Sketchbook Thread of Cynical_Saint

#2

Hi Saint. I like these studies. The first one, in particular, shows a good start in shading and revealing form. I read about your frustrations with measurement, and although I don’t have a lot of experience yet, I do have some thoughts on this that hopefully may help.

Perhaps the first thing to consider is: do you really want to reproduce an image exactly in the first place? I am not ragging on the practice of copying from references. I do it all the time myself. I think you can learn a lot from it. But if you only try to reproduce exactly what you see in the photo you won’t get the deeper knowledge that will improve your work. I think the way to go is to analyze the forms of the face/body etc, to think about how the light is hitting these surfaces in 3 dimensions and about how best to reveal this in your interpretation (not blind copy).

There are many posters here who have much, much more experience than me, and I’m sure they’ll drop by to offer some advice in this direction. But I’d like to say this: don’t think of your art as a slavish copy of reality (or of a photo, which is far removed from reality anyway). Think of your art as an adventure on paper, a way of exploring and understanding the people and things around us. My accuracy in measurement and the like also sucks right now, but I have faith that it will improve with practice, and the way to ensure continued practice is to keep it fun for ourselves. I hope I haven’t overstepped any boundaries here. I’m just trying to say, “great stuff. Keep on drawing!”

#3

Holden:

Thanks for the comments.

In response to your question, at this point I DO want to reporoduce an image exactly, at least in the sense of the shapes and contours. I already take a little bit of creative latitude when it comes to the shading. I’m not really looking for things to be perfect, just have good proportion and relation of shapes. For instance, the Eyes, Nose, Lips and Ears (as shapes) in my latest drawing, are not perfectly representative of the reference, but I am quite happy with how they are. However, if you look in the second picture, you can see the original jawline, and how far off my initial attempts at getting the contours placed generally are, before I measure and correct them.

Here is how I look at it. In the end, I want to be able to draw perfectly, what I want to be able to draw. At this point, I want to be able to draw from my reference and reproduce it as closely as possible. Once I have mastered, or at least become better at this, then I can start drawing artistically and have the skill to draw from an artistic eye.

#4

Sorry, Saint. I can see now I totally misread your question. Apologies.

I do know of one simple technique that might help if you don’t know it already. You could use a grid on both your photo ref and your paper (light lines or just small marks at the edge). As long as the grids corespond you will have a great guide while you are sketching. It will make it easier to measure distance, angles, relations etc. without having to hold the sketch over the reference. Glancing at your first image here as an example you could probably use about 6 vertical lines and 10 horizontal (or less, depending on your confidence), which should give you plenty of guidance to check your contours before they go too far astray.

Once again, apologies for going off on a tangent. Hope this one helps.

#5

Cynical_Saint,

Welcome aboard! :slight_smile: Good to see you start up a Sketchbook. I look forward to seeing your progress here.

Regarding measurements, I would suggest looking into both Andrew Loomis’ books (which you can still find online) and in particular, I would recommend getting this book by Anthony / Tony Ryder, a fantastic figurative realist:

[b]The Artist’s Complete Guide to Figure Drawing: A Contemporary Perspective on the Classical Tradition (Paperback)

[/b]Ryder lays out a very useful technique for doing basic measurements that really seems to work for people who study his method.

If you want to see the work of a beginner who has been using this book, see Mr. Mu’s impressive progress here.

I think that particularly for beginners, it is important to work less from photo reference, and more from either life or from master works, doing master copies. Spatial relationships are difficult to define from photos, and it takes a lot of practice doing life drawing and master works to know what to take from a photo and not create an image that looks flat or photoreferenced.

Do you have access to a Life Drawing course or to Figure Drawing Sessions? There are many sources for doing Master Copies here on the Forum:

Open Figure Drawing Workshops (OFDWs) are open to anyone and to all media ~ 2D Traditional and Digital, and even 3D. Lately the OFDWs have been devoted to doing Master Copies from provided Reference. These Workshops run for 4 weeks.

