Skip to main content
Page Summary:

The text discusses the relationship between painting and sculpture, focusing on how colors appear based on lighting conditions. It offers general rules for understanding shadows, light, and reflections, emphasizing chiaroscuro effects. It also provides guidance on observing how light and shadows play on different surfaces and in different artistic contexts.

Image of Original Page
English Translation of this page:

Necessity of Models in Relief

Up to now, Painting and Sculpture have gone hand in hand because it is assumed that the Sculptor has practiced because their color is subdued by the deprivation of light; which makes them appear bluish, due to the opposition of golden or red tones, or others that make the gray appear bluish. These remarks specifically concern landscape painters. There are some general rules that are necessary to know; that the shadows cast by bodies are always stronger than the shaded part of the same bodies; the strongest touches and shadows are always near the brightest lights, however, they are subordinate to the light of reflections, which, when vivid and nearby, can destroy part of that strength, and only in the areas where reflections cannot enter: touches and details that are in the shadows are never as strong and sensitive as those in the light, and consequently, shadowed parts are always vague and restful in comparison to illuminated parts.

Another principle of chiaroscuro is given, which is all the better as it leads to grandeur and aids in producing striking and sensitive effects; it is that reflections, in their brightest parts, are always browner than the half-tones in their darkest browns. Admittedly, this rule is subject to many exceptions. For firstly, the difference in colors produces some of these exceptions, as it seems they may be lighter than some colored half-tones: for example, the reflected shadow of a white cloth may be lighter than the half-tone, and even the light of a black fabric. However, this rule is good and leads to a lot of effect, as by it the masses are well defined in a painting, and distinguish themselves better from afar; thus, I believe that this law should be followed in large historical paintings which are supposed to be viewed from a slightly distant perspective; because in effect, it is what is observed in nature seen from a bit afar: the masses of shadows are darker than they would be if viewed up close, especially when it is sunlight that illuminates the painting; as this light produces very distinct and well-defined shadows. It is not the same when it comes to a portrait, which is assumed to be seen up close; since the slightest details that can contribute to the likeness are represented: there may be vivid and clear reflections, and the particular colors of each object have their more sensitive differences.

It is also necessary to observe that the edges of objects are soft and a bit uncertain, not only when the objects are round and turning but also when they are flat, and even when they stand in brown on light backgrounds; it seems that the rays that come and take the light backgrounds against these edges have a strong aberration, and outline a little.