the big picture - seeing the whole while working on the part - EXERCISES?

[dorian]

Hey there!

When drawing from life (or any drawing, really) many people (including me) seem to have trouble seeing the whole while they're occupied with drawing a part and the drawing ends up looking like a mess of disjointed pieces, nothing quite fitting together.
Say you draw a figure, starting with the torso which turns out fine, then you draw a leg, get closer to the paper, draw and draw, then you step back, look at the whole drawing and go "whow! what did I do?! That leg's way too long!"
How come you didn't realize while you were drawing the leg?

I think the main thing is to STEP BACK
(or, if you can't, take a photo and look at it on screen, use binoculars and look through them the "wrong" way, or whatever you come up with)

But sometimes stepping back isn't enough, and we just can't see "the big picture". Working on the whole drawing and blocking in big things first is usually a good strategy. But even then, when blocking in the shadow shape of the eye socket it might get too big or too small or too far over to the left even though we're stepping back. And often we see that something's off but can't quite figure out what it is. Then a friend or teacher walks up and says "watch out, that eye socket is too far to the right" - and then we can see it, too. Or sometimes not.. :)
Does anybody know or have any ideas about exercises that could specifically train that ability?Any thoughts are greatly appreciated!


Tipps so far / essential & useful habits:
step back physically!
step back mentally! Meaning get some to the work, take a break and think about something else for a few minutes, hours or days and when you come back the mistakes will be much more obvious. Look at the work and imagine your (imaginary) assistant did it - did he/she do a good job? What needs to be fixed?
work from the general to the specific - block in big stuff first, don't get lost in details - think abstract shapes
squint! this simplifies what you see
blur your eyes! this as well simplifies what you see
use a mirror and/or turn the image upside down
put what you see into words! "A problem well stated is a problem half solved." Say to yourself (in your head or out loud): In relation to the whole, the top of that eye-socket lines up with the ears. Then that hairline comes in THAT much, etc.
use a measuring tool in the beginning to help you with the big proportions, but make sure you FIRST put down your best guess by eye (no mechanical measuring), then take another very good look by eye and fix it if necessary, THEN check with a measuring tool (your pencil/brush, a knitting needle, etc.)
find horizontal and vertical alignments (use a knitting needle in the beginning, for horizontals hold it in front of you with both arms stretched out, for verticals hold it lightly at the top and let it fal down vertically or use a plumb line (string with a weight attached)
Don't look directly at the subject, look to the left or right and try to take in the whole subjectExercises so far:
Draw more...! Use the above tips!
The Imaginary Assistent - step back mentally! Draw something, then take a break. When you come back after a while, look at your work and imagine your assistant did it. Did he/she do a good job? What needs to be fixed?
Draw the same subject a few times - every time it will go better and you will see more of the "big picture". After a few of these your drawing and seeing in general will improve
Big-picture Contour Drawing! - "I don't focus my vision on any one part of the subject, like when you space out and blankly stare at something, you can just see the whole thing without focusing on any one detail. Then trying to block out the shapes while you've got the whole subject held in your vision. Obviously this isn't actually going to yield very accurate results, but I think it's a good (maybe) exercise to train the coordination." (Thanks Hunterkiller!)
Memory Drawing! Put your easel behind you and your subject in front of you. Or draw in a different room than the subject is. Or look at the subject for 3 minutes without making any marks on the paper, then without looking at the subject draw for 5 minutes, then repeat the process. This will help you focus on the big stuff, simplify!
...?.

[nonie]

If it's a long pose: You've been trained with blocking in, right? Use the same process you use to block in a cast - draw the biggest overall shape first (A polygon using the outermost extremes of the figure as corners - this is called envelope technique I think) carefully measuring the distances and angles between each point and then work in from there. Always draw the largest shapes first and only tighten detail when you need to to measure and once you're sure everything's accurate. When you have the outermost guide lines established, find halfway points (sometimes the bellybutton) and things that are the same measurement, like maybe the foot is closer to you and is the same length as the arm from wrist to armpit, etc. Use straight lines and get the angles and lengths right.

Working out from a smaller shape (like the torso, or doing the head first) is a lot less accurate. Forcing yourself to stay in light, rough, straight lines until your block-in is accurate is pretty essential. Squint at the model to keep detail from being too visible and try to twitch your eyes back and forth between the two fast enough that your brain turns it into and animated gif - then differences will be obvious.

Always sit or stand a full arm's length from the paper until your block-in is satisfactory. And yes, stepping back is important. You can also turn the drawing upside-down for a fresher view. I often tilt my head horizontally when I step back, but I get teased for it :P I dunno, it helps me.

