What do you mean 317 views... this is extremely insightful. Knowing theory does not always translate to skills and this particular video is really helpful
I was stuck on a commission I have to paint where a lot of the subject is in shadow and really struggling to make it look right, I think this may have given me the solution I needed 🙏
I've been drawing for 10ish years now and i think that i'm a bit above average, but never was able to push further. Found your channel a days ago and your mindset about the painting process totally changed my views on art
That was powerful. I enjoyed this video very much. I get confused when trying to divide the lights from shadows. It would be greatly appreciated if you make a tutorial on how to separate light and shadow.
@@FaithfulStepsPodcast-z6r yeah it took me a bit of practice as well. If you haven’t seen these videos, these might be helpful: Light & Shadow: th-cam.com/video/cTvYNiq5T-4/w-d-xo.htmlsi=pLB5PzkmPhDkAZEn STOP Painting What you See: th-cam.com/video/1cU-780E3hY/w-d-xo.html Also, I’m open to give free art critiques so you can give it a try yourself and send me your work here: www.danielfolta.com/critique
@@antonioblanco3086 great question. I’ll break it down so we can understand. Let’s imagine we have two objects on a table - Object 1 is generally brighter than Object 2. There’s also a light shining from the above and to the side on both. When assessing the values, we discover that the shadow value of Object 1 is really close if not brighter than the light value of Object 2. In this case, I would intentionally let the shadow value of Object 1 be darker than the light value of Object 2, even though the still life might be trying to say otherwise. This will help make the drawing/painting look more 3D, because it helps the eye clearly discern the light and shadow. It also helps you learn to perceive light and shadow better. You’d be amazed to find that a lot of the “bright” shadow values (like in Object 1) are often a lot darker than you think! In making the adjustment, it doesn’t have to be a lot darker, just slightly darker helps a lot. Now, you could get away with having a shadow value be brighter than a light value (we see this all the time in reality). But eventually you’ll take the reference away and all you’ll have is the drawing/painting. Keeping shadows darker will make it easier for you to quickly create the 3D illusion - and Object 1 will still appear generally brighter than Object 2. So, all that to say, if you’re drawing for the purpose of learning, it’s a good rule of thumb to make sure ALL your shadows are darker than ALL your lights in your drawing / painting, regardless of the objects. (No object should have a shadow value brighter than a light value anywhere in the painting, even on other objects). Hope this helps!
@danielfoltapaints thank you so much, very nice explanation. So, is it correct to make modifications despite not 100% reflecting the photo reference? Is still "realism"?
@@antonioblanco3086 I suppose it depends on how you define realism. Many people associate realism with details, or with making something look exactly like a photo, but I associate it more with creating an illusion of 3-dimensions. Details won’t make something more realistic without the illusion of 3-dimensions. The artist in this video simplified his shadows and was able to make the drawing look “more real” - that is, it looks more 3D. But he may not have copied exactly what he saw, in reality. My goal in these videos is to teach fundamentals that function as pillars for what we generally think of as realism. Things like how to create the illusion of form (3D), and of depth. There’s also textures as well, etc. The reason why artists need to learn realism isn’t to be able to copy what they see. It really should be learned in order to be able to paint anything you intend to. That way, you can go beyond drawing/ painting from photos and draw/paint from imagination. (Realism is an objective standard that proves whether you can paint what you intend or not, so it’s great for learning). But how you learn the realism matters. If you only learn how to copy what you see, you’re missing out on the gold. Within realism we can find principles that apply to any style, any medium. Those fundamental principles are the gold you’re looking for. And the fundamentals are easier to see when we strip away things that aren’t necessary, and only retain what matters. In the same way, sometimes a painting or drawing can be more POWERFUL when you leave out some unnecessary information - John Singer Sargent’s work might be an example of that. From a distance his paintings look more alive than most classical realist painters, and yet when you get up close it looks like an abstract impressionist painting. It’s incredible. Let me know if that’s all making sense. Might be worth doing a video on this topic alone!