You can find links to the best of previous OFDWs here:
Links to all OFDW SPOTLIGHT Threads

You can find links to the full versions of all OFDWs here:
Open Figure Drawing Workshops

Links to all OFDW SPOTLIGHT Threads

Another very successful Workshop Series is the Anatomy Lesson Series - great work in these threads, highly inspirational:

Anatomy Lesson Series: Body Part 2 - The Torso

Anatomy Lesson Series: Body Part 1 - The Head

To be notified of new Tutorials and Workshops as they appear on the Forum, I suggest subscribing here:

Notification of New Open Figure Drawing Workshops / + TUTORIALS - SUBSCRIBE HERE!

I suggest getting the Ryder book and finding Loomis’ books (particularly, his “Figure Drawing For All It’s Worth”) and then try a Master Copy. I think you will gain a great deal from doing master copies, vs. copying from photos at first. :slight_smile:

Cheers and Happy New Year!

-Rebeccak

#6

Hi Saint! Great stuff here!! I like the emphasis on contrast in your drawings…:slight_smile:
I agree with Holden here that it “analyzing” rather than “coping” should solve your problem. the point is not to copy it the way it is but to ask yourself why it looks the way it does… why there is a highlight there and a shadow here… etc… in short reading the real model from the picture… start your head with a simple geometry such as a cube… that will help you nail down the orientation of the head in the first place(use perspective lines… think 3d!)… then you can divide it into planes and place the features in the right places. It will be easy from there on to add details, lighting and stuff.
Rebecca can give you links to the right kind of tutorials…
Happy New Year!! looking forward to more stuff from you!

#7

OMG!! Rebecca! you got here while I was typing my message!:eek:

#8

Thanks for the replies all!

@Holden: I have done the grid technique before, and basically that is what I do in my head. When I look at the reference, I imagine the mid-lines, and divide the picture up in my head. Unfortunately that doesn’t work so well for me. For some reason my brain just can’t see the difference between what is on the paper, and what I am looking at in the reference. Ugh… If I put grid lines on the reference image itself, I could do it, but I would rather not, that feels TOO much like tracing.

@Anandpg: Yeah, the shading and “ChiroSchiro” or however it is spelled, are definitely my stronger suits. I did take a couple classes a couple years ago and the emphasis was on using the full range of value in the sketches. Details are also stronger for me than the base contours. Its just that first darn step of getting the contours and outlines in proper proportion that is killing me. Its the very first step, and getting it wrong, will mess up the rest of the sketch.

@Rebeccak: I was hoping you would reply here. I browsed through some of the other SketchBooks and noticed that you are of great help to alot of people here.

I am kinda confused on how Master Works or Life Drawing will help in my particular problem. When I attempt to draw still lifes, or even very basic landscapes, the same issue comes up as the above portrait and anatomy drawings. The sizes, distances and proportions of the main shapes are always off. As an example I could look at my desk and see a monitor and two speakers. If I tried to draw the contours/shapes, what will happen is that the speaks might come out too big in comparison to the monitor, the spacing between the speakers and monitor will be wrong, etc… Same happens with the key features of a face or body. The nose ends up too big, or the chin is not far enough down, etc… If I can get the contours of a sketch correct, then I have no problem with the shapes or the shading. I can make a decent drawing. But generally when I draw without any measuring, my stuff comes out a little ‘Picasso’ since everything is out of proportion.

I am open to trying to work from Master Works, but I wanted to make sure you guys understand exactly what the problem is for me first.

Thanks again for replying.

#9

Hey there,

I am not trained in this method, but apparently it is one which is taught in the small ateliers which still teach the hard core fundamentals of traditional art. :slight_smile:

It’s called sight-size and there is an article on it here:

http://480bc.com/sight_size/sightsize.htm

Check it out and do a bit of research - I think that it may be directly addressing what you are looking for. :slight_smile:

With respect to my advice to do Master Copies, that is more of a general kind of advice that I would have because generally speaking, master copies will teach you much more of representing the figure in 3D than photo reference will - especially at first. It’s less to do with precisely copying an image than learning how to imbue a drawing with life - I think that maybe I’m saying you might be better off going down that path, than just trying to copy photos. There is nothing wrong with using photo reference at all - it’s only that I think that doing Master Copies is a better way to learn how to draw the figure generally. There is more to art sometimes than just accurately copying the model. :slight_smile:

#10

Hi…Cynical Saint…:slight_smile:

