Munsell system

Welcome to the forum.

Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.

Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.

Hang on Studio Wall
Message
This is beginning to annoy me - not that this is ever a REALLY hard thing to do... I keep seeing, not here but on Facebook and elsewhere, reference to colour mixing via the Munsell system. Having looked at it, I totally fail to see the point or use of it, but then, having been at this for 50 years, it may not be aimed at me. Painters in the past didn't use this system - but that's not really a very good argument against it. Does anyone here have any familiarity with this system? Do you use it? What do you think of it? Is it, in short, of any flaming use?
Familiar with the Munsell colour wheel but not a system of colour mixing by that name unless it simply relaters to using the wheel to identify complementary and analogous colours etc?
I just googled it. Seems he tried to show possible colours that could be discerned by the human eye. Heaven forbid he tries it for a mantis shrimp. (about 17,000 times better colour vision than ours. IIRC)
Well, it'd be all your own work whether you took this or that course, or adopted someone else's method - you can learn all sorts of things, but then have to put it into practice.... Which is often slightly less straightforward than one might have been led to think. A bit of background - on Facebook there are two sites for painters that I visit; Painting Best Practice, and Traditional Oil Painting. The first of these is moderated by George O'Hanlon, who makes Rublev oil paints and runs the Natural Pigments website; the other is run by Virgil Elliott, author of the book of the same name as his FB page. Neither George nor Elliott has evinced any special enthusiasm for the Munsell system but others contributing there have, and have asked if paint companies could include the Munsell 'ratings' on the labels of their products. Now - this would be of no help to me at all, so far as I can see; but I wondered if it might have been of help to anyone here. I suspect it might, to starters-out on the journey of colour - but at the same time, wonder if they're not getting too hung-up on 'Munsell values', and consequently getting confined, as Davey up above suggests, in 'prisons of their own making'. I have always believed that cast iron principles have little place in painting (or in life, for that matter); that one has to choose, and make one's own way, finding what works, what makes sense, what is advice that, if ignored, will ruin your work; and what's just a matter of other people's opinions, maybe valid for them but useless to the rest of us. As it happens, most of those commenting thus far seem never to have heard of it, or to be unaware that the Munsell colour-wheel is anything other than .... well.... just a colour wheel. So I suspect this may be more a US phenomenon - but not to be dismissed for that reason alone, because the US is probably pioneering research into oil paint, particularly, which is leaving Europe standing. Even so - I'm not feeling pulled in a Munselly direction....
Well I've just looked at this and it seems to me to be tied up with the science of the perplexification of the bleedin' obvious.
This divide is between those who have found a way that works for them - though it may have taken them half a lifetime to do so - and those who are interested in the science of light, among other things. There are numerous theories, not all of which are based on much by way of evidence, and there is analysis of what is known. I am, unfortunately, not a scientist - but am interested in explanations, and theories about, WHY things work. Of course one can just dive in - probably, many of the older ones among us had to, because the amount of scientific study into colour mixing and the constituents of paint was extremely limited even 30 years ago, and based largely on observed changes in the properties of paint over time. But it's at the very least legitimate to want to delve further into such of the science as I can understand; and if there are those (well, there are!) who understand it better than I do, I want to hear what they have to say. Why does this matter? Because - among other things as always - painters patently did NOT understand so much in the past, and many don't now: which is why their oil paintings are slithering cheerfully off the canvas, or cracking; why their watercolours are fading; why some colours are darkening and turning brown (cf van Gogh's sunflower paintings). We always knew that Zinc White was a dangerous colour to use as a base, because it took so long to dry and was brittle when it did. We now know that it can cause delamination - but that it doesn't always: now, I find this fascinating. WHY does it do this? Why sometimes does it not do it? How many of our lighter value paints contain Zinc? Is this going to be a problem? We have moved on from Munsell, and yet again the teensiest hint (I'm good at understatement) of needle has crept in. But surely the very experienced, those who have learned by doing over many years, and those interested in the accrual of knowledge which might even cause the very experienced to stop and think, ought to be on the same side?

Edited
by RobertJones

Sylvia. My post (should you think it aimed at you ) was a general comment. Apologies if it seemed otherwise. I'm not a rude person and only ever express my own views.
Sylvia, what has your gender got to do with anything or do you just like playing victim cards? Your opinion is your own and mine is my own, what is your point other that you obviously think yours is more valid than everybody else's. As to Syd, I don't have any particular theoretical knowledge on colour and even if I did it doesn't mean I would make a good painting. If you can make a good painting you obviously have better theoretical and practical knowledge than I do which was entirely my point. Just because you don't have a formal name for your method you still possess the theoretical knowledge to know how to mix the colours you desire, to modify their warmth or coldness, vary their chroma and make them lighter and darker. Unless absolutely every colour you mix is pure random chance (which I really do not believe is likely the case) You simply came to your theoretical understanding by experimentation rather than academic research which is fine because everyone has their preffered methods of learning. I still don't understand why there is anything controversial about thinking different strokes for different folks and there are more than one valid way of doing things. It is a very simple point and one I will continue to repeat every time I witness the closed minded brigade dismiss anything that is outside their realm of experience.