book on color
> theory in art for self study? I am interested in
> something that balances theoretical rhetoric
> with practical examples and is written in
> plain english.
>
> Thanks,
> Hemant
>
Nita Leland
color and going into special color effects. One of my favorites.
--
Nita
nle...@erinet.com
Nita Leland Studio
Please visit my Exploring Color Web Site at http://www.nitaleland.com
Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> wrote in message
news:7q7e36$2v...@edrn.newsguy.com...
> In article <37C6C650...@koan.med.yale.edu>, "Hemant says...
> >
> >Could someone recommend a good book on color
> >theory in art for self study? I am interested in
> >something that balances theoretical rhetoric
> >with practical examples and is written in
> >plain english.
>
Nita Leland
text. My workshops are sometimes available for college credit, too,
depending on where they're held.
--
Nita
nle...@erinet.com
Nita Leland Studio
Please visit my Exploring Color Web Site at http://www.nitaleland.com
Aster Iske <do...@emailme.com> wrote in message
news:37c7d...@oracle.zianet.com...
> In article <37C6C650...@koan.med.yale.edu>, hd...@koan.med.yale.edu
> says...
>
Nita Leland
That's okay. I imagine Alison is upset because I don't have a magic piece of
paper that proves I've earned a fine arts degree somewhere. True enough.
Everyone knows that in the land of Oz you have to have that magic
certificate or your brains, courage and hard work don't count. In spite of
that I have taught at community colleges and a handful of university
extension courses without benefit of portfolio and no one walked out
yawning. As for the color wheel, everyone knows Newton invented the color
wheel. I invented a Color Scheme Selector, which is something quite
different. My web site is content-oriented for artists and teachers at any
level who are looking for ideas for breaking blocks, projects, and tips on
photographing art or taking workshops. Yes, my books and other things are
available for sale. It isn't like I drag you to my site to pound you with
sales pitches. My conscience is clear. I didn't know YMCA was the theme song
of the homosexual liberation. Big deal. I happen to love rainbows, too, but
nobody owns the rainbow. I use it all over the place. And I don't intend to
change the bio for that reason.
Nita
nle...@erinet.com
Nita Leland Studio
Please visit my Exploring Color Web Site at http://www.nitaleland.com
Alison A Raimes <Ali...@signature.in.address> wrote in message
news:t4VFElAM...@raimes.demon.co.uk...
> In article <37c7d...@oracle.zianet.com>, Aster Iske <do...@emailme.com>
> writes
>
> >
> >The required text for the beginning painting
> >class at the University where I teach is
> >Nita Leland's EXPLORING COLOR. You can purchase
> >it directly from Nita Leland at her web site or
> >at any of the bookseller web sites or a local
> >bookseller near you. Her book is just the ticket
> >for easy reading, examples and excercises and she had
> >the advantage of having studied all the former
> >color theorists like Albers, Itten, etc.
> >
>
> Can you get a place at a University in the US without a portfolio of
> work showing you can paint and draw ? You certainly cannot in the UK.
> I don't know what sort of class *Aster* Flowery Showers teaches at
> University but maybe that is why they can't sit through one of her
> canvas stretching classes without walking out half way.
>
> This book is written for Sunday painters and seven year olds who just
> got their first paint set - who have never had a basic lesson in
> painting. The author even claims to be the inventor of the colour wheel.
> The promotional website has COMMERCIAL written right across it - its for
> the gullible not for serious artists... if you fit into either category
> then buy it. Otherwise take Mark and Charles' advise.
>
> However, if you want to sing along to YMCA as you read NL's biography
> then that is fun - especially when one considers that song is the
> flagship of the homosexual liberation. Good for her supporting that
> cause. Round of applause starts now **********
Alison A Raimes
>Nita
>nle...@erinet.com
>Nita Leland Studio
>Please visit my Exploring Color Web Site at http://www.nitaleland.com
Nice spamming - I expected you to pop up pretty quickly. Your friend
*Aster* does it perfectly well for you though - isn't it fun to have a
mignon to do your chores for you ?
You aren't serious about this being University text book quality though
are you ? I don't disapprove of it being a commercial hobbyist book ..
but University level ?
Alison
ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk (new work updated 1st Sept)
Kay
would use your text? If you claim the book for what it actually is, a book
for hobbyists, I don't have a problem with that. It is NOT university
level. You found a nice market, enjoy it. Don't claim what you aren't
qualified for.
Kay
Alison A Raimes wrote in message ...
:In article <XPwz3.2305$34.1...@news.oh.voyager.net>, Nita Leland
Kay
Nita Leland wrote in message ...
:Ouch! Someone is really upset with me. Well, you can't please everyone.
:That's okay. I imagine Alison is upset because I don't have a magic piece
of
:paper that proves I've earned a fine arts degree somewhere. True enough.
:Everyone knows that in the land of Oz you have to have that magic
:certificate or your brains, courage and hard work don't count.
This is so typical of someone who doesn't! You know, they don't just GIVE
that piece of paper out, it is damn hard work and you earn it! I resent
your attitude. You market a certain type of *student* and fine, I hope you
make a billion. But do NOT pretend that you are someone you aren't. You
couldn't be accepted as a student and certainly wouldn't graduate because
you would be considered *unteachable*.
: In spite of
:that I have taught at community colleges and a handful of university
:extension courses without benefit of portfolio and no one walked out
:yawning.
No they were probably wondering where their wallets went to after you picked
their pockets. Name one community college you taught at. You won't of
course because I could report you and they would lose their accreditation.
Kay
Kay
Kay
Nita Leland wrote in message ...
:That's good to hear. I know of several other colleges that use my book as a
:text. My workshops are sometimes available for college credit, too,
:depending on where they're held.
:
:--
:Nita
:nle...@erinet.com
:Nita Leland Studio
:Please visit my Exploring Color Web Site at http://www.nitaleland.com
:
:
:Aster Iske <do...@emailme.com> wrote in message
:news:37c7d...@oracle.zianet.com...
:> In article <37C6C650...@koan.med.yale.edu>, hd...@koan.med.yale.edu
:> says...
:>
:> The required text for the beginning painting
:>
:
:
burnin...@my-deja.com
Alison A Raimes <Ali...@signature.in.address> wrote:
> In article <XPwz3.2305$34.1...@news.oh.voyager.net>, Nita Leland
>
> >nle...@erinet.com
> >Nita Leland Studio
> >Please visit my Exploring Color Web Site at
http://www.nitaleland.com
>
(snip)
I could have sworn I saw a thread titled "Blatant self promotion"
here somewhere with your name on it.....?
Know what I mean?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
burnin...@my-deja.com
"Nita Leland" <nle...@erinet.com> wrote:
Some facts:
1. Nita sells a reasonable number of books and probably doesn't
give much of a shit if anyone here buys her book or not.
Note that these are my words -- not hers.
2. Very few people here skip a chance at "self promotion".
"Let he who is without sin..." eh?
3. The rainbow has been co-opted by homosexuals as a replacement
for the pink triangle. They'll probably move onto something
else soon because almost everyone recognizes it as such now.
4. YMCA is/was a theme song for homosexuals -- most of the Village
People (apparently) were. If I remember correctly, the black
guy who lived in NC wasn't.
5. I've never been accused of being sympathetic to homosexual causes.
In fact, the opposite is normally the case.
However --
What Ms. Leland does on her time is her concern and has nothing
to do with the merit of her book. To raise an issue like this
is not only uncalled for it's unseemly.
I would suggest to all combatants that this would be a good time
to consider letting this thread die -- as it seems to have
degenerated into personal slurs and inuendo much faster than is
normal even for here.
(big snip)
Nita Leland
about 4 times a year and just happened on this discussion. Of course, you
won't believe any of that. Yes, I am serious about this book being used in
college education. I get a great many students in my workshops who complain
that they weren't taught to use and understand color in college art classes.
I wouldn't presume to suggest it should replace the classics--Chevreul,
Itten, Albers and others. The original edition of Exploring Color was used
as a text at an Ohio college and I'm told the revised edition was used at a
university in New Mexico recently as the text in beginning painting. I don't
know what school Aster was speaking of. My courses have been granted credit
at accredited colleges as art courses at colleges in Ohio, Maryland and
Wyoming. I taught watercolor for a short while at a fully accredited
community college, and my courses were full credit courses. No, I won't
give you the names of the colleges. I don't have to prove anything to you.
Nita
nle...@erinet.com
Nita Leland Studio
Please visit my Exploring Color Web Site at http://www.nitaleland.com
Alison A Raimes <Ali...@signature.in.address> wrote in message
news:Z2doHfBr...@raimes.demon.co.uk...
> In article <XPwz3.2305$34.1...@news.oh.voyager.net>, Nita Leland
>
> >Nita
> >nle...@erinet.com
> >Nita Leland Studio
> >Please visit my Exploring Color Web Site at http://www.nitaleland.com
>
Chris
Kay wrote:
>
> This is so typical of someone who doesn't! You know, they don't just GIVE
> that piece of paper out, it is damn hard work and you earn it! I resent
> your attitude. You market a certain type of *student* and fine, I hope you
> make a billion. But do NOT pretend that you are someone you aren't. You
> couldn't be accepted as a student and certainly wouldn't graduate because
> you would be considered *unteachable*.
>
What was that quote from Alison re. intolerance being based on fear?
And I'm curious, what kind of academic institution would allow someone
in a position of responsibility to make the really quite bizarre claims
you & Alison have made about Nita Leland, without offering any evidence,
and running for the cover of innuendo and the prestige of paper when you
are caught out? None that I know of.
