Catch light

[Steve]

I would like to hear the opinions on the use of catch-light on the eyes of our figures. By catch light I refer to the intense reflection effect somewhere on the eye ball that usually appears as a white or nearly white spot. Thx--Steve Scott

 

[MattS]

Unless you are painting a large scale figure or a bust, I generally wouldn't use a catch light.

 

[pkess]

I never paint in catch lights unless the figure is depicted as being indoors. There are no catch lights in eyes when you are outdoors. Just my own preference.

 

[KeithP]

Matt and Phil are two painters whose work I really admire and enjoy...

For myself, I like the catchlights. Not sure I can explain but makes the eye appear to be less stark.

Try both with and without and see which appeals to you>

Keith

 

[Einion]

I don't use them and think they always look wrong, unless the figure is painted entirely from an imaginary directional lightsource (and doesn't feature any variation in surface gloss - it must be all matt).

Einion

 

[Anders Heintz]

On busts I would say they are a must. They make the eye pop out and look more alive. Wether it is indoors or not. On smaller scales such as 54mm I would add them if I could, but usually I exagerate the color of the iris instead and make it light so the eyes will pop out.

 

[Sambaman]

Steve,
didn't you and I have a brief conversation on just this subject almost exactly a month ago? I've only been painting in larger scales as you probably know, so I always use a catchlight in the eyes of my figures. I agree with Keith, I think it adds a degree of "life" and depth to the eyes. I don't really subscribe to the "indoor-outdoor" theory. I just like what it adds to the eyes. We say the face is the focal point of a figure, certainly in a bust and at the larger scales not only does the face play an important role, the eyes become an even closer visual focus.

Sorry!!!!!!!!

Jay H.
OKC

 

[Steve]

Thanks for the use of your brains. Interesting points of view. Yes, Jay, I know your opinion. Thanks--Steve

 

[Steve]

Thanks for the use of your brains. Interesting points of view. Yes, Jay, I know your opinion. Thanks--Steve

 

[Sambaman]

Sorry to waste your time Steve.

Jay H.
OKC

 

[Blind Pew]

I must admit I'm in full agreement with Jay, Anders & Keith. Catchlights simply make the whole face come alive - when done well. Although I do agree they can be inappropraite in smaller scale.

For busts, flats and anything over 54mm they're a must. I've also been know to place a thin layer of clear varnish on eyes as well as it makes them look more 'liquid'

 

[brian]

Hi
Check out Bill Horan's 54mm figure's eyes.
Brian

 

[Einion]

As far as catchlights 'making the eyes come alive', especially in a larger scale, doesn't it make more sense to mimic the appearance of a wet eyeball if you've used metallic paint, have a glossy finish on leather and so forth; after all don't most of us paint this way, so why treat the eyeball differently?

Again, if you've painted an entire bust matt then you should be replicating the effect of light entirely with painted illusions (something at least partway toward zenithal/overhead lighting) so then a catchlight is appropriate to the handling. Mixing this style up with the standard way of painting doesn't really make sense though - why a specular highlight on the eyes but not on the corner of a buckle, on a gemstone, on the top of a helm, the edge of a blade, the toe of a polished boot etc?

One of the things that looks funny about catchlights on something in the round is that when you rotate your viewpoint the illusion of reality is lost as the white dot is stationary; this is also true to some extent of zenithal/overhead lighting itself. Once you stop rotating the figure or moving your viewpoint the effect comes into its own again, which is why this style can look so effective in photos.

Einion