Can’t the information (color, value difference etc.) be in either the light or the dark, just not in both in the same image? For example, if the light is blown out (very strong) you may actually see more detail like value and hue variations in the shadow.
@@sketchingwithcolor9480 😲 yes! And this Saturday I’m posting a video with a painting that has blown out lights and you’ll see me focus more on the shadows. But fundamentally, if the lights aren’t overexposed and the composition has information in both the lights and the shadows, you’ll find more information (more variances of color and value, details, etc.) in the lights, because without light there is no information. In the case of blown out lights, our eyes have adjusted to the shadows and so they are perceiving the “light” inside those shadows. So ultimately, light = visual information. Thanks for asking 🙂 had to think about that for a bit
Maybe it doesn't matter to most people, or maybe it's off-putting, but I find mixing God with art to be refreshing and encouraging and wholesome. There's a kind of understanding, a false understanding in my opinion, that liberals are creative and conservatives are not, or that liberals are more creative than conservatives. Maybe "atheists" and "Christians" would be more accurate, more relevant. It gets discouraging to feel like people who hold your own cherished beliefs are not creative or thoughtful people. This is just another indication that there are many of us out there, from all walks of life, in pursuit of all different endeavors. God be with you, brother, as cringe and goofy as this post may sound.
Thank you Sel! I appreciate that - I don't think it's cringe at all. With all our different walks of life, I've found most people enjoy open discussions around God or spirituality, regardless of beliefs. Especially for something like art, which, for all the "technicals" is ultimately a pursuit of beauty. The fact that there are technical principles that consistently work every time... is part of that discussion of beauty, and truth. And considering how those technicals are all based on the light... it feels like a travesty not to wonder about the deeper implications. The light brightens things. It can illuminate a path. It gives warmth. It brings clarity. It exposes things, like how exposing ourselves invites intimacy. It reveals truth. It's beautiful. It's good. These are all attributes we would assign to a perfect God. Whether someone believes God was invented in our minds or that God is real (as I do), I think we can all appreciate the added significance of how the book of Genesis - one of the oldest and most widely respected creation stories - starts with the creation of light itself.
@@aledmb yes there’s another light source that’s illuminating the leg. But simplifying the painting into light and shadow based on the one primary light source will give you the foundation for the rest of the painting. Secondary light sources should generally be treated as “secondary,” especially if you want to use the light to really convey the impression of form. Multiple light sources, not placed properly, can create visual confusion, making it harder to understand the form / planes of the 3D structure. Hope that helps!
Subscribed the moment I heard God separated light from the darkness. Yes. Yes. Just like how you need someone to interpret the application of chess to life, many things point to the Father of lights as all things have their meaning and purpose in the Son. Nothing is meaningless in light of His Word. He fills all in all!
@eunicestjarielofficial Yes! It’s amazing how so many painting principles have parallels to spiritual principles and it’s something I love exploring. Making this video reminded me a lot about Philippians 4:8 and 1 John 1:7.
What do you mean 317 views... this is extremely insightful. Knowing theory does not always translate to skills and this particular video is really helpful
Wow! Your student seriously leveled up! There was a world of difference between the 2 pictures.
I was stuck on a commission I have to paint where a lot of the subject is in shadow and really struggling to make it look right, I think this may have given me the solution I needed 🙏
I've been drawing for 10ish years now and i think that i'm a bit above average, but never was able to push further. Found your channel a days ago and your mindset about the painting process totally changed my views on art
@@zander8347 that’s awesome 🔥🔥
That was powerful. I enjoyed this video very much. I get confused when trying to divide the lights from shadows. It would be greatly appreciated if you make a tutorial on how to separate light and shadow.
@@FaithfulStepsPodcast-z6r yeah it took me a bit of practice as well. If you haven’t seen these videos, these might be helpful:
Light & Shadow: th-cam.com/video/cTvYNiq5T-4/w-d-xo.htmlsi=pLB5PzkmPhDkAZEn
STOP Painting What you See:
th-cam.com/video/1cU-780E3hY/w-d-xo.html
Also, I’m open to give free art critiques so you can give it a try yourself and send me your work here: www.danielfolta.com/critique
Thank you, Daniel! @danielfoltapaints
This is the most useful lighting video I've watched!