Get a life, assemble an installation, do something useful; this
certainly isn't to your credit.
Cheers;
Chris
Kay
Chris wrote in message <37CEE884...@ns.sympatico.ca>...
:
:
:Kay wrote:
:
:>
:> This is so typical of someone who doesn't! You know, they don't just
GIVE
:> that piece of paper out, it is damn hard work and you earn it! I resent
:> your attitude. You market a certain type of *student* and fine, I hope
you
:> make a billion. But do NOT pretend that you are someone you aren't. You
:> couldn't be accepted as a student and certainly wouldn't graduate because
:> you would be considered *unteachable*.
:>
:
:What was that quote from Alison re. intolerance being based on fear?
You tell me. I'm sure you have some type of manipulative anti-education
take on it.
:
:And I'm curious, what kind of academic institution would allow someone
:in a position of responsibility to make the really quite bizarre claims
:you & Alison have made about Nita Leland, without offering any evidence,
:and running for the cover of innuendo and the prestige of paper when you
:are caught out?
Sounds like another self-taught artist swallowing some bitter grapes. Want
the name but not the work? What in the blazes are you talking about in the
above paragraph?
None that I know of.
But you don't really know much, do you?
:Get a life, assemble an installation, do something useful; this
:certainly isn't to your credit.
You are absolutely right. I do not associate with people who are so
drastically different than myself and you know, it really isn't any fun
arguing with someone who has so little knowledge as I find myself repeatedly
doing here. But, that little piece of paper you discard will open many
doors that will remain closed to you. I am unsubscribing for a mental
health break. And while I disagree totally with Ms. Leland's claims, unlike
others, I haven't taken her name in my e-mail address and claimed to be her
in order to make fun of her. This is too sick.
:Cheers;
:
:Chris
Erik A. Mattila
another name since it is September. Lita Niland is just a tool. This
might explain how the thread degenerated so quickly -- the incubus has
already grown.
BTW, my favorite Virgil Partch joke showed this guy, wearing a long white
robe, laying knocked out on the sidewalk with a big lump on his forehead
-- a rock laying beside his head. Also on the ground was the placard he
was carrying, which read "Let ye who is without sin cast the first
stone."
Erik Mattila
burnin...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <XPwz3.2305$34.1...@news.oh.voyager.net>,
Alison A Raimes
writes
>I could have sworn I saw a thread titled "Blatant self promotion"
>here somewhere with your name on it.....?
>
>Know what I mean?
I don't object in any sense to Nita promoting her book as long as she is
prepared to face the criticism shown here. I expect no less when I
display my work ;-) - even put a basket of rotten eggs there too. I
resent the implications that it is a book used for University Art
Students - that makes a nonsense of the Art education.
Alison A Raimes
<bro...@ns.sympatico.ca> writes
>What was that quote from Alison re. intolerance being based on fear?
No one is showing intolerance here - we are objecting to the
implications of a second rate art book. The resentment is that a book
like this can be seen as a representation of the standard of University
studies that art students undergo.
>
>And I'm curious, what kind of academic institution would allow someone
>in a position of responsibility to make the really quite bizarre claims
>you & Alison have made about Nita Leland, without offering any evidence,
>and running for the cover of innuendo and the prestige of paper when you
>are caught out? None that I know of.
>
I would suggest that if we approached any University and asked them if
Nita's book is part of the accredited list of books for their students
that the answer would be NO. Can she substantiate that there are
Universities using it ? If so I will certainly apologise. In the
meantime it makes University Art degrees look like weekend easel
painting courses - which is exactly what the book is designed for.
>Get a life, assemble an installation, do something useful; this
>certainly isn't to your credit.
>
Get a life ? explain that - it is one much debated on the philosophy
newsgroups. Does that mean - *do what I do* ? Are you doing something
useful. Should the world model itself around you ? Do you see yourself
as some sort of hierarchy that we should all look up to, Chris ?
Alison A Raimes
University accredited teaching book and that is clearly untrue. When I
first came to this group one of the first posts to me was Aster telling
me to read Nita's book. That is an insult to anyone who just finished
five years in art school. The website is what you would expect for a
child to look at. The design and the terrible colour scheme do not
reflect a serious art colour theory book. This is also evident in the
total lack of social understanding. One is expected to sing along to a
song that is the flagship of homosexual freedom - an issue that is a
major part of contemporary life. To use the song as a *sing-a-long* to
someone's biography is an insult - it makes a mockery of the cause
behind the issue. It also makes NL's website into a joke - especially
for University Art students who, one would hope, are actively involved
in the culture they are inextricably linked to. If this book is to be
promoted as art of University education level then it must also be ready
to be scrutinised for its worth as such.
In article <7qmk9r$17t$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, burnin...@my-deja.com
writes
>In article <XPwz3.2305$34.1...@news.oh.voyager.net>,
> "Nita Leland" <nle...@erinet.com> wrote:
>
>Some facts:
>
>1. Nita sells a reasonable number of books and probably doesn't
> give much of a shit if anyone here buys her book or not.
>
-
Alison
Alison A Raimes
<scarl...@theriver.com> writes
>:What was that quote from Alison re. intolerance being based on fear?
>
>You tell me. I'm sure you have some type of manipulative anti-education
>take on it.
That quote, now taken out of context (as usual), referred to the issue
of why so many people reject abstract art and the relationship to it
being necessary to *learn* the language of abstract art in order to have
a better understanding of it. Like it or not, abstract art has become a
specialised subject. It has nothing to do with our questioning Nita
Leland's book as a University accredited teaching book and the
implications.
Alison A Raimes
<nle...@erinet.com> writes
>It may surprise you to know I haven't a clue who Aster is.
Aster changes her name every month. You will know her also as names like
April Showers; May Flowers; Pinky Permeated; Silver; Blue Moon; Jillian;
and on I go. A quick search of Dejanews archives show that you have
engaged in many, many conversations with her - and that on some of the
lists you subscribe to she is also there - under another name. Whenever
she mentions your book here on r.a.f you appear within a couple of days.
I believe it is called a *cult following*.
I have no problem with your book being a teaching aid to first time
painters. There are many books like it here in England and have used
them myself. I do object to the persistence of your groupies to try and
imply it is other than it is - a book for first time painters. As I said
to Kay, to get a place at a University in Britain, one must have first
produce a portfolio of work that show you are skilled in both painting
and drawing. Most University courses have around eight people going for
one place. Places are awarded on credit of quality of work. Which is why
I find someone like Aster, who says she has an MFA and teaches art in a
University (and uses your book), makes me concerned. One would imagine
then that the University art education system in the USA is not of the
sort of standard that it is in Britain. Do you disagree with this ?
burnin...@my-deja.com
Alison A Raimes <Ali...@signature.in.address> wrote:
> In article <7qmigo$vpp$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, burnin...@my-deja.com
> writes
>
> >I could have sworn I saw a thread titled "Blatant self promotion"
> >here somewhere with your name on it.....?
> >
> >Know what I mean?
>
> I don't object in any sense to Nita promoting her book as long as she
is
> prepared to face the criticism shown here.
Possibly you could have worded the passages I read somewhat differently
then? Because that certainly wasn't the message you seemed to be
conveying.
To my knowledge, no one is making comments on her book. This thread
seems to be completely comprised of personal slurs.
My point stands. Consider letting it drop.
burnin...@my-deja.com
Alison A Raimes <Ali...@signature.in.address> wrote:
If your argument is with Aster, why are you making all sorts of
nasty comments about Nita?
> as a
> University accredited teaching book and that is clearly untrue.
Everyone is entitled to one opinion. One can only hope that you
understand that not everyone might agree with you?
> When I
> first came to this group one of the first posts to me was Aster
telling
> me to read Nita's book.
Considering the welcome most people receive, you have no complaints.
> That is an insult to anyone who just finished
> five years in art school.
There are many people who would consider anyone who spent 5 years
in art school to be a walking insult... and they manage to keep from
saying it to people who chose that path.
> The website is what you would expect for a
> child to look at.
So?
> The design and the terrible colour scheme do not
> reflect a serious art colour theory book.
OK.... so you're really commenting on her website and not the
book?
> This is also evident in the total lack of social understanding.
Would that more people were so inclined. Personally, I've had it
up to my ears with all the "social understanding" bullshit.
> One is expected to sing along to a
> song that is the flagship of homosexual freedom - an issue that is a
> major part of contemporary life.
Possibly in yours.
> To use the song as a *sing-a-long* to
> someone's biography is an insult - it makes a mockery of the cause
> behind the issue.
Odd... since it's a fact that the song in question is theme song
for the cause you mention...?
Your statements are contradictory.
Just off hand, I'd say you need to log out for a couple of days,
go pub diving, read a book or two and chill out.
The issues you are raising have *nothing* to do with art and don't
belong here irrespective of which side of the issue you are on.
If you wish to continue this rant, consider using alt.homosexual
or one of the other designated groups for the topic.
> It also makes NL's website into a joke - especially
> for University Art students who, one would hope, are actively involved
> in the culture they are inextricably linked to.
Ditto above.
> If this book is to be
> promoted as art of University education level then it must also be
ready
> to be scrutinised for its worth as such.
Your credibility would be better served if you left your personal
biases at the door. As it is, it's unlikely anyone is going to
listen to your rants on this thread. That is, you're accomplishing
nothing.
