Studies in Simultaneous Contrast

M.E. Chevreul, Experiment on Complements using Colored Yarns, 1839.

Simultaneous contrast refers to a phenomena whereby juxtaposed colors interact with one another to produce a change in their visual appearance. This interaction was studied by the French scientist M.E. Chevreul. Chevreul’s theories are elaborated in his book, The Principles of Harmony and Contrast of Colors. This treatise has influenced almost every painter from the 1840’s until the present. It includes such diverse painters as Delacroix, the French Impressionists, Seurat and the Neo-Impressinists, Robert Henri and the Ashcan School as well as Josef Albers and the Bauhaus School and Abstract Expressionism.

Robert Henri became acquainted with Chevreul’s theories by reading Chevreul’s published work in France before it was translated and published in America. But Henri does not investigate simultaneous contrast thoroughly until he meets H.G. Maratta, an American color theorist, in 1909. Maratta published a small pamphlet where he expresses how simultaneous contrast and harmony of sequence factor into his development of his color theory and the pigments that he was marketing as The Maratta Scales of Artists’ Oil Pigments, 1916. It is a dense little booklet and deserves a thorough read. Maratta provides experiments to support his own theories and tie them into Chevreul’s. This week I revisited these experiments and I would like to share them with you.

The studies I conducted focus around the color orange. First, I examined the relationship between an orange tint (orange at full intensity + white) and the scale of orange: From full intensity to Bi color to Hue to neutral. Remember these are variations on orange juxtaposed against an orange tint (plus white) from the same scale.

Orange tint juxtaposed with various mixes from the orange scale.

Although, the viewing of these studies are best observed from life, one can still see how the vibrancy of the tint changes slightly. As the orange color increases in intensity juxtaposed next to the tint, the tint itself appears less vibrant and cools to a certain degree. This coolness occurs because the more intense orange is casting its complement blue into the neighboring tint. Whereas at the top, the darker orange Hue on the left and the orange neutral on the right add vibrancy to the orange tint. The most beautiful juxtaposition occurs at the upper left- orange tint/ orange Hue. Below this, middle row, the orange tint is juxtaposed against orange Bi color and orange Bi color + white. The left version is more effective because the deeper value of the orange Bi color creates more contrast with the orange tint as opposed to, the right version which is a higher value with white added. This is also one of Chevreul’s discoveries-to create a greater harmony, there should occur a contrast of value and intensity between the colors.

Harmony of contrast between Orange and various mixes in the scale of Blue.

Let’s examine harmony of contrast taking the direct complement to orange, blue. In this study I mixed orange color + a touch of white (to add opacity) to create an orange of high intensity. I then juxtaposed various mixes from the scale of blue. All the orange mixes are the same except for the upper right mix- this I deepened in value.

At the bottom left the orange is juxtaposed against a blue Hue and on the right against a deep blue Bi color. These 2 mixes had the most vitality and interest, especially the deep blue Bi color. These juxtapositions allow the orange full capacity to glow. The middle row- a blue at full intensity+ white (left) and a blue Bi color + white both tend to take the vitality out of the orange and leave it duller. Top row- The left mix of orange and a blue Bi of greater intensity seem to arrest each other and the viewer can’t make up their mind which color is more dominant. The right one is more successful because I have changed the value between the orange (making this deeper/darker) and the blue Bi + white (making this lighter and therefore more neutralized). The orange dominates this juxtaposition.

Simultaneous contrast is most effective if the relation between the juxtaposed colors also includes a contrast of value and intensity. Maratta states,”A contrast of color such as this which at the same time is a contrast of intensity and in value seems to be the happiest form of association in which contrasting colors may engage.” [H.G. Maratta, The Maratta Scales of Artists’ Oil Pigments, 1916, The Palette Art Co., NY]

Orange Hue tint juxtaposed next to various mixes from the orange scale.

In this study, I took orange Hue + white to create a neutralized tint of dull orange. This I juxtaposed against orange mixes of different intensities. Observe the color temperature changes. As the juxtaposed orange mix gets deeper and less intense, the orange Hue tint becomes warmer. As the juxtaposed orange mix increases in intensity and value, the orange Hue tint becomes cooler and slightly grayer. The increased intensity of the juxtaposed orange color throws some blue back into the neutralized orange tint. The value change of the orange mix in the lower right, appears more interesting, even though the neutral is cooled, because the contrast of value adds vitality.

As Henri mastered the effects of simultaneous contrast and harmony of sequence, he was able to juxtapose colors in such a way as to vitalize the surface of his canvases creating a living, moving organism of color transference. What makes these effects so stimulating is that they are not mixed on the canvas directly, but take place in the mind of the viewer. This adds an ebb and flow of movement that is illusive- just like ‘life’ itself. This effect cannot be captured by the photograph, but calls the viewer to engage directly with the image.

I found this to be especially true with Henri’s late Irish portraits. Standing in front of these canvases and engaging directly with the color surface was compelling. Many of the colors on the canvases appeared not to be intensely laid down. But as one gazed at the canvases, color became increased and activated. Color choices in the background provided the face with an emanating or inherent light drawing your attention to the child before you. Henri could only have achieved these effects by careful study and execution. These effects are not blatant like the Bauhaus School, but subtle and beautiful- like capturing a butterfly and then setting it free in the world.