[dorian]

great! good stuff, I updated the first post!

I should've mentioned I want to stay away from measuring as much as possible. "Measuring is a crutch, if you use a crutch too long you won't be able to walk on your own legs."
It's fine for the big measurements in the beginning, gives you a somewhat reliable foundation. (I think it makes a lot of sense to measure ANYTHING by EYE FIRST, and THEN check with a knitting needle, pencil or whatever one uses to measure.)

So it's really the problem of seeing the big picture. Measuring is pretty easy but way too slow, inaccurate and limiting in the long run.

[NightVision]

A way to practice this would be to draw the same thing several times, the first time it might take 10 minutes, but the last maybe only 2, each time you know more things NOT to do and each time you (should be able to) see a 'bigger' picture and simplify.

[nonie]

Don't stay away from measuring. (And I don't know of doing it any other way than what you're saying - draw it and then check it.) The fact is that measuring strengthens your ability to get it right the first time - after doing enough block-ins you no longer need to measure because more often than not you're getting it right anyway. It's a learning tool, and a pretty big one at that. I mean you can call it a crutch, but who keeps using a crutch once their legs are strong enough to stand on their own?

[timpaatkins]

Something that dave kassan helped me with was to keep comparing every line you draw to the line snext to it, whilst looking at the body and doing the same, and not draw like one entire leg on the torso, but sort of growing them out at the same time, whilst comparing and mentally asking yourself

"ok, so this comes out like that, but how is it connected to that, is it at the right angle, ohh and whats this little dude doing here, shouldn't he be like that more, and ooh now i see that this goes behind that"

Its almost like a little conversation, and I can get quite in to it! (sometimes ill even be talking out loud..) I also use a knitting needle to measure initially, and then I use it to see slants and angles, one is surprised how often something is misinterpreted by the eyes and brain. I like to hold the needle horizontally or vertically, creating a plumb line and then i can judge the angle easier.

[Chris Bennett]

When you draw a snake you must try to see the tail when you are looking at its toungue.
I don't necessarily think this is entirely about proportions, if at all in the most profound sense. After all, an image can be in correct proportion yet still not 'read' together. Then again a charicature can have the most outlandish differences in relative proportions yet still come together as a whole.
Rather, I think its to do with maintaining connections across the whole. Much in the way a page of script can be easily read if it is well written.

One is trying to make a catalogue and not a list.

Internal visualisation plays a big part in this I am sure, since I tend to find that if this is stong, then, when I step back I'm usually pleasantly suprised at how good it's all looking. If I'm not too sure what I'm doing and just seem to be doodling around waiting for inspiration to stike, no amount of stepping back makes things any better - quite the opposite, since I just 'lock up' completely!

[HunterKiller_]

Great topic.

I agree strongly with Chris on visualization.

The 'twitchy eye' technique work well sometimes.

I've been trying this weird method lately. It's kind of blind contour drawing, except that instead of tracing around the subject with the eyes and following with the hand, I don't focus my vision on any one part of the subject, like when you space out and blankly stare at something, you can just see the whole thing without focusing on any one detail.
Then trying to block out the shapes while you've got the whole subject held in your vision.

Obviously this isn't actually going to yield very accurate results, but I think it's a good (maybe) exercise to train the coordination.

[GNL]

Great Topic Dorian!

Its such an annoying thing when you know somethings wrong, but don't know what!!!



I've often thought about how being able to see your drawing on the paper makes things much easier.

It would almost be like your eyes were a projector of sort, and you could just have your pencil flow around the image your seeing in the paper, make the drawing as naturalistic or symbolic as you want.

I find looking of to the left or right of the figure helps - not focusing on the drawing itself.

[dorian]

NightVision: hm, I think that would actually help with that one drawing - and over time one would probably even get better with all drawings in general. Good one, thanks!

nonie: I agree, one shouldn't stay away from measuring completely, especially in the beginning. But it should be used as little as possible. That could still mean until all the main things and even some smaller elements are blocked in and one feels comfortable.
In the long run and with the goal of mastering drawing from life, it makes very good sense to train the eye, though. True skill that becomes accurate and intuitive, as opposed to the limited mechanical measuring.
But then, that's only how I feel :) It might work differently for other people and if someone else loves their measuring tool and it's the way of most freedom, that surely works as well!
About making the mark first and THEN measuring - I've seen people who stopped looking. They measure first, put down where the measuring tool tells them the mark should go and proceed to the next one. They don't look. Then somebody walks up, tells them about the things that are off and suddenly they can see them, too. Ooops :)
Not directly related but good: Maestro John Angel says: "The secret to good drawing is: stop guessing, start looking!"

timpaatkins: good stuff! Putting it into words definitely helps: "A problem well stated is a problem half solved"! I also think of Betty Edwards' "drawing on the right side of the brain". Essentially the describing and looking more closely is trying to see what's really there.