Feel free to respond as you wish. No more posts on this thread
will be forthcoming from me.
newsgroups
Check out this Penguine...just downed at that tip of the iceberg by Tiger
Sharks....and this is the tip of the iceberg!
http://www.metroactive.com/metro/morgan-9935.html
Michael Learmonth did a pretty good job of covering the story...messed up
some of my facts...but...more importantly...there are many many many more
lies and people that Dianna Morgan tried her cons on....I checked
everything...
she told everyone...nothing checked out...NOTHING...there was so much, and
so many people, lies large and small, she was working hunderes of people at
once in Silicon Valley.
There was literally so much, Learmonth, could never fit it all in a
story...if you know anyone involved with her, tell those penguines...time to
jump iceberg.....suprised she didn't die that redhead by now!!!
Or better yet if she burned you in Los Angeles, Hawaii, Australia? She is
here come and get her!
LOL
Redheaded Penguine Skewered News at 11!
I would love to see those artworks her son told me she took from an
Australian or American working in Australia, returned along with mine.
Mattison Fitzgerald
Artist
http://www.rhinodev.com/M
Alison A Raimes
writes
>If your argument is with Aster, why are you making all sorts of
>nasty comments about Nita?
Actually, I criticised her website and her book in the context of it
being promoted as a University credited text by Aster, which Nita
confirmed it as being. I didn't even comment on her being self taught
and have only voiced an opinion about what she has presented to the
public via her website. As she already has said - why should she care
about what I think and on that basis I have continued.
I still find it hard to believe that this book can be taken seriously as
a University text and think it is untrue and should not be promoted as
such. Kay, who knows more about US education system than I, has verified
this. The structure of it and the website read that it is not a
*serious* book and that is what I find disturbing. The sing-a-long reads
as an indicator of *how* flippant the author's approach is to art and I
do not believe such books should be used at University level -
particularly as *Aster* continues to promotes it as such at every
opportunity on this group.
As I wrote this on a public forum I would expect to receive criticism
back - this is not a problem to me but it will not stop me expressing my
views. Other people I know, chose to ridicule by taking on her name and
posting to another group. That is not my game. I criticised with the
full knowledge that she would appear and defend herself.... she always
pops up just after Aster does a promotional run for her. I am sure she
probably has had a few sales from this anyway - nothing like negative
publicity to get people's cheque books out, eh - maybe I should ask for
commission ;-)
>
>There are many people who would consider anyone who spent 5 years
>in art school to be a walking insult... and they manage to keep from
>saying it to people who chose that path.
Unfortunately this is not true. Art Graduates suffer all sorts of
prejudices that other Graduates do not. Few people in society recognise
that an Art degree has *worth* unless they are artists that have gone
through the system and understand the intrinsic value of it. I believe
there is more to being a professional artist than being able to make art
- everyone and his dog can make *art* but making a profession out of it
requires a level of understanding of the art world that self taught
rarely experience. On this group alone the continuing battle between
self taught and art graduates rages on. The issue has little to do with
*skill* but more to do with the level of commitment that one is prepared
to invest in a profession and the sacrifices that one makes for this
investment. There are always exceptions to the rule, but generally it is
evident when a self taught artist has received no training.
Artists are entitled to the same recognition for their studies as any
other graduate, but rarely get it, as we too often discover once back in
the *real* world.
>Just off hand, I'd say you need to log out for a couple of days,
>go pub diving, read a book or two and chill out.
>
May not have time for the book or the chilling - I will, however, be
away for the weekend in Stonehenge and then a friend has a show opening
in London which I feel compelled to drink copious amounts of alcohol at,
and fall over with her late into the night .... so sadly, I must bid you
farewell for a few days - just as I was starting to have fun ;-)
Incidentally, this same friend has just finished her MFA after seven
years of continuous art studies. She worked her ass off and came out
with commendations and awards and of course, exhibitions. She does not,
however, have a sellable commodity (installations) so today, her
greatest excitement was that she got a job as a screen printer for
around 300 bucks a week.
>The issues you are raising have *nothing* to do with art and don't
>belong here irrespective of which side of the issue you are on.
>If you wish to continue this rant, consider using alt.homosexual
>or one of the other designated groups for the topic.
Yes, of course - sorry about that - I will try to stick solely to *art*
related topics just like you, eh ? Did you think I was ranting ? I must
tell this story to my gay friends in the pub tomorrow - they will laugh
hysterically when they hear why and raise their eyebrows - always
fighting their cause ;-) Perhaps we will have a sing-along to YMCA just
for old times sakes.
>Your credibility would be better served if you left your personal
>biases at the door. As it is, it's unlikely anyone is going to
>listen to your rants on this thread. That is, you're accomplishing
>nothing.
Absolutely - I will take you as my role model ;-) - my personal biases
are back in the bag - like yours :-) However, if you get tempted to get
them back out, so will I - OK ? I am not going to lose any sleep about
my *credibility* here on r.a.f - it longed ceased to be an environment
for other than bantering and adrenaline rushes. Ah, shattered Utopia.
And wouldn't it be a sleepy little town otherwise. I guess that is why
so many people continue to hang around here.
>
>Feel free to respond as you wish. No more posts on this thread
>will be forthcoming from me.
Missing you already ;-)
Old Hen
seacrest wrote:
>
> All this bickering and one-upping each other amazes me. In a world where
> the general population already dismisses the majority of artists, why ever
> would you fight amongst yourselves over something so trivial? What an utter
> waste of time and energy when you could be *creating*. This newsgroup
> should be a safe haven for artists whether their art, books, whatever, are
> supported.
>
> Eve
--
Gloria: "And on the Fifth Day God Created Birds" nuff said!
Gus: "I Can Talk ... Can You Fly?"
Old Hen
know that I think your work is absolutely beautiful.
Gloria
James W. Foster
junior class, taught it in lower secondary school, taught it plus the colour
wheel for light (primary colours=green red and blue) at GCSE, taught it at
'A' level with an expansion from colour mixing to complimentary colours,
taught it at Foundation where the tutor actually somehow made it interesting
again and now I've had a year being taught it at Degree level. I knew it
from the age of 8 onwards, I don't need to be shown it yet again and again.
Why do they do this? Do they not want me to spend my time constructively?
Once you've been taught how to read, they don't keep teaching you the same
thing over again. I mean WHY? for the love of God! Am I the only one who
understood it first time round? I know colour theory and I certainly don't
need books on it.
Sorry, just had to be said.
-james
Next week's recommended university read - 'How to tie your shoelaces'
ISBN:666
mark webber
Hi James,
I don't mean this to be taken as a snotty reply to your post, but without
checking a text, can you name seven ways to contrast a color? In all
likelyhood you can, but many color theory classes and texts don't
ennumerate these very important tools, and frankly, I have students all
the time telling me they don't need to study the color wheel again - only
to find three months later, they only knew part of the basics.
Maybe its not such a bad thing - given the reported continuous
disappointments with academic systems - to try it a few times.
sicerely,
Mark
Lauri.L.
"James W. Foster" <jwfo...@UKARTISTS.com> wrote:
> Colour theory pisses me off. I got taught it in infant class, taught
it in
> junior class,
> I knew it
> from the age of 8 onwards, I don't need to be shown it yet again and
again.
> Why do they do this? Do they not want me to spend my time
constructively?
Well, I have few years studied color theory in the experimental
psychology in two universities, followed the literature for
decades since then - and I do not know color theory.
What I know that the false simlifications given everywhere
are of no use, as you said.
We have theory of light for physists,
Theory of pigments for paint and graphical industry
Theory of vision for psychologists
And a pair of eyes for artists
- lauri
--
//www.saunalahti.fi/~laurleva/
The fact that I abuse my office email address does not
imply that my employer agrees with or is aware of
my opinions expressed here
Dan Fox
I agree with you. I taught off and on for many years, but was always a bit
of a fish out of water because I'm a working artist first, and a teacher
second. Many full-time teachers make their living in the classroom and are
lousy artists (there are exceptions, of course), so non-art courses are a
natural to fill in time.
Color theory courses are mostly specious constructs. They are in the
curriculum because they always have been, and for another very important
reason: teaching bullshit ideas like 'color theory' is easy. Teaching
painting
and drawing competently is very difficult. It is as simple as that: why
get in the water with your students when you could teach 'swimming theory'
instead?
While learning a few basic color ideas, like complements, will certainly
shorten your apprenticeship, painting with color and using it day in, day
out, is the only thing that will get an artist the total familiarity he or
she needs.
I've seen your work. It's great. You don't need any of this shit.
"James W. Foster" <jwfo...@UKARTISTS.com> wrote:
> Colour theory pisses me off.
<snip>
> Sorry, just had to be said.
>
> -james
>
> Next week's recommended university read - 'How to tie your shoelaces'
> ISBN:666
--
Dan
'The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom.' - Blake
http://www.danfoxart.com
Dan Fox
>
> We have theory of light for physists,
> Theory of pigments for paint and graphical industry
> Theory of vision for psychologists
> And a pair of eyes for artists
>
> - lauri
That says it all, Lauri. Thanks.
Erik A. Mattila
grader. I felt theoristicaly challenged, unable to defend myself.
Let's say you're a member in good standing of the "Bad Art" school, and
someone says "Yech, those colors make me want to vomit!" It would be handy
to be able to say, with authority and conviction, "Yes, my device was to
sublimate local color phenomena to the service of the CMYK mythos. It took me
years to develop that skill!"