I will continue this exploration and focus on harmony of sequence in this month’s newsletter. Please sign up and confirm your subscription when prompted.

The Individual and Nature

Judith Reeve, “A Morning in March”, oil, 16″ x 32″.

I recently read an essay by John Fowles called The Tree. Fowles is best know as a British novelist who wrote The French Lieutenant’s Woman (1969) which was later turned into a film starring Meryl Streep. The Tree is the first work of his that I have read. What intrigued me about this essay was Fowles desire to locate our disenfranchisement from nature- our detachment, our lack of integration in our environment. Fowles attempts a journey from within to find an answer to this pressing question- How did we become so removed from nature and what is the true relationship, that should be, between the human person and his or her environment? And where does art fit into this relationship?

Fowles sees the dilemma arising from our contemporary relationship with science. Fowles uses the naturalist, Carl Linneaus who formalized modern nomenclature of organisms, to describe this beginning of our disconnect to the natural world. Fowles states, “The Linnean mentality, which fussed endlessly to make nature seem categorical, serves in turn to introduce us to the differing approaches of science and ‘the kind of experience or knowledge we loosely define as art.’ Science pounces on chaos- on ‘unphilosophical, irrational, uncontrollable, incalculable’ nature. Art perceives no threat, no great evil in unlimited chaos; the engagement with nature is personal, intimate, and without objective.”(p. xiv)

This really is the clear difference between art and science. Art can live with great unknowns, with what Keats called ‘negative capability– the willingness to live and be satisfied with not knowing- “capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason”. Art needs to dwell in this place, in this atmosphere of doubt because real insight, the intuitive grasp of beauty in the moment, flees from rational and calculated analysis. “Beauty is truth and truth beauty, that is all/ Ye know on earth and all ye need to know.” Beauty can only reside within the equilibrium provided by the mysterious unknown.

The artist participates in nature in a very personal and individual way. But this individual lived experience in many ways cannot be described by any art. Fowles, the writer, believes that even his experience, “…whose deepest value (of nature) lies in the fact that it cannot be directly described by any art….including that of words.” (p.32) Fowles tries to reconcile this inability to describe a deep experience of nature by tapping into the eighteenth-century attitude which, “…viewed nature as a mirror for philosophers, as an evoker of emotion, as a pleasure, a poem, (and) was forgotten.” (p.33) In eighteenth-century writing, man/woman exists as a whole being, both artist, writer, believer, and individual in all his/her complexities. It is this ability to remain in this state of ‘complexities’ that allows us, according to Fowles, to fully participate in nature.

“Ordinary experience is …highly synthetic…and made of a complexity of strands, past memories and present perceptions, times and places, private and public history, hopelessly beyond science’s powers to analyze. It is quintessentially ‘wild’…and corresponds…with wild nature. Almost all the richness of our personal existence derives from this synthetic and eternally present ‘confused’ consciousness of both internal and external reality, and not least because we know it is beyond the analytical, or destructive, capacity of science.” (p.36-37)

One’s experience in the world is so elastic, multifaceted and complex. If I use an analogy of a ‘confluence‘- one can observe a smaller stream meeting a larger river at their intersection, but once that stream enters the flow of the larger river, one can no longer separate the two. They in fact, become one flow, one experience. So, it is with man and his immersion in nature. What science picks apart, experience reveals a sensory wholeness, an inward and outward unity.

“What is irreplaceable in any object of art is never, in the final analysis, its technique or craft, but the personality of the artist, the expression of his or her unique and individual feeling.” (p.42) One can only experience nature as an individual through creative self-expression and self-discovery. There is no art or writing or science that can connect us to nature- it relies on the individual alone- to live that experience fully in the moment. I believe that the artist just happens to be that individual that is highly receptive to this creative immersion, to this heightened awareness. Fowles manages to describe that state of being, that inherent creativity, that position of intent, that the artist must possess inherently. It becomes a ‘new’ way of knowing that is unique to each person and which the artist himself is uniquely possessed. Although, Fowler seeks not to raise up the qualities of the artist, but seeks to suggest that these experiences of nature are singular and in a sense, can never be fully shared through art.

What role does art play since nature can only be reached and experienced by each individual, alone, through their own creative self-discovery? Fowler uses the word ‘art’ in a looser way to describe a way of knowing and experiencing, “…that is internally rather than externally creative, that leaves very little public trace; and yet which for those very reasons is almost wholly concentrated in its own creative process. It is really only the qualified…artist who can escape from the interiority and constant now-ness, the green chaos of this experience, by making some aspect of it exterior and so fixing it in past time, or known knowledge.” (p.49) The artist through the artwork itself, can create some kind of a bridge to this experience of nature, but the art itself can never fully describe the interior self-discovery that transpires. It can only hint at such manifestations.

Nature takes us “…into a place always a complexity beyond daily reality, never fully comprehensible or explicable, always more potential than realized; yet where no one will ever penetrate as far as we have. It is our passage, our mystery alone…The artist’s experience here is only a special- unusually prolonged and self-conscious- case of the universal individual one.” (p.76). And this brings us back to Keats. The great mystery of experience must remain an unfathomable mystery that we must live with “… without any irritable reaching after fact and reason.”

Please sign up for my newsletter and become a member of the Attentive Equations community of artists.