Chris Bennett: I totally agree with what you're saying - the thing I'm concerned with here is the specific challenge of drawing from life and getting the proportions right. In a realistic portrait, say. And in an exercise mindset of getting it "just right", minimum distortion and design to make things nicer, just training your eye, mind and hand to get utmost control.
The visualisation stuff extremely interests me, I'll open a thread about that in a while, I'm researching stuff and writing a little something!

HunterKiller_: sweet! Betty Edwards comes to mind again, she had a few similar exercises in "drawing on the right side.." Added it to the first post, thanks!

GNL: the thing you're describing is called "projection" by some people. VERY interesting indeed, I wonder how this can be achieved as well, but that probably deserves its own topic. Maybe Marko can clarify a few things there :) (DRAW DRAW DRAW LAZY BUMS! :D)
I added "not focusing on the figure itself" to the top, very good trick as well, thanks!

This is great, thank you everybody!! Keep it coming! I'm asking friends and teachers and will update the first post!

.

[dose]

The most effective tool for me is mental/emotional distance from the piece. Usually this is done most easily with time away from the piece. If you can afford it given the pose/subject and the deadline, take a break and forget about the piece. Get some water, talk with someone about something unrelated. 10 minutes can help a lot, a day is great, and a week or two is gold. The more time the better, really- again, if you can afford that kind of time. I think everybody's had the experience of unearthing a drawing from last year that you thought was awesome only to find some glaring mistakes and wonder how you missed them while you were working on it.

The breaks are important- not just for you, but for the piece as well. I got into a streak where I would pride myself on working through the breaks in class, thinking what a great work ethic I had. But it usually just meant that mentally I never stepped back from the piece even though by that time I'd trained myself to step back physically with regularity. If I came back from a break with a fresh eye lots of mistakes were instantly obvious, but I was missing them by working straight through. Eventually I found that I generally do better and more efficient work if I take the break and think about something else (or nothing) for a while. This is hardest when you're racing for a deadline, but even then I generally find it's better if I force myself take the break (which is usually the last thing I want to do with 4 or 5 hours left).

I try use the idea of stepping back mentally in conjunction with stepping back physically. Whenever you step back, try your hardest to view the piece as if you'd never seen it before- throw out all your previous knowledge about how you've done what you've done so far. This is *much* easier said than done, but a crucial part of stepping back. I think it's why your teacher or friend can walk up to your piece and instantly see that the head is two inches to the left of where it should be- because they automatically have the mental distance from it.

Hope this helps

Tim

[J Wilson]

work from the general to the specific - block in big stuff first, don't get lost in details

This more than anything else in my opinion. If you take the time to make sure your general layout and shapes are good before moving on, you'll be in pretty good shape. You do need to frequently assess the whole image to see if everything works together, but you should be able to do enough work at the beginning to make sure you have few drawing or composition issues.

[dorian]

dose: ah! brilliant! Thank you!!

The Dweller: I agree - its hard for a beginner though to think big & simplify things. There's two approaches I can think of, one is "get the foundation right so everything you build on top will hold together" vs. "get the big stuff in fast so you can see your image on the page and you have something to look at and compare to your subject. I think we should practise both.

.

[dorian]

Good quote in Robert Henri's "The Art Spirit":


I am sure there are many people - and there are artists - who have never seen a whole head. They look from feature to feature. You can't draw a head until you see it whole. It's not easy. Try it. When I first realized this it seemed that I had to stretch my brain in order to get it around a whole head. It seemed that I could go so far, but it was a feat to comprehend the whole. No use trying to draw a thing until you have got all around it. It is only then that you comprehend a unity of which the parts can be treated as parts.

[kev ferrara]

My opinion: Previsualizing your picture to the absolute limit of your powers and holding that image in your mind's eye... and then "projecting" that image (your mind's view) through the paper as you work is the most effective way of seeing the whole thing at once. That is, see the picture you are working on as if it were just below your paper and you were tracing it. But as you trace it, don't look at the tip of your pencil. Continue to look through the paper at the image below it.

I am only able to do this when I'm working at peak level, which is to say, once in a while. But training yourself to do this kind of image previsualization is very helpful to improving both your imagination and your ability to see the whole picture at once. An image is really just a graphic design, a visual metaphor of the yin-yang variety... which our imaginations create. Our intellect is detail-oriented and not emotional, which is why it so often screws up the image in its zeal to complicate and render.