Erik Mattila
Dan Fox wrote:
Alison A Raimes
>Colour theory pisses me off. I got taught it in infant class, taught it in
Colour theory is part of learning the *trade* - like a chef learning how
to cook a white sauce or make an omelette, or a musician learning
scales. It should become second nature and you should barely be aware
that you ever needed a book to teach you.
James W. Foster
> Let's say you're a member in good standing of the "Bad Art" school, and
> someone says "Yech, those colors make me want to vomit!" It would be
handy
> to be able to say, with authority and conviction, "Yes, my device was to
> sublimate local color phenomena to the service of the CMYK mythos. It took
me
> years to develop that skill!"
>
Or one could just say "Excellent!, I intended to provoke the physical
reaction of nausea in order to break the false security of dependance on
aesthetically pleasing art." Personally I wouldn't, I'd probably just smile
and think 'Cool...'
-james
James W. Foster
> Hi James,
>
> I don't mean this to be taken as a snotty reply to your post, but without
> checking a text, can you name seven ways to contrast a color? In all
> likelyhood you can, but many color theory classes and texts don't
> ennumerate these very important tools, and frankly, I have students all
> the time telling me they don't need to study the color wheel again - only
> to find three months later, they only knew part of the basics.
I'm saying this without knowing the precise situation so I may well be
wrong, but maybe they didn't absorb it properly first time and didn't
practice enough. I was always like that with mathematics. If asked, I
probably wouldn't be able to name seven ways to contrast a colour because I
find processes like that hard to actually put into words. I just do it when
the time comes, like writing. I hated analysing texts in English Lit.
because I always used to read things, absorb them and then write in a
similar style without thinking about it. Then again, some people have a
natural talent for the guitar, I'm only good at hurting my fingers on the
strings...
>
> Maybe its not such a bad thing - given the reported continuous
> disappointments with academic systems - to try it a few times.
>
> sicerely,
>
> Mark
>
Sure, every now and then just as a reminder but every single year? No
thanks.
-james
Charles Eicher
>
>Hi, James -
>
>I agree with you. I taught off and on for many years, but was always a bit
>of a fish out of water because I'm a working artist first, and a teacher
>second. Many full-time teachers make their living in the classroom and are
>lousy artists (there are exceptions, of course), so non-art courses are a
>natural to fill in time.
Hmm.. I know one teacher, I liked her work and wanted to study with her when I
went back to art school. Alas, she totally snubbed me. I decided not to take it
so personally, she really was an awful teacher, and hated teaching so much that
she sought (and received) a grant to spent more time painting and less time
teaching. What they hell did she want to be a teacher for?
>Color theory courses are mostly specious constructs. They are in the
>curriculum because they always have been, and for another very important
>reason: teaching bullshit ideas like 'color theory' is easy. Teaching
> painting
>and drawing competently is very difficult. It is as simple as that: why
>get in the water with your students when you could teach 'swimming theory'
>instead?
Some people swim deeper than others. If you got a scuba class in the water
without lengthy classroom education, you'd get a lot of people dying from
nitrogen narcosis and the bends.
>While learning a few basic color ideas, like complements, will certainly
>shorten your apprenticeship, painting with color and using it day in, day
>out, is the only thing that will get an artist the total familiarity he or
>she needs.
More knowledge is always a good thing. If there are competing theories about
color, study them all. Your work may not center around color theories, like the
works of old Albers for example, but there's plenty of interesting ideas in
color theory to provide tons of inspiration for your work.
Larry Seiler
I'm familiar with a few of your books, and as an artist with about 25
years a professional, I enjoy consulting at will various texts having
little personal good experience learning anything from someone directly.
It seems you get to know what and where you want to grow after awhile,
and books don't possess in and of themselves egos that need degrade you
publically to benefit themselves. They offer a safety zone.
At any rate....I know that selling oneself isn't a thing that is going
to win a lot of people over on newsgroups, but again, I am aware of your
work. I for one am glad you are here and hope you won't be put off and
run off.
Feels a thing to be appreciated knowing a few such as yourself lurk and
are about. My two cents....!
peace,
Larry
WetCanvas-
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Gallery/S/Larry_Seiler/index.html
Larry Seiler
> lousy artists (there are exceptions, of course), so non-art courses are a
> natural to fill in time.
Hi Dan....!!!
hahaha....well...I'm running back to the classroom because I was not
able in 10 years to find a rep or market with any integrity. I don't
paint to be made painfully aware again and again how corrupt and
injurious the world man thrives in is.
Now....I'm teaching art again...hoping to do a good job and do justice
to makes ya all proud of me! Its nice to know I and my wife will be
eating regularly again, be able to see a doctor when needed, and not
wonder if we'll afford a place to live next month!
> Color theory courses are mostly specious constructs. They are in the
> curriculum because they always have been, and for another very important
> reason: teaching bullshit ideas like 'color theory' is easy. Teaching
> painting
> and drawing competently is very difficult.
Art is an elective. It is often discouraged because foreign language
and more important classes are necessary to fill the bill to get into
college. Hardly more than the basics can be pressed into.
Kids cannot be "forced" in an elective to focus with the kind of focus
to bring capable competence. If forced, they quickly decide not to take
art again..and warn others not to take art. Its a "fun" escapist age
afterall.
Thus...much accomplishment comes by somehow winning the kids over.
Color theory, though easy and simple...helps because in part it is easy
and simple. It breaks what the kids see as confusing and difficult and
for those "talented few" into a process that brings hope that perhaps
this stuff "can be learned." Developing a theme that brings cohesion
into a painting and brings about good composition is easier understood
with color families by high schoolers such as warm or cool, or neutral
color families. It becomes more a jumping off position...and allows the
ankles to get used to the water enough to convince the student it won't
be so bad jumping in!
They can begin to see in other's works why something seems to be
working. Understanding what works for others brings a sense of art
understanding, appreciation, and some confidence to venture forward and
"then" beyond.
> While learning a few basic color ideas, like complements, will certainly
> shorten your apprenticeship, painting with color and using it day in, day
> out, is the only thing that will get an artist the total familiarity he or
> she needs.
I certainly agree....however,
Only self-discipline and passion/obsession will turn the average
athletic form into competitive body building physique. Getting them
into the weight room to begin with starts with their interests in other
sports competition. Can't hoist up and lift those 300# barbells until
you've worked through the lighter weights.
While true understanding and competence comes with time spent as an
artist, enough simple understanding and command of lesser skills comes
before entertaining the idea of whether or not becoming an artist is
something worth considering.
peace,
Larry
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Gallery/S/Larry_Seiler/index.html
James W. Foster
> Colour theory is part of learning the *trade* - like a chef learning how
> to cook a white sauce or make an omelette, or a musician learning
> scales. It should become second nature and you should barely be aware
> that you ever needed a book to teach you.
Yeah, it's like when you're driving you usually change gear automatically
without thinking about it, but in your first driving lessons you're
concentrating really hard on it and you end up going into reverse instead of
fourth or changing from second to third so violently you steer the car into
the other side of the road (thank God for quiet country lanes!).
-james
boy_w...@bigfoot.com
>> I am unsubscribing for a mental health break. <<
Thought you said you were going to unsubscibe?? What the hell
happened???? I still see you nipping at the heels of Nita like a
little chihuahua. LIGHTEN-UP!!!! Your jealousy is un-becoming. Just
remember: Six of the Top Ten richest people in the world, NEVER
FINISHED COLLEGE!! Furthermore, Don't recall seeing Pablo's ,
Vincent's or Andy's sheepskin. Did You??
NOTICE TO BULK EMAILERS: Pursuant to US Code,
Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, 227, any
and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to
this address is subject to a download and
archival fee in the amount of $500 US.
E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms.
mark webber
On Wed, 8 Sep 1999, James W. Foster wrote:
(on why some students think they've had enough color theory and later find
they were wrong)
>
> I'm saying this without knowing the precise situation so I may well be
> wrong, but maybe they didn't absorb it properly first time and didn't
> practice enough. I was always like that with mathematics. If asked, I
> probably wouldn't be able to name seven ways to contrast a colour because I
> find processes like that hard to actually put into words.
I see. Well my point was pretty much just that - that is, that putting
into words ths contrast of color is actually pretty easy, and useful, too.
I'm not saying that a great deal of successful color work can't be done
instinctually, or without having studied the seven color contrasts. I'm
just saying that once someone *has* learned them, they often find they
have some very useful tools.
My color theory teacher (I only had one, for one semester, undergrad)
studied at Yale, and once mentioned to me that when he got out of Yale,
he threw away everything he learned - except seven things. He really is a
terrific colorist.
> I just do it when
> the time comes, like writing. I hated analysing texts in English Lit.
I have students tell me they think that analyzing a painting's composition
is annoying, that it spoils it for them. They usually stop this protest
after a little while and begin to see it as a valuable excercise.
>
> Sure, every now and then just as a reminder but every single year? No
> thanks.
Even just once should be enough - if one's teacher takes one beyond the
color wheel. The color wheel isn't color theory, it's color
identification. Getting into the ways that color interact and how to
contrast them - you only need that once, if done right. It isn't your
fault, if none of these teachers gave you excercises on contrast. But you
should still try them. After you have you'll probably be glad you did.
best,
Mark
Marge Inal
webb...@TIGER.UOFS.EDU says...
>Even just once should be enough - if one's teacher takes one beyond the
>color wheel. The color wheel isn't color theory, it's color
>identification. Getting into the ways that color interact and how to
>contrast them - you only need that once, if done right. It isn't your
>fault, if none of these teachers gave you excercises on contrast. But you
>should still try them. After you have you'll probably be glad you did.
