A common phrase the aspiring artist will hear is “learning how to paint is learning how to see.” While not the full picture, this is fundamentally true - before a person can paint something, they must see what they are trying to paint correctly.
“Learning to see” is rather broad language that is in my opinion unhelpful at first, because what the heck does it mean? Surely everybody already knows how to see - I myself learned to see the moment I opened my eyes for the first time as a baby.
Obviously there is more to it. A more accurate phrase then would be “learning to paint requires learning to understand the relationships between shape, value, color, size, drawing, and edges that make up thing you are looking at.” Of course, that does not have as nice of a ring to it.
As the artist begins building their understanding of the fundamentals, they begin to become more aware of the elements that make up what is visually in front of them. However in doing so an unhelpful way of thinking can arise - at least it did for me - and it slowed my development substantially until I reframed the way I approached the problems that stood in between me and a finished painting.
I call this unhelpful thinking single point identification. The ‘correct’ alternative is the title of this blog: Relational thinking.
When an artist engages in single point identification, they are asking questions like:
How dark exactly is this shape?
What specific color is that?
How big should I draw this?
While these aren’t inherently misguided questions, they share a common thread: they are attempts to identify things in isolation. Unfortunately for the single point identifier, everything is relative when it comes to what we see. This is not to say that there is no objective truth and our eyes cannot be trusted. Rather, it takes into account the complete truth: that things can (and do) look different relative to the conditions they are in.
The same color can look very different when placed next to other colors. An object can appear darker or lighter depending on what its next to. And so on, and so forth, in all fundamental areas of painting. This isn’t exactly a new idea - many art books, teachers, youtube videos, etc, describe something like this. However I do not think the importance of relational thinking as a fundamental mental framework is emphasized enough to beginners.
Relational thinking means evaluating visual relationships rather than identifying visual properties in isolation. I call it a mental framework because it should be the lens with which you evaluate things - the fundamental system you use to make your decisions when painting. Relational thinking makes painting much easier, because it forces the artist into a bounded question and answer based workflow rather than continuous blind guessing. Comparing against a reference point is easier and more useful than trying to guess the specific properties for a shape of color.
The four commonly taught visual properties that the artist must evaluate are those of drawing (shape), value, color, and edges. However this is not specific enough and can be confusing to the beginner, because value is a sub-property of color, along with hue and saturation. So for the sake of clarity, the properties you should be evaluating (as separate steps) are:
Shape
Value (the lightness or darkness of an object)
Hue (red, blue, yellowness of an object)
Saturation (how vibrant or dull a hue is)
Edges (the interaction where two shapes contact each other)
How to begin relational thinking
The most straightforward way to begin relational thinking is to simply start what I call thinking in ‘ers’ rather than trying to isolate and match specific areas in the subject you are painting. Once you identify these relationships in your subject, copy those onto your canvas. But what is thinking in ‘ers?’ It looks something like this:
Drawing
When mapping a three-dimensional scene onto a two-dimensional canvas, thinking in ‘ers’ looks like:
Is X taller or shorter than Y?
Is X straighter or more curved than Y?
Is X placed higher or lower than Y?
Drawing often benefits more from choosing a single measurement and comparing all others against it. If you prefer doing this, still think in ‘ers’!
Is X longer or shorter than my reference measurement?
Values
Is X darker or lighter than Y?
Hue
Is X redder, bluer, or yellower than Y?
Saturation
Is X more or less saturated than Y? (unfortunately there is no ‘er’ here, but the principle remains)
Edges
Edges have more nuance. They can indicate form, areas of focus, and distance from the viewer. For now, consider edges as observed, before making expressive changes.
An edge occurs where two shapes of color meet. Call the meeting point between shapes A and B “X,” and the meeting point between shapes C and D “Y.”
We are comparing the contact between A and B against the contact between C and D, rather than comparing A against B, or C against D. Edges require especially careful observation.
Useful questions include:
Is X higher or lower contrast than Y?
Is X harder or softer than Y?
Is X easier or harder to distinguish than Y?
Before you touch brush to canvas, observe your subject and identify these relationships. Much of the mental work of a painting can be done before you actually begin.
Bound your comparisons: Pick obvious extremes and work inward. For example, when evaluating value, your darkest dark occurs when nothing in your subject is darker than that. Placing the darkest dark and lightest light correctly and immediately will establish clear reference points to compare against in the future.
Order your thinking by priority: Establish clear relationships before resolving subtle ones.
In doing this, you have set up a mental scale, with the most obvious relationships at one end and the least obvious relationships at the other. Notice how you are thinking in relationships. This is the order in which you should paint, and is the precursor to the third step:
Refine later: More nuanced judgments depend on the broader relationships established first.
