Tips for an aspiring artist

[RookieArtist]

Hey, Im new to the forums and I am a "rookie" as you can see from the username :) Anyway, Ive always wanted to get into drawing, but the thing is I was always one of those people that get frustrated when not good at something right away. I would always think a quick sketch was rubbish and toss it out. But, ive found I can be a bit more patient now and I would like to draw again, or at least try ;)


So, one thing I was wondering. At this point, im not very talented at drawing an image from my head, something unique of my own. I was wondering if it helps to practice drawing other peoples work. I for instance, like playing Magic the Gathering, and I like to try doodling the drawings on the cards sometimes. Does this aid in gaining technique? or am I running in a circle?


Anyway, and tips for a new guy would be appreciated. Thanks much!

[ask maurice]

It is perfectly fine to observe and/or dissect how another artist work has been created. It is not OK to recreate it. Yes, there are allot of sweat shop companies out there replicating old un-copyrighted work from the classical masters. Is it legal yes but, very un-ethical etiquette and insulting to the living artist.

It is better to start good habits by practicing to draw from life or by reference photos you have taken as it provides you with other essential skills such as composition, perspective, chiaroscuro and concept development.


Ask Maurice.Org
Home (http://www.askmaurice.org/index.html) | Book Store (http://www.askmaurice.org/store.html) |Forum (http://askmaurice.org/simplemachinesforum/index.php) |Links (http://www.askmaurice.org/links.html)

[FourTonMantis]

It is perfectly fine to observe and/or dissect how another artist work has been created. It is not OK to recreate it.

This is where I and I'm sure a lot of people here would disagree. Ever heard of a master study? It's where you take a master's work and recreate it, stroke for stroke, to see how they did it. As long as you aren't claiming the work for your own, there's nothing wrong with recreating a work done by another artist.

[ask maurice]

Sure did and never agreed with it's principals, never will.

It's a bad habit to start because it interrupts and dilutes an individual's personal style as well as makes the mind lazy in regards to obtaining original subject matter.


Ask Maurice.Org
Home (http://www.askmaurice.org/index.html) | Book Store (http://www.askmaurice.org/store.html) |Forum (http://askmaurice.org/simplemachinesforum/index.php) |Links (http://www.askmaurice.org/links.html)

[RookieArtist]

well Im not claiming the art as my own. I just figured that doing trying to replicate artwork that I like would help me to build technique. Im not claiming the work as my own.

[ask maurice]

You asked for an opinion and got it.

[FourTonMantis]

It's a bad habit to start because it interrupts and dilutes an individual's personal style

How do you think personal style is developed? A huge portion of style comes from the art that the artist is surrounded by and interested in. There's nothing wrong with master studies purely as educational tools. The only way it would dilute personal style is if that's all one did. Slippery slope much?

as well as makes the mind lazy in regards to obtaining original subject matter.


Again, as studies they are useful. Balancing master studies between everything else (observational studies, life drawing, etc.) can only help.

[Tiko]

I began to draw drawing Son Gokhu xDD (It isn't a joke, it's true)

[Baron Impossible]

^ I agree, if used sparingly it's a fun educational method to try and recreate a master's painting, or even a fellow artist's, in part or in full (the latter only for personal use and not for public display, obviously).

As an occasional exercise it has merit and I've certainly learned from the few times I've done it. Unfortunately I haven't sacrificed my own style for that of Cornwell... if only

[Craig D]

Copying to learn is a great thing to do.

[Zazerzs]

Im going to have to disagree with ask maurice's statement

"It's a bad habit to start because it interrupts and dilutes an individuals personal style as well as makes the mind lazy in regards to obtaining original subject matter".

Right now as a beginner you shouldn't be worried about your own personal style, you don't know enough to produce a successful one.

Studying others techniques is a great way to help build your own style.

In music you learn scales , other peoples pieces ect. art is no different.

The more you learn from others the more you will develop your own style. , what you like , what you dont.

I would suggest starting with the basics, check out the tuts and tips forums.
Start a sketchbook and post so we can give feedback on what you are working on.

Its hard to make things up when there is nothing in your brain to draw from, you only draw what you know so start filling up that brain :)

[ask maurice]

Who did the cave man copy from?

Creativity is something that is inside you. What you visualize and how you express it is a sacred thing from inside of you. The purity of this talent that you may or may not process becomes an essential part of your creativity itself. This is why we have Picasso's (who was an excellent realist by the way) and other artist who've created a trends, or movements that are still being copied today. Once you begin you will always be comparing your talent to this artist style or that. Besides, there are millions of things in life to choose for subject matter.