For someone serious about their art, simply studying any
of the color theory books is not going to be enough.
For example, I have over the years purchased SETS of
books that are published for those wishing to design
colorful products. Some of these are inexpensive paper
backs. Here are a couple of examples:
A BOOK OF COLORS (matching, combining, designing, decorating)
Nippon Color & Design Institute. Distributed in the USA
by Kodansha Intl.
DESIGNer's GUIDE TO COLOR (set of three small paperbacks)
Another Japanese origin, published in the USA by
Chronicle Books, San Francisco.
Artists who paint or do color printmaking can learn
from what designers do with colors. Emotions can
be as strongly influenced by color choices as by
the subject matter, which, in non-objective paintings
should go without saying...
Charles Eicher
>
>In article <Pine.PMDF.3.96.9909090...@TIGER.UOFS.EDU>,
>webb...@TIGER.UOFS.EDU says...
>
>>Even just once should be enough - if one's teacher takes one beyond the
>>color wheel. The color wheel isn't color theory, it's color
>>identification. Getting into the ways that color interact and how to
>>contrast them - you only need that once, if done right. It isn't your
>>fault, if none of these teachers gave you excercises on contrast. But you
>>should still try them. After you have you'll probably be glad you did.
>
>For someone serious about their art, simply studying any
>of the color theory books is not going to be enough.
>For example, I have over the years purchased SETS of
>books that are published for those wishing to design
>colorful products. Some of these are inexpensive paper
>backs. Here are a couple of examples:
>
>A BOOK OF COLORS (matching, combining, designing, decorating)
>Nippon Color & Design Institute. Distributed in the USA
>by Kodansha Intl.
>
>DESIGNer's GUIDE TO COLOR (set of three small paperbacks)
>Another Japanese origin, published in the USA by
>Chronicle Books, San Francisco.
I own that book set, and I have to put a huge disclaimer on your recommendation.
The Designers Guide is based on CMYK colors. Its primary use is in selecting
color schemes that have a common CMYK element in each color, so it is simpler to
"trap" colors for the printing press. I like to use it to select color schemes
for prepress, but it would probably not be a good book for painters or other
people using nonCMYK color systems.
Marge Inal
>I own that book set, and I have to put a huge disclaimer on your
recommendation.
Disclaim all you like. Regardless of HOW the colors in the
book set were derived, the point of the book as far as I
am concerned (besides being useful for combining process
colors) is to show design combinations. Book 3 in particular
I have found very helpful at times when looking for some
color combinations that I needed. And I am primarily a
painter -- not a printmaker. My point was that most color books
have their limitations and their strong points and I've
not yet seen one that does all things for all purposes.
Here's another thought for you. I find that most color
books fade with time so that what was printed when the
book was published may differ from what is seen years
down the road. While I can't detect fading in the
Designer's Guide in question, I can see definite fading
in some other books I own.
Philip Ayers
purposes of "identification" and I would go further by saying it's a good
thing to know ... because it lays out the mixing structure. a good thing
to learn early...about as hard as 4=4. duh?
...but what I haven't seen mentioned here is J. ALBERS. No matter how
misused albers work in color has been in foundation classes, he still
represents a very compelling introduction to the study of Color. I don't
think you have to go in his direction as so many do but I think his
delineation of "color interaction" is just plain and simply, the best
pedigical tool for color available STILL!
In article <Pine.PMDF.3.96.9909090...@TIGER.UOFS.EDU>,
mark webber <webb...@TIGER.UOFS.EDU> wrote:
> Even just once should be enough - if one's teacher takes one beyond the
> color wheel. The color wheel isn't color theory, it's color
> identification. Getting into the ways that color interact and how to
> contrast them - you only need that once, if done right. It isn't your
> fault, if none of these teachers gave you excercises on contrast. But you
> should still try them. After you have you'll probably be glad you did.
>
> best,
>
> Mark
Charles Eicher
>
>In article <7r8o12$27...@edrn.newsguy.com>, cei...@inav.net says...
>
>>I own that book set, and I have to put a huge disclaimer on your
>recommendation.
>
>Disclaim all you like. Regardless of HOW the colors in the
>book set were derived, the point of the book as far as I
>am concerned (besides being useful for combining process
>colors) is to show design combinations. Book 3 in particular
>I have found very helpful at times when looking for some
>color combinations that I needed. And I am primarily a
>painter -- not a printmaker. My point was that most color books
>have their limitations and their strong points and I've
>not yet seen one that does all things for all purposes.
I agree, the presentation of these books is excellent. But I still think it
excessively relies on CMYK schemes. I think their choice of color combinations
is a little limited by the trapping trickery. As long as you are aware of it,
and know how to go beyond CMYK, it should be fine.
>Here's another thought for you. I find that most color
>books fade with time so that what was printed when the
>book was published may differ from what is seen years
>down the road. While I can't detect fading in the
>Designer's Guide in question, I can see definite fading
>in some other books I own.
High-quality Japanese printing is pretty darn amazing. They have different ink
sets, and some of them are quite excellent and longlasting. I just bought some
Japanese DTP manuals with high-quality color printing samples, some at 400line
screens. Boy do they look great!
Charles Eicher
>
>But you're talking about color swatches while Charles is talking about
>color theory. To beg the point, why don't you get some cyan, magenta,
>yellow and black pigments and mix away. The physics of light primaries
>and pigment primaries are different animals, entirely.
>
>Erik Mattila
No, I'm sort of talking about an entirely different thing. Its an obscure
problem unless you worked in CMYK color prepress a lot. Its about trapping. I
was hoping to avoid this, but here's a short prepress lesson.
Since 4-color printing is done in 4 separate press stages, it is often
misregistered. In this case, trapping errors can cause the edges where colors
meet to show a white gap. This is common in fine-art printing too. But the
easiest way to avoid this trapping error is by clever use of color combinations.
For example, lets say I have a dark blue background which is C:100 M:100, and I
want to print pure yellow type on it. There's no shared color to fill in the
gaps. If the yellow is misregistered, there could be a white band around it. But
instead, if I print an orangy type, like C:40 M:40 Y:100, they share C&M, so the
gap cannot occur. This really isn't the PROPER way to trap a page, but it saves
a huge amount of time if you can work this way.
SO, what I'm saying is, this book relies on this trick a lot in suggesting color
combinations. Its great for prepress designers, but you'd probably prefer other
color combinations in a painting.
>Marge Inal wrote:
>
>> In article <7r8o12$27...@edrn.newsguy.com>, cei...@inav.net says...
>>
>> >I own that book set, and I have to put a huge disclaimer on your
>> recommendation.
>>
>> Disclaim all you like. Regardless of HOW the colors in the
>> book set were derived, the point of the book as far as I
>> am concerned (besides being useful for combining process
>> colors) is to show design combinations. Book 3 in particular
>> I have found very helpful at times when looking for some
>> color combinations that I needed. And I am primarily a
>> painter -- not a printmaker. My point was that most color books
>> have their limitations and their strong points and I've
>> not yet seen one that does all things for all purposes.
>>
Erik A. Mattila
color theory. To beg the point, why don't you get some cyan, magenta,
yellow and black pigments and mix away. The physics of light primaries
and pigment primaries are different animals, entirely.
Erik Mattila
Marge Inal wrote:
Erik A. Mattila
I took you comments on 'trapping' personally (he hee he) however, because I have
one of those 'tear my hair out' projects right now. You might be able to give me
some good advice. I designed a logo for an organization, and its first application
was on the conver of a directory, in glorious full collor, and actually very large
(about 3" high, or thereabouts). Since then, the organization's principles decided
that the wanted to use the logo in full color, even though I had provided line art
and spot color (2) with the design. They obviously are well funded. At any rate,
they then decided to use a full color version on biz cards, but letterhead and
envelops will be 3 color.
My original approach was to make three greyscales, since two of the elements are
either graded blends or textured surfaces. And I did do some hand trapping where
appropriate. But the printer was dubious (I don't know if he was aware I even
trapped at all) so I looked into Photoshops new trapping capability, and saw that
it was really designed for solids. Now the printer has agreed to try the
hand-trapped version.
But what I don't know is how much should be trapped. I went 2 pixels (more or
less), but I'm not sure if that is enough. I haven't worked with presses in quite
a few years, but I understand the new presses don't stretch paper as much. Anyway,
what is your opinion on this?
Erik Mattila
Charles Eicher wrote:
> In article <37D85578...@tomatoweb.com>, "Erik says...
> >
> >But you're talking about color swatches while Charles is talking about
> >color theory. To beg the point, why don't you get some cyan, magenta,
> >yellow and black pigments and mix away. The physics of light primaries
> >and pigment primaries are different animals, entirely.
> >
> >Erik Mattila
>
> No, I'm sort of talking about an entirely different thing. Its an obscure
> problem unless you worked in CMYK color prepress a lot. Its about trapping. I
> was hoping to avoid this, but here's a short prepress lesson.
>
> Since 4-color printing is done in 4 separate press stages, it is often
> misregistered. In this case, trapping errors can cause the edges where colors
> meet to show a white gap. This is common in fine-art printing too. But the
> easiest way to avoid this trapping error is by clever use of color combinations.
