|Color and Light||1.1||Do Assignment|
|Color and Light||1.2||Do Assignment||1.3 | 1.4|
|Illusion of Space and Atmosphere||1||Do Assignment|
|Personal Art||1.1||Do Assignment|
Wait what? This seems awfully turned around to me Queenie - 3D is the simulation...I don't understand what "fake them physically" means?
Here's the reality...setting up a block and a light on a table is all of 30 seconds effort. What is not being understood in this discussion is that light and shadow are infinitely variable depending on the scene. The example originally posted is so primitive as to be ridiculous...no personal offense intended to the OP, but it just is. Now, what I think they were really trying to ask (and I'm just assuming) is not ridiculous, and I think that was more along the lines of "How does one construct or project shadows?". Which is why I answered that is covered under perspective theory.
And again, no offense intended toward D0ming0 (I think it was nice of them to attempt a setup to illustrate the question) but dpaint was right. That was essentially useless because just setting something up in 3D does not teach you about the theory of projection, let alone all the other factors that go into light and shadow.
Which led to Queenie's assertion that 3D is just as valuable as any other form of reference. Of course, it can be. But the effort involved is huge, especially if you want it to be accurate to real world lighting. Even then I tend to be skeptical. Sure, it's great for spaceships...and plenty of other situations where it can be useful. But more often than not it gives a false sense of reality.
Farvus mentioned a couple artists who use 3D to inform their traditional work - I haven't looked them up, maybe they use it effectively, IDK. What I do know is for every one person you might name, literaly thousands of artists both working today and over the last 600 years do fine without it. Queenie, you mentioned it wasn't around. OK, it's around now. It's been around awhile, long enough for artists to adapt it to their workflow if it is of such great advantage - I don't see that happening - that tells you something. It may in fact be more convenient to become adept with 3D for some people, the problem is to get to the point where 3D even remotely comes close to even a simple physical model taken out in the sun, or a maquette lit by a candle, is no small feat. You make it sound like they're about equal...far from it.
Bottom line is every hour you take dinking around in 3D, Poser, DAZ, Photoshop, whatever...without first understanding basic drawing and painting, is an hour you delay your understanding.
I think we scared away the OP