I like that last one…:thumbsup:
A great way to get everything right to start with, as far as spacial relationships go, is to think in terms of the abstact negitive space and shapes surrounding the forms of the figure or whatever it is that you are decribing on the flat two dementional picture plane.When you simplify the shapes,…they resemble pieces of a puzzle…just make the negitive pieces of the puzzle the correct size and shape, and everything will fall into it’s proper place, just like a puzzle…:slight_smile: …If you get the first piece of the negative space, or puzzle piece right, then it is impossible for the other puzzle shapes to not line up correctly…:scream:
The same thing applies when you are working within the figure or whatever it is you are decribing…it’s all an illussion of negative space and shapes given volume through values creatined with shadeing and lighting …:slight_smile:
Hope that helped some…really looking forward to seeing your first master copy…:thumbsup: :slight_smile:
TAKE CARE
Glenn

#11

Took your advice and started on the Anatomy Lesson,

Started of course with head 01 Head of ‘Water’.

Had to start over about 10 times, cause the contours were not coming out right, as always.

Finally got it ‘close’ by doing a rough shape outline of the head first, then drawing the true shapes over that outline.

Shading came out pretty bad because I used a much smaller sketchpad. (This pic is about life size)

#12

Been a while since I posted anything new, and I dont have alot to show today.

I started a figure drawing class a few weeks ago, and am struggling with being forced to use techniques and media that I am not used to. My teacher unfortunately hates Charcoal, so I dont get to use the one media I am slightly proficient at.

Below is a hand study I did (We have to do 99 total studies this semester, 33 Hands/Feet/Heads). This is using Conté (which I have never touched) and Hatching/Cross-Contour (which I have never done). However, I am kinda happy with how the second hand (on the right) came out. Course the ugly dis-proportionate one over top of it kinda ruins it. heh

Will post a couple of my self portraits when I get them back from grading.

#13

Some new stuff.

Another hand study, conté - lifesize

Foot/Hand study, conté - lifesize

Now some self portraits:

This is a quick sketch (5 mins) using Conté and cross contouring.

This is a Bigger than lifesize graphite ~2hours

This is my second big portrait bigger than lifesize, graphite ~3.5hours

Two more big self portraits to come, as soon as I get them back from grading.

As for the hand/feet studies, I have been learning cross contouring, but I still fail to see how I can translate this technique into a realistic drawing. I love how it gives volume to the hands/feet, and I like the style of the first selfportrait, but I prefer smooth blended drawings, so I have trouble when I am asked to hatch.

The two large self portraits are basically my first two self portraits I have ever done. I struggled with the graphite as it is not as easy to work as charcoal is, but I was starting to get the hang of it when we moved on to conté.

Next I will have two bigger than lifesize self portraits, one done in all black conté, and another done with white conté on black paper.

Until then, any comments/crits appreciated.

#14

The main reason for doing these cross-contouring exercises would be to learn to think 3D while drawing a subject. One must think 3D and transpond the 3D distances into a 2D canvas. For example, the distance of an ear to a nose in a 3/4 view of a head may appear longer in 3D than it actually is to be drawn on a 2D sheet.

That’s basically what SpiritDreamer said earlier :slight_smile:

A great exercise to train this is drawing a square on the floor (or putting a square shaped carpet on the floor), then sit at a few meters distance and draw it. Change position several times and draw it again (without shading). Perspective comes in play here. See my sketchbook thread for more details.

Furthermore i can say that accuracy comes with practice. Do you know that awkward feeling you get when you draw someting, put it aside for a day and then look at it again compared to the real subject… realizing you were so inaccurate? It’s something that occures to all of us I’m afraid and the only cure for it is to draw more more more :slight_smile:

btw, i really like the head nr1 from the anatomy challenge and the fact that you actually tried over and over again until you got a reasonable result, rather than spending hours on a single study trying to fix and fix within the same drawing!

Looking forward to see more drawings Cynical_Saint!

#15

Johan,

Thanks for the reply! I was getting a bit frustrated at the lack of response, even tho I know there are 100s of these Sketchbook threads around.

Actually like the contour drawings. It does give a good feeling of 3d space to the drawings. Funny enough, I spent like a total of 5 or 6 hours on the two big self portraits at bottom, but actually prefer the 5min one for artistic quality.

Another thing about it, is that generally “sketches” take really long for me. I usually spend a good couple hours on any sketch I do, but that first self portrait was a true sketch that came out fairly good after only 5 mins.