> For example, lets say I have a dark blue background which is C:100 M:100, and I
> want to print pure yellow type on it. There's no shared color to fill in the
> gaps. If the yellow is misregistered, there could be a white band around it. But
> instead, if I print an orangy type, like C:40 M:40 Y:100, they share C&M, so the
> gap cannot occur. This really isn't the PROPER way to trap a page, but it saves
> a huge amount of time if you can work this way.
>
> SO, what I'm saying is, this book relies on this trick a lot in suggesting color
> combinations. Its great for prepress designers, but you'd probably prefer other
> color combinations in a painting.
>
Charles Eicher
>
>I took you comments on 'trapping' personally (he hee he) however, because I have
>one of those 'tear my hair out' projects right now. You might be able to give
>me
>some good advice. I designed a logo for an organization, and its first
>application
>was on the conver of a directory, in glorious full collor, and actually very
>large
>(about 3" high, or thereabouts). Since then, the organization's principles
>decided
>that the wanted to use the logo in full color, even though I had provided line
>art
>and spot color (2) with the design. They obviously are well funded. At any
>rate,
>they then decided to use a full color version on biz cards, but letterhead and
>envelops will be 3 color.
I leave it to your design sense to work out how the logos look at different
levels, i.e. spot color vs. 4 color. But you've got a nearly impossible job,
anticipating how the client will use the logo on various media with printing of
differing quality..
What programs did you create the artwork in? Did you use vector art like Adobe
Illustrator, or just do a continuous tone image in Photoshop? Its at times like
this that the advantages of vector-art programs become obvious.
>My original approach was to make three greyscales, since two of the elements are
>either graded blends or textured surfaces. And I did do some hand trapping
>where
>appropriate. But the printer was dubious (I don't know if he was aware I even
>trapped at all) so I looked into Photoshops new trapping capability, and saw
>that
>it was really designed for solids. Now the printer has agreed to try the
>hand-trapped version.
Oh boy. That sounds like the one single hardest trapping problem, trapping a
color gradation against a color gradation. Your trapping might have been easier
if you'd picked a color set that had the 'shared element' properties I
described. I'd have to see the artwork to see specifically how it should trap.
>But what I don't know is how much should be trapped. I went 2 pixels (more or
>less), but I'm not sure if that is enough.
Don't think pixels, think actual dimensions on the press. Your pressman probably
knows exactly how accurate his presses are, since he works with it day in and
day out. And you know how to work the image at press size.
I haven't worked with presses in quite
>a few years, but I understand the new presses don't stretch paper as much.
>Anyway,
>what is your opinion on this?
Good color presses can be damn accurate. I once did a poster that was to be
printed 4color at 24x36, with some complex 3-d rendered artwork. I looked at the
final art, and decided it needed massive help with trapping since the colors
were so bright and contrasty. I spent about 5 hours trapping the thing. And when
I saw the final print run, the pressman had done such a good job that it was
really "overtrapped" and I could have probably gotten away with NO trapping. But
printers like that are rare, and besides, the client liked my artwork so much
that he took it to a better printer at the last minute, and got a much more
expensive production run. I set the job up for the average crappy 4-color press
with a pressman who is good but not TOO good.
Then on the other hand, I used to hear my ex-girlfriend complain about having to
hand-paint over trapping errors for a run of Lichtenstein lithographs. She was a
printer's assistant at Gemini GEL, and these were professional printers mostly
from Tamarind, with the best equipment and talent money can buy. But they still
screwed up the registration, and for weeks on end, my ex- used to come home from
work, and complain about how she had spent all day with a tiny retouching
paintbrush, painting around the misregistered edges of millions of Lichtenstein
BenDay Dots, filling in all the white areas. Aack. Well, I supppose if your
prints sell for $30,000, you can hire people to hand-paint over your trapping
errors.
Anyway.. if your logo has to go on tons of different media, from envelopes to
biz cards to 4-color magazine advertising, at all different sizes, there really
isn't one perfect compromise that will print well and still trap at all
different sizes. But if you give me a few details, or if I could see the
artwork, I could probably suggest some strategies.
Erik A. Mattila
http://www.impix.com/ex/barc/cartouche.html
It's not that bad of a problem. It's going to be pretty tiny, so not much is going
to show. The three color scheme is to use the teal color for the water, and a brown
for the oval shape and the land. The land is embossed (visually), so any overlap
between the land and water will be ok, since it will all 'mix' to a dark value
anyway. The dark brown of the cartouche (oval) will also cover a multitude of
sins. All the text will be solid black.
But this is my 'cross to bear' about this industry. I always design to whatever
technology is involved in the reproduction, and I had other versions available to
cover these kinds of technical problems. But on the other hand the client is always
correct. So this is a real hybrid job. I mean, if they would have said 'three
color' in the first place, I never would have shown them anything that would be
difficult to print, and they would have been happy as clams. To make it worse, I
have no direct contact with this organization, as I am subcontracted by another
client (a research group) to do their art work.
One of the best horror stories I have was from several years ago. I was working for
a new "Sunshine" studio in SoCal, and the studio logo was designed by a world class
industrial designer, Stacey Dukes. It was a very beautiful and unique design. To
get the visual design of a glowing sun, he dropped a solid black circle inside of a
yellow circle, with just about 3/32nds of the yellow showing. It looked like it was
on fire - a very remarkable effect. But the printer couldn't make it fly. He
couldn't successfully register the black on the yellow, since two concentric circles
that are slightly off alignment are very visible - for some reason we can perceive
this very well. Anyway, it all ended up going back on the drawing board.
What I wonder about alot today is if printers still work their miricles on the light
table. I stripped for awhile, and it was really amazing what you could do with an
exacto knife, opaquing fluid, rubylith, and a good screen collection. But this is
all pre-computer stuff.
Once, while working for "Last Gasp" comics, I got a really nasty note from S. Clay
Wilson because all his stories, when printed, had wide margins at the bottom of the
page. He just didn't seem to understand how to proportion his work. I ended up
making him a kit out of film with proportion scales on it etc. and it worked out
perfectly. But I used to do full color covers there, and all the separations were
done with film, screens etc. It got really involved - but at the same time color
separations cost a lot of money.
I work with Illustrator when I can - vector graphics rule, as far as I'm concerned.
But the color version of this logo is Photoshop. I really prefer to avoid huge
computer files, but sometimes it is necessary. I just got a new job that I think
I'll lay out with Strata Studio, since it has some elements in it that beg for some
3d work. So that will involve at least an EPS file for the printer.
One other anecdote. In the early eighties I went with a friend of mine to George C.
Rice & Sons in LA. I was quite impressed. It was the first time I saw a drum laser
scanner, and air-cushioned sheet presses. Wow, I thought I was in Star Wars. But I
had to take a leak, so the sales rep we were talking to gave me directions to the
John. I had to pass through a locker room to get there. On my way out there were
two Chicano pressman in the locker room on coffee break, and one was saying "Hey,
Manny, you know that problem with press 17? I fixed it yesterday. I just had to
twist that chingadera on the bottom, give it a kick, and it purrs like a kitten!"
Pretty good high tech talk, I thought. Nothing's changed.
Erik
Marge Inal
>SO, what I'm saying is, this book relies on this trick a lot in suggesting
color
>combinations. Its great for prepress designers, but you'd probably prefer
other
>color combinations in a painting.
I simply don't understand your argument. ALL books that
have color illustrations are printed in process colors.
These books are no different. Giving the information
on ratios of CMYK is just added information for anyone
WANTING to use this as a printmaking reference. What
does that have to do with using as a designer's reference,
which is clearly the intent of the publication?
Charles Eicher
>
>Sure, you can see it here:
>http://www.impix.com/ex/barc/cartouche.html
>
>It's not that bad of a problem. It's going to be pretty tiny, so not much is
>going
>to show. The three color scheme is to use the teal color for the water, and a
>brown
>for the oval shape and the land. The land is embossed (visually), so any
>overlap
>between the land and water will be ok, since it will all 'mix' to a dark value
>anyway. The dark brown of the cartouche (oval) will also cover a multitude of
>sins. All the text will be solid black.
>
Looks like you're just fine if you do the standard thing, spread one color over
the other where they adjoin. Its a fairly simple job, its not like what I was
thinking of, it doesn't have one gradation "pass by" another, so to speak. Those
are a bitch to trap. Instead, you just have flat colors butting up against each
other. Just throw an wider stroke of one color overprinting. You know the usual
stuff..
>..But the printer couldn't make it fly. He
>couldn't successfully register the black on the yellow, since two concentric
>circles
>that are slightly off alignment are very visible - for some reason we can
>perceive
>this very well.
Hmm.. interesting.
>What I wonder about alot today is if printers still work their miricles on the
>light
>table. I stripped for awhile, and it was really amazing what you could do with
>an
>exacto knife, opaquing fluid, rubylith, and a good screen collection. But this
>is
>all pre-computer stuff.
Yeah, I grew up in that era, and I ended up working with a few guys who were
really good at films. They could look at the negatives and tell right away if
the color seps were good or bad. I never could quite figure out how they did
that.
>Once, while working for "Last Gasp" comics, I got a really nasty note from S.
>Clay
>Wilson because all his stories, when printed, had wide margins at the bottom of
>the
>page. He just didn't seem to understand how to proportion his work. I ended up
>making him a kit out of film with proportion scales on it etc. and it worked out
>perfectly.
ha.. I used to keep a slide-rule on my desk, just for doing proportions.
Everyone thought I was weird to use a slide rule to figure proportions for the
computer screen, but its the fastest way to work fractional proportions. I
recently discovered that Slide Rules are a new collectible item, models like
mine (bought in about 1972 for under $50) are now worth hundreds of dollars. And
prices keep going up and up.
