Education and Inspiration

The relationship between value and color is interdependent. Woven together they create a tapestry that allows the painter to convey an illusion of light. Any painting based entirely on value would be monochromatic, like a drawing, and any painting that used color without a value structure would be without form.

Some artists argue that value is the key to color, while others say that color is more important than value. In fact, they are both essential. The key variable is how value affects color identity.

How value affects color identity

Extremes of value profoundly effect a color’s ability to be read as color.
In this 9-step value scale, colors on the left are nearly white, with only the tiniest amount of pigment present. On the other end, colors are dark, nearly black, with almost none of their intrinsic hue left. The purest colors, without any white or black in them, are in the middle position at 5. Observe: If you squint at the value scale, the colors in middle zone (around 4 to 6) are brightest and seem to come forward.

This demonstrates a fundamental truth about color. Extremely light or extremely dark colors reveal less of their instrinic hue; therefore, they are less able to act as color, to react chromatically. A color’s full personality is expressed when its value is neither too dark or too light, but when it is in the middle range.

Value-priority and color-priority systems

This effect of value on color identity can be practically demonstrated by looking at two schools of painting: Dutch Landscape and Impressionism. Both are very successful at depicting natural light, but each does it very differently. One tradition uses a value-priority system. The other uses a color-priority system.

Dutch landscapists—a focus on value
An extreme contrast between light and dark, a value-priority system, was used by the painters of chiaroscuro. You’re probably familiar with Rembrandt’s use of strong value contrasts to achieve dramatic lighting effects. In the landscape tradition, the Dutch Landscapists of the 17th century used a similar value-priority system to create the illusion of light. Color is certainly not absent in the Dutch landscapes, but it plays a secondary role.

A value-priority system produces a very dramatic light. The artist uses the most extreme contrast range available. Forms are strong and clear. But where value contrasts take priority, color plays a more recessive role.

Jacob van Ruisdael. Sunlight on the Waterfront. The painting is shown in both color and black and white versions. If you squint, it’s easy to see that there’s not nearly as much difference between them as compared to the Boudin examples (next page). Although color is present on the left, it is clearly subordinate to strong value contrasts. Why? Ruisdael’s metaphor for light is extreme value contrast, from very light or white to black. But colors hold less of their intrinsic hue when they are very light or very dark. They read primarlily as a light or dark values rather than a spot with a lot of color information.

Impressionism — a focus on color
On the opposite end of the spectrum, the Impressionists used a color-priority system. Their goal was also to depict landscape light, but they believed that pure color was a better analogy for the intensity and emotional impact of light than strong value contrasts. So they sought a strategy that deferred to brighter colors. This strategy employs, in part, a reduced value range. By keeping more of the colors in the middle range (see value scale, previous page) they retain more of their coloristic identity. Value is still at play, but in a more subordinate role, as compared to a Dutch landscape.

Boudin

Eugene Boudin. Laundresses by a Stream. The difference between the color and black and white versions of Boudin’s painting is much more apparent. Unlike the Ruisdael, the black and white version loses much in the translation. It looks washed out. The color version uses many colors that are closer to the middle range, allowing them to keep more of their coloristic identity and react with each other in more chromatic ways.

Neither the Dutch landscapist or the Impressionist approach is a “truer” representation of reality. Each uses an artistic metaphor that works for different reasons. As examples, they sit at two ends of a continuum, with value dominating on one end and color dominating on the other. Of course, the myriad approaches to color don’t always fit so neatly into categories, but value- and color-priority examples do demonstrate the important principle of how color is affected by value.

Artists today can draw from the collective wisdom of many traditions. We see painters who use a value-priority system, those who use a color-priority system, and those that use a combination of both.

Solmssen Kurt Solmssen. Yellow Boat, Reading, 50 x 70, 2002.
Solmssen frequently uses extremely dark, nearly black colors for his shadows. Yet his colors are bright and intense. If he had made the sunstruck areas too light in value, they would not hold as much of their intrinsic color identity, which is what let’s them sing. Instead, he selects values for the yellow, green and blue that are closer to the middle range so they can retain their maximum identity and in this case, intensity. The black shadows also form a strong pattern that helps organize the painting.