Very cool how removing the detail made it so much more realistic. Reminds me of comic book style cel shading
Thanks for the video
@@Newt2799 yeah! It’s cool how it’s both more realistic and also opens a door to lots of styles. Fundamentals 😉
Love this!
Super useful :) also,, really cool outro :D
so glad I've been blessed by the youtube algorythm! thank you so much for sharing this lesson
@@knowndigits glad you found me!
Excellent video, thank you. Can’t believe this has so little views
@@katm8128 thank you Kat!
happy to be ur 1000th sub! :D btw ty for such an amazing tut!
@@ukossoku 😲 thank YOU!
Amazing lesson thank you so much :)
Thank you so much for this valuable information!! Subscribed! God bless you, brother!
@@DenisWisestorm thank you! God bless you too
What happens when you have multiple objects with differents local values and the light of one is the shadow in the other object?
@@antonioblanco3086 great question. I’ll break it down so we can understand. Let’s imagine we have two objects on a table - Object 1 is generally brighter than Object 2. There’s also a light shining from the above and to the side on both. When assessing the values, we discover that the shadow value of Object 1 is really close if not brighter than the light value of Object 2. In this case, I would intentionally let the shadow value of Object 1 be darker than the light value of Object 2, even though the still life might be trying to say otherwise.
This will help make the drawing/painting look more 3D, because it helps the eye clearly discern the light and shadow. It also helps you learn to perceive light and shadow better. You’d be amazed to find that a lot of the “bright” shadow values (like in Object 1) are often a lot darker than you think!
In making the adjustment, it doesn’t have to be a lot darker, just slightly darker helps a lot. Now, you could get away with having a shadow value be brighter than a light value (we see this all the time in reality). But eventually you’ll take the reference away and all you’ll have is the drawing/painting. Keeping shadows darker will make it easier for you to quickly create the 3D illusion - and Object 1 will still appear generally brighter than Object 2.
So, all that to say, if you’re drawing for the purpose of learning, it’s a good rule of thumb to make sure ALL your shadows are darker than ALL your lights in your drawing / painting, regardless of the objects. (No object should have a shadow value brighter than a light value anywhere in the painting, even on other objects).
Hope this helps!
@danielfoltapaints thank you so much, very nice explanation. So, is it correct to make modifications despite not 100% reflecting the photo reference? Is still "realism"?
@@antonioblanco3086 I suppose it depends on how you define realism. Many people associate realism with details, or with making something look exactly like a photo, but I associate it more with creating an illusion of 3-dimensions.
Details won’t make something more realistic without the illusion of 3-dimensions.
The artist in this video simplified his shadows and was able to make the drawing look “more real” - that is, it looks more 3D. But he may not have copied exactly what he saw, in reality.
My goal in these videos is to teach fundamentals that function as pillars for what we generally think of as realism. Things like how to create the illusion of form (3D), and of depth. There’s also textures as well, etc.
The reason why artists need to learn realism isn’t to be able to copy what they see. It really should be learned in order to be able to paint anything you intend to. That way, you can go beyond drawing/ painting from photos and draw/paint from imagination. (Realism is an objective standard that proves whether you can paint what you intend or not, so it’s great for learning). But how you learn the realism matters. If you only learn how to copy what you see, you’re missing out on the gold.
Within realism we can find principles that apply to any style, any medium. Those fundamental principles are the gold you’re looking for. And the fundamentals are easier to see when we strip away things that aren’t necessary, and only retain what matters.
In the same way, sometimes a painting or drawing can be more POWERFUL when you leave out some unnecessary information - John Singer Sargent’s work might be an example of that. From a distance his paintings look more alive than most classical realist painters, and yet when you get up close it looks like an abstract impressionist painting. It’s incredible.
Let me know if that’s all making sense. Might be worth doing a video on this topic alone!