Which is all to say, hold your intellect in check as you work. Utilize your imagination as fully as you can.

[Zaknafain]

http://gurneyjourney.blogspot.com/2008/06/area-by-area-painting.html

interesting perspective on the topic. I have seen many studies like that before but I have no clue how this technique works (i do find it quite difficult when I try it myself). i also wonder if preliminary drawings / paintings can be used to establish the big picture, then working on the final area by area while having the big picture only in your mind.

Any thoughts on this? I'm also interested in the arthistorical backround of this approach.

[Chris Bennett]

That's really interesting that you should bring this up Zaknafain. I've just started to adopt this approach myself in answer to some fundamental questions I have been asking myself about my approach to subject matter, in particular the realisation that I need to ramp up the way in which I use formal means to comment on what is being depicted. It also answers a need to keep myself in a state of surprise right through to the last moments of working on a picture.
This is a really big question for me and is causing me to rethink much of my approach to composition. I'm thinking of getting a thread started on this topic rather than bolt it onto the 'Advanced Composition Thread', since it involves many other things. In particular it raises problems about the degree to which one pre-visualises.

Anyway, here is a painting I have begun this very day and thus I can show you how this method works.

561317

[Craise]

I used to make the mistake whenever i drew characters to focus only on the face first, it kinda make all my characters look wierd when i looked at the bigger picture, i found that its definately good to start with bold shapes, then in those shapes make more intricate shapes, check that they look correct in the image, correct any faults and repeat until im left with a level of detail that im happy to start fleshing out. Even when im happy with it i usually go through a few more processes to check the image is spot on.

In terms of seeing fractional errors in my drawings, other then flipping the image if im doing it digitally, i usually take 10 mins away from the drawing and coming back to it, its like seeing it fresh and i can easily spot any faults. It always works for me.

[dorian]

kev ferrara: How do you do it??! How do you practice? Just by trying? I'm really interested in mental imagery - projecting it - and the possibilities that being able to do this really well would open up... I've been looking for years but can't find any research on this (mental imagery, controlled visualisation, training these skills, etc.) If anybody knows anything about it, please let me know!
I'm not sure if I agree with "hold your intellect in check as you work. Utilize your imagination as fully as you can." - for me it depends on what stage I'm in and what the goals are with the painting. Mostly it seems that intuitively I can only do as much as the conscious has understood before.

Zaknafain: fuck that's one nice arm :o It seems like they all did accurate drawings before starting with paint. The main reason probably being efficiency - if the drawing is figured out, you know where things go.
For the process, in Gurney's examples it's used only when working from life, where it's pretty straightforward I'd imagine - having the drawing established, just pick an area and finish it, painting what you see and understand. I'm sure there is also some anticipation and thinking about the whole, paying attention to the big hue, value and chroma relationships. But since only a small area of the canvas is covered in the beginning you can only look at those relationships on the subject, being forced to imagine / anticipate tham on the canvas. That's probably where the difficulty lies.
But then, with very careful looking one could probably paint something area by area without much thinking and still have it hold together pretty ok?

The artist proceeded in essentially two steps. First, the main lines and landmarks were carefully drawn with a brush. Then the painting was taken directly to finished effect at the first statement, proceeding across the canvas one area at a time.

[...] He began with an exact drawing of the mountain silhouette. [...] In this unfinished study, Church captured the rocky coast of Maine in a similar way. On the right, you can see traces of his preliminary—and very precise—pencil drawing.
[...] The trick is to take your time getting the drawing right before you start in with paint, and then mix and render each area with full awareness of its relationship to other values.

Chris: nice, thanks for sharing! Can you go a bit more into what you meant by "in particular the realisation that I need to ramp up the way in which I use formal means to comment on what is being depicted"?
And post the link to that thread if you decide to open it, I'd be interested to hear people's thoughts!

Craise: yup, same here - sometimes the tough thing is to remember to take a break and flip the thing. And stay away from the details in early stages

[DavePalumbo]

It seems like they all did accurate drawings before starting with paint. The main reason probably being efficiency - if the drawing is figured out, you know where things go.

That's how I work. If I have a tight and resolved drawing infront of me, I feel confident where things are going and just go right to finishing each piece as I do it. Even if you focus in on small pieces as you work, if you have a mental blueprint or work up an accurate drawing or underpainting, you can just take occasional breaks to make sure you're not deviating and it'll all pull together. I think it's prep stages that make the difference here.

