Introduction

Light encapsulates all other art forms because it is the medium by which they are perceived.  Any object, whether real or artistically rendered, must have light upon it to be seen by the viewer.  Similarly, every lighted environment, whether unintentional or designed, has a unique consistency which can subtly or blatantly influence our reaction to the objects within it.  Within theatre, light designer use light to tell a story in line with the performance by illuminating the real objects on the stage.  A painter works much the same way, using light to affect the viewer.  The difference is that painters can bend the physics of light to their whim.  I intend to demonstrate this by comparing paintings containing realistic depictions of light with tableau vivants of them created by sophomore lighting students here at NCSA.

Bibliography

Bruce E. Carpenter, 'Cruelty and Genius: Poems of Hsü Wei', Tezukayama University Review (Tezukayama Daigaku Ronshu), Nara, Japan, 1979, no. 26, pp. 16–36.

Caravaggio. (n.d.). Caravaggio Analysis. Retrieved March 10, 2011, from http://caravaggioanalysis.blogsp

Ivan Kramskoi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (n.d.).Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved March 10, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan

Rembrandt. Images and metaphors, Christian Tumpel (editor), Haus Books London 2006

Poet on a Mountaintop

Before we dive in, though, I'd like to recognize the Eastern treatment of lighting, which is, to say the least, minimal.  To use a well known example, take Shen Zhou's Poet on a Mountaintop:

In this work there is almost no attention paid to light.  As the mountains fade into the background they are depicted as being darker, whereas realistically, considering the foggy conditions, they would become lighter as they got farther away.  The darkest tree in the whole composition, just right of center, is at the front of the forest, and also one of the tallest above the ground, therefore it would get the most sunlight, instead of how it is shown here, as the most deeply shadowed.  The most stark example of disregard for lighting is the poet himself.  He casts no shadow.  The clouds are clearly below him, so the light hitting his body would not be diffuse enough to obscure a shadow.  Then where is it?  Ignored by the artist for a very intentional, airy, mystical effect.  This treatment of light is the same in all of the Eastern works we have looked at.  Darkness in a composition implies importance, not shadowing.  Light sources are not important, illumination simply exists.

Self Portrait

Recreation by Mathew Ardoin

Rembrandt was well known for the vivid and modestly accurate self-portraits that he made throughout his life.  This example is of particular note for those interested in lighting, because of its singular, discriminating light source.  The soft white light highlights only half of the painter's face, and he look at us in surprise, as if we've stumbled onto him mid-thought.  The trouble arises, as seems to be the case with all of these paintings, in trying to determine exactly where the light source is coming from.  I determine that it has to be one because of a) the lack of double-shadowing and b) the very small amount of the subject actually illuminated.  Most of the evidence points to straight on side lighting from the left at the level of Rembrandt's face, perhaps positioned between us and him. The constant curve of the light's periphery indicates it is level with the subject, and the full illumination of the angled crevices of the nose further suggests lighting at more or less a 45 degree horizontal angle to the face.  But a problem arises when one considers the shadow hovering over the eye.  It has to be cast by a light source much higher than we expected.  There can't be two lights, because the eye shadowing is consistent, but the light is also coming from two directions.  The brightening of the cap, also, points to a raises source of light.  Faced with this impossible task, the recreation proves to be a bit washed out.  Using the higher-angled  light source, it reveals another practical consideration of real light that the Rembrandt does not have: spill.  On the subject above, light washes down from the shoulder onto the chest, and splashes across the face and cap.  In Rembrandt's image, carefully contained lighting shows only what the painter wishes to reveal: an artist caught mid-thought, halfway between the canvas he paints and the brush he paints with.

Girl with a Tress

Recreation by Kelsey Jones

This painting, by Ivan Kramskoi, falls slightly outside of our date range, but I wanted to include it to show the way artists continued to manipulate light in the name of realism long after the Renaissance had ended.  Kramskoi's fame is in early 19th century Russia, where his extremely true to life images created a movement.  He believed that only through the accurate portrayal of the subject down to the last detail could their true nature be revealed.  It is interesting, then, that in this painting also we find unrealistic lighting.  In the painting below it looks so real, almost more so than in the recreation above.  The difference is found in quality of light, which isn't altogether unnatural, and the number of light sources, which is.  The location of the painting is unclear, but the suggestion of flowers and trees in the background, and the warm color and downward direction of the light seems to suggest an outdoor, sunny environment.  In the recreation, the sun was recreated using, obviously, one light source.  But the difference between the two is clear: Kramskoi's painting simply has more light in more angles than is possible with the sun as a light source.  Observe the full illumination of the top of the girl's head, the back-lighting of her face, and the angled side lighting of the hair that sprawls down her chest.  Two light sources are required for this painting to work realistically.  But though the German master of realistic detail's intent is to convey reality, the methods he uses to portray it (to recreate the sun, in this case) is artificial.

Boy Peeling Fruit

Recreation by Joel Grover.

Caravaggio is best known for his powerful lighting.  In my midterm paper on him, I commented that he portrays light with incredible realism, while making it behave in ways it never would in reality.  In recreating Boy Peeling Fruit, Joel Grover used one overpowering light source, just as Caravaggio seemed to.  The direction is identical, the color and intensity of the light is also perfectly mimicked.  The difference comes from the sharpness of the shadows: compare the shadow line of the chest of the two boys.  In the recreation, the line is sharp, as it must be considering the distance the light source has to at to create the angle and quality of the light.  But glance at Caravaggio's work and discover the softened edges of the shadowing.  Despite ever indication to the contrary, this is not realistic, cannot be.  In order to be that diffuse, the light would have to come from more than one source, or be put through an intense diffusion.  But if the light was really as diffused as it would realistically have to be, it would spill onto the background.  The room behind the boy, depicted as no more than ten or fifteen feet wide, would be illuminated by the light source.  Instead darkness prevails, because Caravaggio designed the light, just as he did the rest of the composition, for a purpose: to remove the viewer from world, bring the foreground forward, and place emphasis on the subject, and this case a boy and his fruit.