>I work with Illustrator when I can - vector graphics rule, as far as I'm
>concerned.
>But the color version of this logo is Photoshop. I really prefer to avoid huge
>computer files, but sometimes it is necessary. I just got a new job that I
>think
>I'll lay out with Strata Studio, since it has some elements in it that beg for
>some
>3d work. So that will involve at least an EPS file for the printer.
Boy, that's exactly what I was talking about. You get lots of hot RGB colors in
a render that are out of gamut, and lots of subtle shadows that may not have
enough color resolution if you convert CMYK. Plus, you get the nightmares, for
example a graduated background in color (like a distinct shadow) butting against
other colored objects with uneven lighting (and thus, changing color). It can be
a real bitch to trap. But here's how I'd approach it.
Do some test renders of your primary colors. Dim down some of the hottest RGB
colors, render some lit objects, and do some test CMYK seps. Experiment to find
the brightest primary colors that separate into the proper CMYK colors.
It also helps to throw some noise in, using photoshop filters. Helps break up
the flat colors a bit, makes them look a bit more natural on press.
>One other anecdote. In the early eighties I went with a friend of mine to
>George C.
>Rice & Sons in LA. I was quite impressed. It was the first time I saw a drum
>laser
>scanner, and air-cushioned sheet presses. Wow, I thought I was in Star Wars.
>But I
>had to take a leak, so the sales rep we were talking to gave me directions to
>the
>John. I had to pass through a locker room to get there. On my way out there
>were
>two Chicano pressman in the locker room on coffee break, and one was saying
>"Hey,
>Manny, you know that problem with press 17? I fixed it yesterday. I just had
>to
>twist that chingadera on the bottom, give it a kick, and it purrs like a
>kitten!"
>Pretty good high tech talk, I thought. Nothing's changed.
hey, any machine that doesn't respond to a kick in the chingadera, I don't want
to use it..
That's part of what I love about printing. Its still so low-tech, but you can do
so many interesting high-tech things with it, take it to another level. But I
still love the old stuff. But I still haven't had the guts to take my old 5x7
letterpress out of the closet. I don't think I want to spend the next 3 or 4
years setting up a printing studio.
Charles Eicher
>
>In article <7ra2nr$1n...@edrn.newsguy.com>, cei...@inav.net says...
>
>>SO, what I'm saying is, this book relies on this trick a lot in suggesting
>color
>>combinations. Its great for prepress designers, but you'd probably prefer
>other
>>color combinations in a painting.
>
>I simply don't understand your argument.
I tried to explain, but I see its done no good. Its not that the images are done
in CMYK, the book uses a specific scheme of CMYK colors, just for this trick..
>ALL books that
>have color illustrations are printed in process colors.
That's not true at all. Pantone spot colors are mixed from a range of about 13
inks. CMYK is just one system, I routinely used to work with 5 and 6 color
printing. Hexachrome is now becoming popular for its wider color gamut. I even
saw one scheme that claimed that adding a 5th plate of silver to CMYK will
improve the color gamut, but I'm skeptical.
>These books are no different. Giving the information
>on ratios of CMYK is just added information for anyone
>WANTING to use this as a printmaking reference.
If you wanted color ratios, you'd just consult a table of colors like the
Trumatch table. This book goes a bit further, suggesting color combinations that
trap easily. Sorry, I can't really explain trapping any better, in just a text
medium.
>What
>does that have to do with using as a designer's reference,
>which is clearly the intent of the publication?
I just think you're looking at one aspect of the reference, and missing its most
important intention. Yes, you can use it for color picking, but its really
intended for precision prepress work. Its no big deal, really.
Marge Inal
>I just think you're looking at one aspect of the reference, and missing its
most
>important intention. Yes, you can use it for color picking, but its really
>intended for precision prepress work. Its no big deal, really.
And I simply don't understand why you have made
my reference to these books, by whose very
title their intention is clear "DESIGNER'S
GUIDE TO COLOR," into a specious argument about
printing technical matters. Unless it's to
flaunt your expertise on the subject.
To put an end to this debate I am quoting VERBATIM
from the fly-leaf of the first volume:
"This compact book is meant to serve primarily as
a professional tool for anyone associated with design
or the design process. Because of the inclusion of
screen values of the four process colors, this book will
make perhaps its greatest contribution to those who realize
their design through some printed process -- graphic
designers, advertising and package designers, and probably
some members of architectural firms who become involved
in printed media. IN A MUCH BROADER SENSE (emphasis mine),
the book has real value to anyone who needs to confirm
color ideas or to find color combinations, suggestions
and examples presented in a straightforward, pure and
neutral way."
And that's all I was trying to say and don't know
why I didn't just use the quote in the first place.
These books are just another tool of knowledge
to augment the other color-theory tools...
Charles Eicher
>
>In article <7rce69$2i...@edrn.newsguy.com>, cei...@inav.net says...
>
>>I just think you're looking at one aspect of the reference, and missing its
>most
>>important intention. Yes, you can use it for color picking, but its really
>>intended for precision prepress work. Its no big deal, really.
>
>And I simply don't understand why you have made
>my reference to these books, by whose very
>title their intention is clear "DESIGNER'S
>GUIDE TO COLOR," into a specious argument about
>printing technical matters. Unless it's to
>flaunt your expertise on the subject.
I'm not here to flaunt any obscure technical expertise. This is a particularly
thorny issue for prepress, and I worked at a job where I spent about half my
working hours explaining these issues to customers. I take no pleasure in
repeating it for the umpteenth time.
Reasonable people have reasonable disagreements about color systems, this is one
of them. I just think that if you knew some of the scheme behind this color
book, you'd think differently about it. Not good or bad, just different.
>To put an end to this debate I am quoting VERBATIM
>from the fly-leaf of the first volume:
>
>"This compact book is meant to serve primarily as
>a professional tool for anyone associated with design
>or the design process. Because of the inclusion of
>screen values of the four process colors, this book will
>make perhaps its greatest contribution to those who realize
>their design through some printed process -- graphic
>designers, advertising and package designers, and probably
>some members of architectural firms who become involved
>in printed media. IN A MUCH BROADER SENSE (emphasis mine),
>the book has real value to anyone who needs to confirm
>color ideas or to find color combinations, suggestions
>and examples presented in a straightforward, pure and
>neutral way."
>
>And that's all I was trying to say and don't know
>why I didn't just use the quote in the first place.
>These books are just another tool of knowledge
>to augment the other color-theory tools...
The tools are a lot more useful if you know how they were designed to be used.
Not that they aren't necessarily useful for other purposes. I once cut a board
in half using a hammer and a screwdriver, because I didn't have any other tools.
Made a ragged cut, but good enough for my purposes at the time.
I'll just restate a couple of objections for using this book series for general
color picking.
1. Its CMYK. Many of the colors could be hard to mix from the conventional tube
pigments. Conventional pigments offer much more intense colors, and the CMYK
book would only show a pale imitation of the color relationships.
2. Its color selections are based on a prepress trapping trick, something I've
tried to explain but have apparently failed. The color relationships are
designed primarily for compatibility on printing presses. You would probably
pick different color schemes if you made the choices on your painting pallette.
Neither of these are fatal flaws in the book. Its just a jumping off point for
making color choices. I just think this book happens to have a really
interesting scheme, but that scheme is not intended for anyone but prepress
designers. I just thought you'd be interested in knowing what is really going on
in the book, behind the scenes.
Marge Inal
>Neither of these are fatal flaws in the book. Its just a jumping off point for
>making color choices. I just think this book happens to have a really
>interesting scheme, but that scheme is not intended for anyone but prepress
>designers. I just thought you'd be interested in knowing what is really going on
>in the book, behind the scenes.
Charles, since I have some background in 'fine art' printing
I understood everything you said. It simply has nothing to
do with what I was trying to convey to those who were railing
about having to study color theory in school. My original
comments were meant to simply suggest that their are more
color theory approaches than the ones put forth by Itten,
Chrevreul, Albers, Leland et al. And I gave a couple of
examples of little paper-back books that I have found handy
in the past.
As for duplicating the colors in the books 'exactly' using
any sort of painting medium, that is something that is as
basic as duplicating nature's colors or painting a photo
realistic painting that looks exactly like the colors in
a photo. Experienced artists have NO problems mimicking
colors, regardless -- IMHO. It took me years to learn that
a 'heightened' color was more 'artistic' than mimicking
as exactly as possible the colors I see in nature. I prefer
to refer to my own paintings now as having a 'heightened
sense of drama' due to the more intense color combinations
I use that are not at all natural but something we are now
all accustomed to seeing via TV and computer monitors, etc.
Erik A. Mattila
at all in your description of how you werre using the books in question. I also
said Charles was, but he disagreed.
So what is 'theory' in the first place? In the context of color theory, for
example, the statement "if you mix two primary colors you will produce a secondary
color" is a theoretical statement. A 'theory' is more or less a proposed model,
which will behave in a certain predictable way when it is applied to real life. In
process color, a statement such as "if you run a 20% yellow screen below a solid
black, you will get a richer, deeper black" is a theoretical statement.