[kev ferrara]

kev ferrara: How do you do it??! How do you practice? Just by trying? I'm really interested in mental imagery - projecting it - and the possibilities that being able to do this really well would open up... I've been looking for years but can't find any research on this (mental imagery, controlled visualisation, training these skills, etc.) If anybody knows anything about it, please let me know!
I'm not sure if I agree with "hold your intellect in check as you work. Utilize your imagination as fully as you can." - for me it depends on what stage I'm in and what the goals are with the painting. Mostly it seems that intuitively I can only do as much as the conscious has understood before.
[B]

Dorian, there is no research on this because scientists aren't artists. There's no scientific literature to consult. So I've always just read what artists who create memorable images had to say on the matter. Frazetta said he would sometimes spend a week imagining a picture before working on it. Joseph Clement Coll would sit on a comfy couch with a cloth over his head until the image appeared to him. Harvey Dunn and Pyle and Wyeth were always talking about previsualization.

(Dunn and Pyle notes...

Pyle: http://www.box.net/shared/eccglstgkk

Dunn: http://www.robolus.com/h.dunn-eveningclassroom.pdf

(Might a mod sticky the Pyle, Dunn, and Sargent pdf notes when time allows?)

The "projection" thing I was talking about was about getting the image down on paper, which is essentially a silhouette drawing. All the other stuff is fairly intellectual... hierarchical, technical. (Like making sure that you keep your highest contrast and most detail for your effect area, say, or not emphasizing an unimportant part of your picture too much, or using atmostpheric perspective, making sensible yet beautiful skin color contrasts, color toning, separating light from shadow to get good solid form, etc.)

I think the way to practice is to get an idea for a picture, and then try to live in it in your imagination. There must be an emotional component to this process. The imagination is not the intelligence. It is "smarter" by an order of magnitude than the intelligence in matters visual because it can create a hologram in your head, (heluva lot of info involved in that.) but I believe it requires strong emotional feeling in order to do its image-creating work. So do this "emotion-charged previsualization" until you can quite literally study the image you come up with in your mind's eye as if looking at the finished product. (You won't be able to study just one part of it, like a hand, because that will cause the image to disappear. Unless you just want to imagine the hand. But since a hand can be referenced, all you really need is the silhouette of the hand to get the expression of it, and then your intelligence/craft/technique can fill in the blanks later as you're working.)

Not an easy technique. But really its just thinking of images in terms of silhouettes/graphic design. I find the hardest part to be getting into that "zen state" where I can generate the emotions that cause the image to appear. Making the dramatic conflict of the picture personal seems to be the entry point into actually feeling the emotion of the scene.

I also recall spending a lot of time setting up a scene and then trying to fly around it and fly through it in my imagination when I was first trying to teach myself previsualization techniques.

Best
kev

[Chris Bennett]

Chris: nice, thanks for sharing! Can you go a bit more into what you meant by "in particular the realisation that I need to ramp up the way in which I use formal means to comment on what is being depicted"?


So often we use our skills at building forms merely in the service of making things 'look like they are there'. To use a phrase Kev Ferrara gave me: we tend to listlessly paint the noun. This is what the camera can do better than us. This practice is often disguised by the emploment of fantasy elements - the shining pazzaz, the explosions the bad ass weapons, beautiful babes etc often distract us from whether the formal elemnts are doing any kind of job at all. In other words the 'nouns' are so seductive that we ignore the far deeper power of the verbs.
Painting the verb is the very living grammer of 2D art. Without it nothing, quite literally nothing, happens.
Chardin paints the the jar of peaches as a summer imprisoned.
Renoir paints lips looking to be kissed.
Frazetta paints a toungue as a taste of its prey.
Modigliani paints the hips as a lover's long touch.

Say we are painting an arm; I ask myself what is it doing and thus try to keep this in the forefront of my mind as I render it on the canvas. This will inevitably lead to painting it in a different way than had I just painted the arm as a noun - 'arm'. I try to paint 'what the arm is doing arm'.

Now, what is relevent to this thread is that it seems to me that 'sequencial painting, or painting by areas at a time and jointing them together, seems to encourage this thought process quite naturally. Whereas painting from the big down to the small can encourage an 'uncommented' array of forms. The truth of this is demonstrated by an effect that someone commented on further up the thread - that if a total commitment is made to working part by part with no 'stepping back' then a certain weird expressiveness can often result. If, on the other hand, one works with cloudy generalisations with the idea of gradually tightening things up the result is often balanced but without a 'point of view' - with nothing seemingly commited to.

Both methods have their payoff and drawbacks. It's a question of which horse to back at any given race or any stage in that race.