An important note: identifying the obvious extremes is usually the easiest part. While it is crucial to get them right, difficulty increases as you move further from your reference points. Moving inward from the extremes brings you further away from your reference points, which makes judgement harder, and mistakes more likely. Increasing your reference points will increase your odds of success (if your reference points are accurate). This is why it is common in art lessons to do three-value studies, or five-value studies. If you find yourself struggling to move forward, increasing your reference points may help. It may look something like this:
Value: darkest dark → midtone → lightest light
Begin by identifying your most obvious darkest dark and lightest light. Using those points as your reference, identify your rough midtone. Everything will be compared against these.
Hue: red, yellow, and blue reference points
Pick the clearest red, yellow, and blue present in your subject, where available, and establish them in the painting. Compare other hues against those references.
Unlike value, hue does not fit along a single dark-to-light-style line. so ask yourself: is the color you are evaluating redder, yellower, or bluer relative to my reference points?
Saturation: most muted → intermediate → most saturated
Within each hue family, identify your most and least saturated colors. Compare the others against them, adding an intermediate reference if helpful.
Edges: hardest → intermediate → softest
Find your hardest and softest edges. Compare all other edges against those.
If possible, identify an intermediate edge to create a three-way comparison.
The Process in Action
Step 1: Identify the extremes and reliable reference points in your subject, whether working from life or a photograph. These may include darkest darks, lightest lights, and midtones, major hue groups, hardest and softest edges, and an initial reference measurement.
Step 2: Establish those reference points accurately on the canvas. Take the time to get them right; the rest of the painting will be judged in relation to them.
Step 3: Choose an unresolved area and compare it to an established reference point. Ask a precise comparative question:
Is it longer or shorter, wider or narrower, straighter or more curved?
Is it lighter or darker?
Is it redder, yellower, or bluer? More or less saturated?
Is the edge harder or softer?
Step 4: Mix and apply the paint according to those observed relationships, rather than trying to identify an isolated “correct” color, value, shape, or edge.
Step 5: Check the result against the subject. Compare the relationship on your canvas to the relationship in the reference. Correct it if necessary.
Step 6: Repeat the process, moving from the largest and most obvious relationships to the smaller and more nuanced ones.
At first, this may feel overwhelming - but notice how relational thinking greatly narrows the amount of guessing you have to do. A value can only be lighter, darker, or equal to another value. An edge can only be harder, softer, or equal. A color can be compared in terms of hue and saturation: redder, yellower, bluer, more saturated, or less saturated. You are making specific comparisons with limited possibilities that are observable and checkable.
As you place relationships accurately, each correct passage becomes another reference point. The more reliable reference points you establish, the easier subsequent comparisons become.
This is what “learning to see” means: you are recognizing how each visual data point differs from another. Take note of the amount of mental work it is. It may seem overwhelming at first, and for the beginner this process will take more time. Be patient with yourself and your painting. Repeated comparison trains the subconscious and builds intuition. With practice, judgments that initially require conscious attention become faster and more automatic.
Relational thinking requires constant awareness - your brain must always be on, actively comparing throughout the whole painting. The moment you find your mind wandering, or notice that you are unsure what to do next, don’t randomly guess. Refocus on comparing relationships.
Beyond the obvious: Why is relational thinking so powerful?
Understanding the underlying relationships that you see unlocks a new type of creative freedom. By modifying the relationships (that is, observing a relationship in your subject and then altering it on your canvas), you can produce results that are truly unique to your personal tastes. Across the best living representational realism artists today, many develop a distinct visual language by emphasizing, exaggerating, subduing, and otherwise modifying the relationships they see in life.
Understanding the underlying relationships you observe also opens a different kind of creative freedom. Once you can identify a relationship in your subject, you can deliberately alter it on the canvas: strengthen or subdue value contrasts, shift color relationships, exaggerate shapes, or soften and sharpen edges. These choices move a painting beyond a literal transcription of your subject and toward a result that reflects your own artistic taste. Almost all accomplished representational painters have developed a recognizable visual language this way, by observing relationships in life and then selectively modifying them.
I hope this post provides some helpful guidance to the aspiring artist. While the principles I write about here are not new, I hope that understanding relational thinking as a mental framework helps to clarify your approach to painting. Like many things, learning to paint is a skill that must be developed over time.
For me, parsing through rules, principles, and fundamentals as separate areas of study was not particularly helpful when I began learning to paint. I find that developing a system of thinking that consistently produces good results is far more helpful than memorizing rules in isolation and trying to apply them. Relational thinking is one of the systems that helped me tremendously.
————————————————-
A special thanks to Daniel Keys for the conversations and lessons that inspired this post.