Magic man, bless u
Just subbed - great advice! Thank you!!
goated vid
Where can I get that cast/statue ?? I love it
I don't know 🙃
wow very good!!
Thank You
Can’t the information (color, value difference etc.) be in either the light or the dark, just not in both in the same image? For example, if the light is blown out (very strong) you may actually see more detail like value and hue variations in the shadow.
@@sketchingwithcolor9480 😲 yes! And this Saturday I’m posting a video with a painting that has blown out lights and you’ll see me focus more on the shadows.
But fundamentally, if the lights aren’t overexposed and the composition has information in both the lights and the shadows, you’ll find more information (more variances of color and value, details, etc.) in the lights, because without light there is no information.
In the case of blown out lights, our eyes have adjusted to the shadows and so they are perceiving the “light” inside those shadows. So ultimately, light = visual information.
Thanks for asking 🙂 had to think about that for a bit
@danielfoltapaints Cool. I look forward to it.
Video is up now! It focuses more on color 🎨 th-cam.com/video/VjkIBMEE1Rc/w-d-xo.html
@danielfoltapaints thanks. I will check it out.
It warmed my heart when you referred to the Lord during your critique of the artwork, subbed.
Great to hear that :)
wow
Omfg, this VDO is greattttt! You deserve more subscribers at least you got mine now.😊
@@tenten1417 just starting out - thank you for the support!
Great stuff man, definitley earned a sub from me :)
Maybe it doesn't matter to most people, or maybe it's off-putting, but I find mixing God with art to be refreshing and encouraging and wholesome.
There's a kind of understanding, a false understanding in my opinion, that liberals are creative and conservatives are not, or that liberals are more creative than conservatives. Maybe "atheists" and "Christians" would be more accurate, more relevant.
It gets discouraging to feel like people who hold your own cherished beliefs are not creative or thoughtful people.
This is just another indication that there are many of us out there, from all walks of life, in pursuit of all different endeavors.
God be with you, brother, as cringe and goofy as this post may sound.
Thank you Sel! I appreciate that - I don't think it's cringe at all. With all our different walks of life, I've found most people enjoy open discussions around God or spirituality, regardless of beliefs. Especially for something like art, which, for all the "technicals" is ultimately a pursuit of beauty. The fact that there are technical principles that consistently work every time... is part of that discussion of beauty, and truth. And considering how those technicals are all based on the light... it feels like a travesty not to wonder about the deeper implications. The light brightens things. It can illuminate a path. It gives warmth. It brings clarity. It exposes things, like how exposing ourselves invites intimacy. It reveals truth. It's beautiful. It's good. These are all attributes we would assign to a perfect God. Whether someone believes God was invented in our minds or that God is real (as I do), I think we can all appreciate the added significance of how the book of Genesis - one of the oldest and most widely respected creation stories - starts with the creation of light itself.
Sir , you looks like Vincent
there's more than one light source for that horse... i don't think you got it right.
@@aledmb yes there’s another light source that’s illuminating the leg. But simplifying the painting into light and shadow based on the one primary light source will give you the foundation for the rest of the painting. Secondary light sources should generally be treated as “secondary,” especially if you want to use the light to really convey the impression of form. Multiple light sources, not placed properly, can create visual confusion, making it harder to understand the form / planes of the 3D structure. Hope that helps!
Subscribed the moment I heard God separated light from the darkness. Yes. Yes. Just like how you need someone to interpret the application of chess to life, many things point to the Father of lights as all things have their meaning and purpose in the Son. Nothing is meaningless in light of His Word. He fills all in all!
@eunicestjarielofficial Yes! It’s amazing how so many painting principles have parallels to spiritual principles and it’s something I love exploring. Making this video reminded me a lot about Philippians 4:8 and 1 John 1:7.
Amen I'm not even a Christian 😂
Since when is pewdiepie is making art tutorials???? I thought he just made progress vids
@@ThisChannelHasAName 😂😂
This drawing is so off
@@errvega2705 in what way? In the proportions, or values, edges, etc?
@danielfoltapaints edges 🥵
@@errvega2705 🤦♂️
Love this interaction 😂