For the record my first recorded drawing in Kindergarten was from memory of Abe Lincoln. It hung on the wall in that school about five years after I moved from that town. My second was a live pencil portrait of my mother. I've continued this trend an haven't looked back since.

[Zazerzs]

I'm not worried about creativity, that's personal, although there are ways to stimulate creativity.

What I'm worried about are the technical aspects of art that can and should be taught.

I will relate this to music again cause i believe it fits.

If you want to lean an instrument you usually study some mucistheory, scales,notes, note placement, keys, ect.

but when it comes to art we expect people to just know how to do it, figure it out by themselves , because its all talent right? nope wrong.

In art there are many systems and structures that once know let your creativity come to life. The golden-section, perspective, color theory, anatomy, ect. are all things that will help one express themselves, not stifle them.

Picasso knew the structure of art and its principles so well that he could break what rules he wanted because he knew them all.

Breaking the rules without knowing them usually leads to a mess, not a work of art.

[Hyskoa]

It is perfectly fine to observe and/or dissect how another artist work has been created. It is not OK to recreate it.
Bullshit? Utter, utter bullshit? Copying different masters trains your eyes, gives you examples of how truly great men handled certain visual problems and gives you a small insight into their way of thinking. In no way does it force you to become a copy of them. Only people with absolutely no spine and the IQ of a brick end up doing work in exactly their style.
Yes, there are allot of sweat shop companies out there replicating old un-copyrighted work from the classical masters. Is it legal yes but, very un-ethical etiquette and insulting to the living artist.
And has absolutely zero to do with this discussion. The op wanted to know if you could learn from copying masters, not if it was good business practice.
It is better to start good habits by practicing to draw from life or by reference photos you have taken as it provides you with other essential skills such as composition, perspective, chiaroscuro and concept development.
Drawing from life gives you none of those. Composition, perspective, chiascuro and concept development are all ideas and concepts which mankind use and have thought of to understand nature and/or form, which is exactly why you need to copy masters and read books on the matter as well as recieve guided training to understand these principles.

Ask Maurice.Org
I'd rather not ask Maurice, as you're wrong. In fact, every reply you've made thus far over several threads contained a nugget of bad advice. Do you even make art? Or is it just an purely theoretical pastime for you?
Home (http://www.askmaurice.org/index.html) | Book Store (http://www.askmaurice.org/store.html) |Forum (http://askmaurice.org/simplemachinesforum/index.php) |Links (http://www.askmaurice.org/links.html)

There is something called a forum signature setting, look it up.

You're welcome.

[AndreasM]

For all i know...

Degas, Sargent, Rubens, Van Dyke and tons of masters studied and constantly strived to live up to (and even surpass) their previous master's efforts.


Creativity is something that is inside you. What you visualize and how you express it is a sacred thing from inside of you. The purity of this talent that you may or may not process becomes an essential part of your creativity itself.

I both agree and disagree with everything you have written so far, Maurice. I think hatever comes from 'inside of you' derives from how you respond to the world around you. If you aproach everything you want to depict in the most honset and scincere way, you'll eventually surpass whatever is claimed to be 'original' during your lifetime. If you rank scincerity higher than creativity, the question of wether or not you loose yourself and your 'style' by learning from the masters (most of who, to my knowledge, aporached nature in the scincerest way they were capable of), becomes unnecessary. Recommending someone to copy from photos, rather than the best paintings of the past, is just...stupid.

I strongly belive that creativity is mainly fueled by being eclectic and persistently staying true one self. Whatever is percieved as "original subject matter" changes with the times and their trends. It should be the least of the artists worries. Least of mine, at least.

(yes, i have been reading Harold Speeds books alot).

[alesoun]

Draw, Rookie Artist. Draw from life, draw from old masters, draw from Bridgeman, Loomis and Harold Speed. Draw in the mall, in the coffee shop, at the demolition site.

Draw all sorts of stuff, with a pencil, a pen, a brush, spitting soda through a straw; whatever you have to hand.

When you get fed up with that; draw some more.

Start a sketchbook here and show your drawings, then take it from there.

[Flake]

I both agree and disagree with everything you have written so far, Maurice. .

Same here.

I fully agree with the points about subject matter, composition. It is important to decide what you wish to paint, why and how.

Where I differ is that I see no harm , conversely great value in seeing how other artists may have approached similar subjects in the past.
Even the mental act of figuring out how someone might have achieved a particular effect, why they might have done it, is automatically a usefull exercise.

Master copies were an accepted method of training for many hundreds of years and if you don't think you could learn anything from Rembrandt or Vermeer, you may be insane.
What better way to learn than to try and do it?
Re inventing the wheel is silly.

No harm in influences as long as you have more than one.