In contrast to this, if an artist wants to see various colors in different
combination in order to develop color ideas or strategies for a work of art,
'theory' isn't really necessary nor appropriate, since you only need examples of
colors juxtaposed in various combinations. True, you can use a color theory text
for this, since there are likely to be plenty of visual expressions and examples
that can be used as color 'swatches' without concerning with any theoretical concern
at all. I've done this for years -- clipping a photo in a magizine because the
color combination is interesting or compelling. Now with the internet, I download
graphics frequently because I'm impressed with the range of colors. I'm just saying
this sort of activity has nothing to do with 'theory.'
I haven't read Itten, but I have Klee (and Itten's theories, as well as Klee's, came
out of collaborations while designing curriculum at the Bauhaus, so I'm assume some
similarities). Klee talks theoretically about 'advancing and receding colors,' for
example, so subsequently an artist may use Klee's theory to plan a painting where
she/he would apply the 'theory' by using colors that advance and recede according to
Klee's model. That's theory and it's application.
The abuse of the term 'theory' is somewhat like the abuse of the term 'plhilosophy'
in our common, everyday usage. When people say "Here's my philosophy of life..."
what follows is usually not 'philosophy' at all, given the fact that 'philosophy' is
actually a real thing with a history and a definition. Anyway, that's my theory
about all this [sic].
Erik Mattila
Marge Inal
>
>I jumped into this a while back commenting that you were'nt talking about
'theory'
>at all in your description of how you werre using the books in question. I
also
>said Charles was, but he disagreed.
NO I WASN'T, and that was the point of this part of
the color theory thread that I began. I was speaking
of additional studies of color BEYOND the usual
concept of color theory. I was referring people who
have any interest in the topic to books that go into
"how to use" color for design and other purposes. I
hope that makes my intent clearer to you...
Erik A. Mattila
that since you are talking about something other than 'color theory' it makes
little sense to cite color theory texts under a thread called 'color theory
books." That's all I'm saying. However, if a color theory text just happens
to have losts of pretty pictures that you want to use as a reference, that's
OK, but is still has little to do with theory.
I know, I seem to be splitting hairs. But here's where I think it's
important. The broader argument in this thread is whether or not leaning color
theory is valuable to an artist. Some say yes, some say no, and each side can
offer arguments with considerable merit. But the discussion only has any
meaning if we are talking about 'theory' since both sides will be advocating a
position which address the righteousness or difficiencies of theory. If you're
arguing about something other than 'theory' it is simply inappropriate, and
represents something that is neither here nor there. This wouldn't even be an
issue, except many people don't really know what a 'theory' is and how it could
be used. So if I argue, for example, that an artist would benefit by learning
color theory, (or the converse) my argument would only be valid if I understood
what 'theory' means. Otherwise it is just a statement or declaration which uses
the term 'theory' without ever addressing what lies beneath the term. So the
statement "An artist would benefit by understanding Commander X's Color Theory
book" has a type of equivalency to "An artist would benefit by understanding
that mixing two primary colors will produce a secondary color." However, the
equivalancy is absent with the second term" An artist would benefit by learning
neat color combinations by using this or that as an example."
I mean try this out (the ng is a good proving grounds). Look at arguments
structurally, even the really contentious ones. Often (perhaps the majority of
times) you will see the contending parties arguing two different things, which
only converge on very superfical points. It's no wonder these often become so
personalized and aggrivated.
Erik Mattila
Marge Inal
>I mean try this out (the ng is a good proving grounds). Look at arguments
>structurally, even the really contentious ones. Often (perhaps the majority
of
>times) you will see the contending parties arguing two different things, which
>only converge on very superfical points. It's no wonder these often become so
>personalized and aggrivated.
Well, I hardly need you to lecture me on this.
I USUALLY begin a new thread within a thread.
I apologize for not doing so when I began this
sub-category suggesting that there was more
to 'color theory' than meets the eye. As far
as I am concerned 'theory' is a misnomer for
something that is physically proven in the case
of light and it's interaction with objects to
create color. As for application of color in
art, I still think it's gone beyond 'theory' and
is pretty well a given now. In any event it is
a matter of semantics, as far as I'm concerned...
Erik A. Mattila
discussion, and I was trying to sort things out.
Recant a bit on this thread. It started with a simple inquiry from Hermant D.
Tagare:
>Hemant D. Tagare" wrote: Could someone recommend a good book on color theory in
art for self study? I am interested in something that balances theoretical
rhetoric with practical examples and is written in plain english. Thanks, Hemant<
The first few responses to to Tagare's question were very positive and useful,
including one from Nita Leland, which actually recommends a text other than her
own. Then you (assuming that Marginal is a clone of Aster Iske) recommend
Nelands's text, which evoked the expected vehemence from some of our regulars who
enjoy insulting people. Then came a string of responses disclaiming 'color
theory' altogether, and some subsequent sub-threads, including this one.
My overview is this. Many time R.A.F. participants have defined this newsgroup as
professional artist, even going into debates about 'real artists vs. sunday
painters or poseurs etc. So I'm wondering what 'professional' really means.
Often, on RAF, a person who is new to art posts a question, with assumptions that
within a group of 'professional' artists useful knowedge can be gained. And I
thing this generally works -- most of these questions do elicit useful and
valuable responses. But these kinds of questions also elicit totally useless
responses which have no relevance to the question. Also, a lot of really bad
advice is offered. As a curiosity, I like to ponder the concept of
'professionalism' in this context. It's more or less a hobby of mine, as I'm
really interested in 'metadiscourse.' Newsgroups are wonderful laboratories for
this.
I could accept your explanation that you were merely initiating a sub-thread,
except that this is not the case. Since you were discussing something other than
'theory,' you really need to state 'this is not about theory' so that there will
be less confusion. But you don't. Even the suggestion that what you are saying
is 'beyond' theory implies that theory has been passed-through, digested, and the
topic has evolved to a higher level. This is not the case. There is simply no
substqantial relationship between color theory and using color reference in order
to discover pleasing color relationships. Were talking about the great divide
between 'theory and practice,' as a matter of fact. If you look at it this way,
it appears that it is not true to say that using color reference systems is
somehow 'beyond' color theory. These are actually discrete practices.
And what does , "it's a matter of semantics" mean?
Marge Inal wrote:
> Well, I hardly need you to lecture me on this.
> I USUALLY begin a new thread within a thread.
> I apologize for not doing so when I began this
> sub-category suggesting that there was more
> to 'color theory' than meets the eye.
This is a pun, yes? Very good. It's just that you can't argue that there's more
to color theory than meets the eye if you are qualifying your argument with things
that do not relate to 'color theory.' This all hinges on the fact that color
theory is a specific thing, not something vague and ambiguous.
> As far
> as I am concerned 'theory' is a misnomer for
> something that is physically proven in the case
> of light and it's interaction with objects to
> create color.
No, you are wrong about your understanding of theory. The 'physically proven,'
'unimpeachable' understanding of the world are termed 'laws' (at least by
'science' as it exists in culture). 'Theory' is a step down from that. Something
is not called a theory until it has been confirmed over the course of many
independent experiments. Theories are more certain than hypotheses, but less
certain than laws.
And also you're not talking about 'color theory' as such, but rather the general
science of 'Optics' (the scientific study of light) which describes (and
theorizes) the phenomenology of light. "Color," by comparison, is a sensate
phemonena, and subsequently 'color thoery' involves the study of the human subject
(and animal subject) and it deals with physiology, perceptual psychology, and all
sorts of subjective phenomena. Certainly any valuable and useful 'color theory'
would also be based in "Optics" which studies that which exists on the supply side
of color perception.
> As for application of color in
> art, I still think it's gone beyond 'theory' and
> is pretty well a given now.
This strikes me as nonsense. The practice of using color in art may parallel the
evolution of 'color theory,' but there is no way that practice can possibly
supplant theory. If it could be imagined reasonably, then it follows that a
theoritician would draft a new theory to account for the usurping of theory by
practice. It's like electricity -- we had light bulbs long before we had a
reasonable theoretical understanding of what electricity is.
> In any event it is
> a matter of semantics, as far as I'm concerned...
Well, that opens more cans of worms. Keep this in mind - when you encounter the
'tic' or 'ic' suffix on a word, it usually means 'the study of.." Thus,
'semantics' means "The study of relations between a representation and what it
represents" or "the study of meaning of linguistic expressions." Strictly
speaking, semantics does not concern itself with things like context, conventions
of language use or the intentions of the speaker. It is a very 'formal'
discipline. I'm sure you can see, with this in mind, that there are no
'semantics' here.
But I do understand the pop-culture form of the term 'semantics' which is another
way of saying 'it's just aa word game' which suggests that there is something
else, a greater truth, a wisdom that resides beyong words. But it is never
defined, this greater wisdom (perhaps only as 'common sense' which is then not
defined). So what we have are phantom concepts offered as an alternative to a
specific thing such as actually using words to communicate ideas.
I just believe that one way the idea of 'professionalism' among a group of artists
can be advanced is to give some attention to the language we use to represent
complex subjects, and try to hone our ability to communicate these ideas which are
often difficult to express in words. What I have found over the years is that
language critiques are often not welcome, since language itself plays such a major
role in who and what we are. It almost gets too personal, too threatening. And
now we have the sociology of the newsgroup to contend with, where actual human
beings meet in a virtual environment where the written word ("ecrit") must
represent the whole human.
I know, I'm being a great bore. I'm just pursuing what interests me. I admit
it's a bit selfish.
Erik Mattila
Marge Inal
>I know, I'm being a great bore. I'm just pursuing what interests me. I admit
>it's a bit selfish.
>
>Erik Mattila
Pat Pat -- YAWN -- zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz