Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

You can send an email to [email protected] if you have questions about how to use this forum.

Your opinion?

i see more and more people painting from computer monitors. Your opinion? -Jodie Estes, Elmira, NY

Comments

  • edited March 2
    At first I objected to painting from a computer screen, but budget severe restraints, impossible. But I came around to justify it further by acknowledging my years of experience with still life and plein air experience and color theory to accomplish the task. Now I have the knack of it with my present computer and works fine for me. First time it was quite challenging and time consuming, but not any longer in a very short period of time. The screen I use often cannot display a full image all at once, so have to scroll in sections and color display is very good. I seem to be painting in sections already. But I would not necessarily recommend this to any beginner, it's quite the challenge to get started. I also work with my own photos and have memory experience of having been there and take photo to work with. I feel I most often have adequate information to work with and I trust my decision making process. I am very picky about capturing convincing realism apart from the photo too.
    jodie2025asifshaikh
  • Do you mean painting from a monitor as opposed to a print? To me the best option would be to use both... prints make colour matching easy, while monitors can reveal more details, you can zoom in etc.
    PaulBRoxyBobitalyjodie2025
  • @movealonghome is right.  When it comes to matching colors, nothing beats a laminated photograph.

    Take a look at these brush marks on the photograph.  It's easy to see which ones match, and which ones don't.  I can't imagine ever getting a close color/value match by holding up a brush against a backlit screen.



    jodie2025BOB73
  • I love, love, love my nixplay.  https://www.amazon.com/NIX-Advance-Digital-Motion-Sensor/dp/B00Z9ZYXF4     I got tired of spending so much money on printing - there were several times that I paid professionals to print something for me and even their ink was off - you can't beat the picture quality and there is no glare on the nixplay -  What you'll save in ink and printing will pay for itself.  If you really must touch the surface with paint (you can put saranwrap tight) - I just hold the color close.  I prefer to paint from life - you can't beat it.  But I've had my nixplay for a while and absolutely love it when I have to paint from a photo.
    jodie2025BOB73asifshaikh
  • I think the monitor is fine as long as you use the same monitor the whole time.

    Forgiveness
  • edited March 7
    Also when using your monitor, be sure to keep your settings the same for every session, do not forget this. I have to calibrate light and dark at every session, no exceptions.
  • @forgiveness what do you mean calibrate? If your studio has a controlled lighting set up then why would you need to calibrate? Isn’t that the opposite of ‘keep your settings the same”? Not trying to be argumentative
    Forgiveness
  • edited March 8
    What I mean is, yes my studio has controlled lighting set up but adjusting the light on the computer screen to high or low for brightness and contrast, I have to simply be sure to keep accordingly. I my case when I shut down my laptop and turn it on once again, the light setting will have changed and need to readjust, I work on the highest (brightest) setting while I paint. No further adjustments, nor calibration to the photo's color are necessary. I hope this clears up any confusion/ambiguity on this.
  •  The best part of using a monitor is that one can resize the photo and make the change in any particular area.
    The only problem with using the monitor is the initial costs incurred on the setup.
    Forgiveness
  • If you want to get very exact then yes you would periodically need to calibrate.  For example people who edit photographs to be printed should be working with a monitor that is calibrated.  For painting purposes, I sort of disagree with Forgiveness on this one.  To me it does not make that much of a difference if there is a slight variation in color.  Now if for some reason you had to have a perfect copy of an image (I'm not sure why for the most part), then maintaining monitor calibration would be pretty important.

    Forgiveness
  • edited March 8
    Maybe I am hard on myself when it comes to color application, maybe my background training too including plein air experience, but I most often work with edited photos, so need to calibrate some. This also includes accurate "value" readings and display. The light set up I have mimics outdoors and gallery settings, so quite bright and further affects the image displayed on my laptop monitor set up to my left on a table right next to and level with my painting easel. Otherwise I do not think calibration is as important, as long as you are close to the family of colors and get your values well. My aim is not to copy any photo precisely in any painting but to render a likeness but yet apart from the photo, after all this is about painting. Also if initial cost is a concern the same can be had from using an iPad, tablets and phone as some artists are doing.
Sign In or Register to comment.