#16

A great way to practice is to do some quick shading sketches (5-10min), say 8-10 of those, and then do one or two longer studies. focus should be on the values… try to find the parts of a subject that have the same value and shade those on your paper… find a different value on all possible locations and shade that too…
This way you would be building up your drawing in shades instead of lines and not rely on the contours of your subject too much. Ofcourse you can draw a very quick and light line sketch first to get a bit of a decent composition, but don’t spend more than 2-3min on it
(even if it’s a longer study)

I do think you would benefit a great deal from doing some line drawings for a while though. Thinking about where to put your lines before actually placing them on the paper helps improve your observational skills ( see 3seconds - draw one line, see 3 secs - draw one line, etc).

Try to be economical when doing these line studies and forget about shading.

whichever way you choose to go… looking forward to see your progress.

oh and Cynical_Saint, the best way to get people commenting on your thread is to check their thread and do the same :wink:

#17

Well progress continues in my Figure Drawing class.

I rcvd back my two latest Self Portraits, and started a new technique/media.

This last couple weeks we worked in White Conté on Black Paper. This actually works out pretty good for me, I like the way my drawings came out.

Unfortunately, as soon as I start to slightly get the hang of something, we change media again. Now we are working on “Heightened Drawing”, meaning we are using Black, White and Red Conté. This new one frustrates the hell out of me, and I simply am not advancing in this technique. Luckily we do not have to do any major projects in this media.

Ok Show and Tell time.

This first piece is a black Conté self-portrait, bigger than life size. With this piece, I have achieved a really good likeness (Wish I had a pic to show you), but again the one thing that detracts from this piece is that the head is too small for the arm and torso. :frowning: Funny thing is that I kinda stopped concentrating on getting a good likeness, and it came all by itself. (Methinks perhaps it is just luck). In any case, I love this drawing because the likeness is great, but I hate it because of the proportion of the head. Ugh, always give and take aint it?

This next piece is basically my first attempt with White Conté on black paper, in preparation for a Self Portrait using the same technique. I like the effect this media gives you, and it seems to suit me. Down-sides to this piece are the value scale is not nearly wide enough in the lit areas. Also, it kinda looks like a death mask. heh. The model was asleep, but the sketch looks more like she is dead. hehe. This was about a 45 minute study from a live model. (P.S. It looks nothing like her :()

This last one is the Self Portrait that followed. The likeness is actually pretty good, and the value scale feels really good to me. I REALLY like this piece, cept for the fact that for some reason everything under my nose seems to be drooping. Really kinda ruins the piece. Again this is a love/hate. I love the lighting and texture this technique creates, but the droopy mouth/chin really ruin it.

As always comments are immensly appreciated.

My next project, that I am doing this weekend, is a Master Study. I was assigned Ingres, and am using a sketch of The Reverend Church. I have to ‘change’ it somehow tho. So I think I am going to change the environment he is in. The actual figure has to look ‘exactly’ like the original, but the background needs to change somehow. Wish me luck!

#18

So here is the Master Copy I had to do for class.

It is:

Ingres, The Reverend Joseph Church

Done in charcoal.

Unfortunately, it was a requirement of the assignement that we totally F^%k the thing up by “copyiny the figure as exact as possible, then changing the environment”. So while it only took me about 2 hours to do the Figure, it took me a good 3 hours to come up with a non repulsive idea for the background. As you can see, I had no luck. I wish my prof would have just let us do a Master Copy, and not fool with it.

In any case, the head came out wrong in a few places (forehead, nose), but the clothing came out quite good IMO. This assignment could have come out worse I suppose.

Anyways, here it is (with the original inset)

#19

Very worthwhile exercise. :slight_smile: I think it’s quite hard to replicate Ingres’ very precise lines however in charcoal - for copying his work I really recommend using a very sharp, soft pencil where you can get a variety of line widths and a precise stroke.

Keep posting!

#20

True enough. A fact I learned while doing this excercise.

I chose to use charcoal, because I am more more versed with its use, and prefer it to graphite. However in this type of sketch, I know now that graphite would have been much easier with a much better result.

Thanks for the comment

#21

You’re welcome - I would encourage anyone to do as many master copies as possible, they’re fantastic learning exercises throughout one’s career. Hope to see more of them. :slight_smile: