This puts the surface on the wetness

[shootingstar]

When dry, use a damp brush to lift some scuffs of wind off the surface - a broad one nearby, a narrow band further away, and a fine one in the far distance. This puts the surface on the wetness, giving it perspective. It is a useful technique for painting convincing water, and can even make water look wet when used as a single technique.

(Source: The Landscape Painter's Essentiail Handbook by Joe Francis Dowden)

It's about watercolour painting. Here a lake is painted and the author explains what to do. I don't understand the underlined sentence. I would have expected this the other way round: "This puts the wetness on the surface". What is meant by the author's phrasing? Are there other phrasings or idioms where "put ....on" is used having this meaning?

 

[jutfrank]

This is hard to understand without seeing the context and the picture. Can you upload the whole page?

There's something being referred to as 'the wetness', which I'd guess is a visual effect that has been mentioned somewhere before. The broad and narrow brush strokes described in this passage create a way of giving this existing visual effect of wetness not only the impression that the lake has a surface, but also of creating perspective.

Please show us the context.

 

[SoothingDave]

He's stroking the brush to make the lake look like water/waves. He's painted some "wetness." Now he's putting some "surface" (texture, effects) on it.

 

[shootingstar]

He's stroking the brush to make the lake look like water/waves. He's painted some "wetness." Now he's putting some "surface" (texture, effects) on it.

Yes, this seems to be true. It's easier than I assumed. First the impression of wetness was realised (with the author's support), and then, by lifting the scuffs of wind off the blue colour (on the watercolour paper) of the lake (a broad one nearby, a narrow band further away, and a fine one in the far distance), the lake 'gets' surface - and perspective. - Do I understand you correctly?

 

[jutfrank]

Do I understand you correctly?

Yes.

 

[Skrej]

Since it's watercolor, the dry brush will lift off some of the wet colored wash, leaving the white paper to show through. This will leave small feathery white spots that will look like waves and wind spray, thus transforming the flat area of color (water).

This technique has to be done while the watercolor wash is still wet ('wetness' refers to the area of colored wet wash). Once it dries, the color is set in the paper and won't lift off.

 

[jutfrank]

'wetness' refers to the area of colored wet wash

This is what wasn't clear to me. So 'the wetness' refers to the paint itself rather than the water of the lake, which is what I guessed. That makes a bit more sense now.

 

[shootingstar]

('wetness' refers to the area of colored wet wash). Once it dries, the color is set in the paper and won't lift off.

Here I must intervene gently because otherwise a misunderstanding could arise. In this text the author sets out from a dried wash (he says "When dry, use a damp brush to lift some scuffs of wind off the surface"), and he is lifting the colour of the lake with a damp brush. So, it's just the other way round: The colour (of the lake) is dry and the brush is damp (a bit wet) to lift off some of the dried blue colour of the lake. You can lift off dried watercolour at any time (on a limit scale). The well known manufacturers of watercolours tag them as to their lifting quality. The word "wetness" refers to other procedures and techniques the author has addressed recently, e.g. blurred soft-focus vertical shapes of tree reflections in vertical brush strokes. Such procedures convey the impression or effect of wetness on watercolour paper. I myself just got those coherences in hindsight.