(yes, i have been reading Harold Speeds books alot).
As should everyone, dude knew his stuff.

Edit: since Speed was brought up, I feel justified in pimping the free E book version of his drawing book again. :D
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/14264

Anyhows, Rookieartist, do anything that seems fun and usefull because if it isn't you won't continue to do it.

[ask maurice]

FourTonMantis How do you think personal style is developed? A huge portion of style comes from the art that the artist is surrounded by and interested in. There's nothing wrong with master studies purely as educational tools. The only way it would dilute personal style is if that's all one did. Slippery slope much?

So if I lived in a neighborhood surrounded by graffiti and because I'm impressed by it that's what MY work will look like? Master studies yes, master copies no.

FourTonMantis Again, as studies they are useful. Balancing master studies between everything else (observational studies, life drawing, etc.) can only help.

So none of you here have taken appreciation tours in museums and been able to understand the technical aspects of a painting without dissecting the art into a mechanical craft?

Can't any artist understand (just by observing) how to position a photograph frame enhancing the composition via augmented perspective or light and shade?

This is your most recent work? (http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=160223)


HyskoaBullshit? Utter, utter bullshit? Copying different masters trains your eyes, gives you examples of how truly great men handled certain visual problems and gives you a small insight into their way of thinking. In no way does it force you to become a copy of them. Only people with absolutely no spine and the IQ of a brick end up doing work in exactly their style.

So when Picasso developed Cubism , or André Breton lead the Surrealism movement it was because they had no spine and the IQ of a brick?


HyskoaDrawing from life gives you none of those. Composition, perspective, chiascuro and concept development are all ideas and concepts which mankind use and have thought of to understand nature and/or form, which is exactly why you need to copy masters and read books on the matter as well as recieve guided training to understand these principles. And what have you learned?? These are your most recent projects (http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=161885)

HyskoaI'd rather not ask Maurice, as you're wrong. In fact, every reply you've made thus far over several threads contained a nugget of bad advice. Do you even make art? Or is it just an purely theoretical pastime for you?

Since you asked: Yes, and I've had some of my work in a NY gallery 12 - 19 yrs before either of you you guys where born. I have grandchildren with more art experience and formal education than you guys. So, I don't know why I'm even feeding this debate. Here is a journal of ONE of my recent studies (http://askmaurice.blogspot.com/)



Ask Maurice.Org
Home (http://www.askmaurice.org/index.html) | Book Store (http://www.askmaurice.org/store.html) |Forum (http://askmaurice.org/simplemachinesforum/index.php) |Links (http://www.askmaurice.org/links.html)

[Baron Impossible]

I'd be a bit careful about pointing the finger at others' work in that way.

[J Wilson]

ask maurice, you've tread into dangerous ground pulling up people's work to invalidate their opinions. I can say pretty strongly, that's not something most of us are going to be very keen on. I don't think you are nearly as advanced as you think you are either.

I won't pull the same and bash on your work (unless you're willing to put your money where your mouth is and put some things up in the Critique forum), but I will give you a verbal warning on this. Attacking a poster's opinions by attacking their artwork isn't the atmosphere we foster here. It's a pretty immature way to conduct an argument.

[Zazerzs]

@ ask Maurice
no need to attack FourTonMantis's works as he was not commenting on your work just your ideas.

as for Hyskoa i think he's shown some very nice progress.

I find your comments unrealeted to the issues at hand.

[hala]

in my humble opinion,

do studies--they teach technicalities that alter your way of seeing the world as an artist.

the minute you step away from your studies and references, is the minute your brain switches into a different gear and you create your own means to convey technique--hence, style. to me, as long as no reference is present, your own style will show through.
and i agree with baron---everything in moderation.

and a personal note to rookie: when you get frustrated at the level of your work, put that page away, go look at some of your favorite artists, and i mean reallyyyy look at their work, and then go back and redraw. you will feel inspired, and by looking you will subconsciously notice things that will transfer through your hand to the paper. The worst thing to do is let your own abilities uninspire you. If you are spiritual, do some meditation or exercise as well...I find a combination of those things really help me when I feel like my work is utter sh*t.
good luck! :)

i don't mean to spur any argument either, some things work for some people, and some things don't. :)

[ask maurice]

ask maurice, you've tread into dangerous ground pulling up people's work to invalidate their opinions. I can say pretty strongly, that's not something most of us are going to be very keen on. I don't think you are nearly as advanced as you think you are either.

I won't pull the same and bash on your work (unless you're willing to put your money where your mouth is and put some things up in the Critique forum), but I will give you a verbal warning on this. Attacking a poster's opinions by attacking their artwork isn't the atmosphere we foster here. It's a pretty immature way to conduct an argument.

An artist's work speaks for itself. No attack was made on their work but, if it is taken than way I humbly apologize to both of them. But it is somewhat prejudicial to have my opinion and experience attacked and told I"M full of "bull_ _ _ _", as well as being warned about my right to express it.

I'm about as mature as it gets short of falling in my grave so thanks for that complement. I have and I am willing to continue to help any one on this forum that is truly interested in the fine arts. And this comment was nothing more than a factual statement "I do have grandchildren with more art experience and formal education than these guys." I guess in the future, I'll just have to avoid their argumentative nature.

For the record, I do have posts in this critique. Have a free for all.

[cmalidore]

Meanwhile, back on the subject of helping Rookieartist

Make sure that if you do studies that you don't get attached to doing them. You will still need to pursue your creativity on your own steam so that you're utilizing what it is you glean from those studies. It is REALLY easy to fall into the trap of one or the other. And that is of far less help in the long run.

Studies can help as long as you're not viewing it as just a copy with no dissection. Dig into the shapes, ask questions - why do you think the artist did what they did with their options when they could have gone a different way?

But with whatever you do.... make sure you enjoy the hell out of it.

[FourTonMantis]

I'm about as mature as it gets short of falling in my grave so thanks for that complement.

You can piss off pal, as dredging up my posts isn't very mature at all.

[Flake]

Chill dude, anger leads to the darkside, the darkside leads to potentially useful threads being locked, or something.

[FourTonMantis]

Chill dude, anger leads to the darkside, the darkside leads to potentially useful threads being locked, or something.

Really? Does that come with the force lightning? :)

[Flake]

No, but you get a sweet red lightsaber and a swishy cape.

Then you get owned by a dude with a ponytail.

[Aeron]

I prefer to be a lurker on these boards and just enjoy the art, but I feel compelled to post here regarding the remarks by ask maurice.

First of all, there is nothing wrong with copying the masters. I find it more than a little bizarre that someone who feels they're in a position to give valid art advice is suggesting that you can learn all you need to know about a painting just by glancing at it in a museum.

"So none of you here have taken appreciation tours in museums and been able to understand the technical aspects of a painting without dissecting the art into a mechanical craft?

Can't any artist understand (just by observing) how to position a photograph frame enhancing the composition via augmented perspective or light and shade?"

ask maurice, I'm going to assume you don't have any formal art training, if you did, you might have spent a great deal of time in an art museum copying the paintings on the walls.

Given your age and proclaimed wisdom in the arts, I'm troubled that you feel the need to openly discredit the works of the younger artists here who are clearly hungry to learn. I find it incredibly nasty and juvenile for any artist to do. That you are a grandfather, and I presume are at least in your late 40's / early 50's, I find it sad that you're acting this way among this younger generation.

[ask maurice]

I prefer to be a lurker on these boards and just enjoy the art, but I feel compelled to post here regarding the remarks by ask maurice.

First of all, there is nothing wrong with copying the masters. I find it more than a little bizarre that someone who feels they're in a position to give valid art advice is suggesting that you can learn all you need to know about a painting just by glancing at it in a museum.

"So none of you here have taken appreciation tours in museums and been able to understand the technical aspects of a painting without dissecting the art into a mechanical craft?

Can't any artist understand (just by observing) how to position a photograph frame enhancing the composition via augmented perspective or light and shade?"

ask maurice, I'm going to assume you don't have any formal art training, if you did, you might have spent a great deal of time in an art museum copying the paintings on the walls.

Given your age and proclaimed wisdom in the arts, I'm troubled that you feel the need to openly discredit the works of the younger artists here who are clearly hungry to learn. I find it incredibly nasty and juvenile for any artist to do. That you are a grandfather, and I presume are at least in your late 40's / early 50's, I find it sad that you're acting this way among this younger generation.

It was not my intention to discredit anyone. But there was and still is towards me. Since you asked, actually I am a Great-grandfather. And I agree, it is in fact immature to show ANY form of disrespect or prejudice towards anyone on this or any other forum including myself. Regardless an apology was made. Please give it a rest.

Your assumption is correct about formal art training. I was already past whatever they would teach at that time before graduating HS. Please, I'm not knocking "formal education". It was just not worth MY time or money then and the piece of paper is not what sells my art. So let's not use the term "primitive" here either.

I have spent allot of time in museums though. I remember doing sketches of statues but that is all. All the 2D stuff was analytical observation and notes mostly because none of it looks the same in books.

I have also spent years in the organic chemical industry to learn about the properties of various materials used in the arts such as pigments, oils and polymers to name a few. I have been able to obtain information about allot of things I would have never been taught in school.