Some studies

[kv_ak]

Hi folks, I'm new to CA, and just recently decided to post some of my works here... one pic is a study after C.Bargue and two remaining are short life sketches... Some of you might have seen my thread at Tsofa (Hi to Mr. Mentler!) I'm looking for critiques on my works to help me get better understanding of possible problems and to improve...

Anyway, about drawings:

Bargue was especially interesting since this leg has a lot of fine modelling...

Lightsource is placed somewhere in front, since front plane of marble block on which it stands is brightly lit, and somewhat to the left from leg, since we observe form shadow on the right edge of leg. Also some small cast shadows from foot can give us hints about LS placement in space...

It took me some time to figure why there are halftones on the knee, but then I realised that leg is bent, and some planes will have proper halftones because
of all the foreshortenin involved.

... I wish I had more time to polish those short still-lifes sketches... anyway, I can't get my shorter studies to look as polished as the longer ones... I think I've overstated outlines in some places... generally I would remove sketch lines after doing preliminary massing, but here I didn't have time to do it properly...

I've noticed while doing onion sketch that we see texture only near halftone band... I tried here to get better modelling of halftones and low-lights to bring out highlights...

Apple study was somewhat harder to do-- plate, as it seems proved to be highly reflective, being covered with some sort of glazing, which threw unpleasant and massing-breaking gleams into cast shadow region...
I've massed all those gleams with shadow, however it turned out uneven... I also left some reflected light on apple's side, maybe I should've massed those too...I wonder how Old Masters managed to maintain unity of massing when drawing glazed plates and such? There would be a lot of reflected light everywhere...

I've also massed into shadow XX-pattern that runs around the edges of that plate, left it only on the lit side, since when I squint, it vanishes into shadows.

I want to say thanks to Dave Palumbo, who helped me a lot with understanding of half-tone modelling.

Anyway, input is appreciated, same goes for critiques .

[Kai H]

Whoa really good. Shadow tones looks really superb, eaven iam not a expert on that.

Did you copied the bargue with sight-size? or is it just normal comparative measurement (not sure how it is spelled)? The original has very complex smooth shadows... You have mastered those very well... I cant deam of such skill in near future :)

The apple and onion looks very good too. Those are charcoal?

[kv_ak]

Hi, Baretul, those studies are pencil- I'm hesitant to use charcoal since I don't feel confident enough with pencil.

Bargue drawing was done with comparative measuring... As for shadows, I believe that it is more important to understand why planes are the way they appear to us, and to question oneself why exactly do we see halftones, lights and shadow... smoothness is nothing but a technical question of practice, for even the smoothest tone will look off if there are problems with basic massing and it is not describing the true modelling of forms.

Here's fresh Vanderpoel studies and one of the older Bargues from the beginning of book... also a short sketch of arm from Adolf Joseph Grass's
Narcissus.

C&c's are welcome.

[Seedling]

..I wonder how Old Masters managed to maintain unity of massing when drawing glazed plates and such? There would be a lot of reflected light everywhere...

The best artists who work from life are successful because they are painting what is visible, and not analyzing their subject to death. Check out Richard Schmidt's "Alla Prima" book for more info.

[kv_ak]

Hi Seedling, I'm not familiar with this book, can you explain it a bit more?
Loomis said about installing some stuff and depicting light and shadows the way they are, though he still accentuated necessity of understanding what is one drawing, and making value key maps...

Anyway here's a new still life sketch, something is off with my modelling, I'm not quite sure exactly what... maybe reflected light is too bright, or lights should be more modelled... background tones are overworked, and maybe shadows need to be more even...

also, are there any good books about still life drawing and light modelling? Bargue's good, but he only explains light on human body...

Any help is appreciated.

[kv_ak]

Another Bargue- I think I need to be more accurate with my modelling, it is somewhat difficult to achieve the same fine level of lowlights modelling at the present time for me; however it was a good learning experience.

Anyway, on to next one.

[Rblackmore]

kv_ak: Nice studies, they are very beautiful. I will be recieving my copy of the Bargue book but am a little scared, I'm afraid I won't do well. Did you feel the same before you began, like you couldn't do it? Thanks for your time, Rblackmore.

[kv_ak]

Hi Rblackmore, thanks for comment, yes it was somewhat scary in the beginning, but I've managed to overcome it.

You can try starting with simpler drawings in the beginning of Bargue book, and then gradually progress to more complex. Good luck with your journey:)

Here are my recent assignments - study from Loomis, some still-lifes
and a couple of experimental digital oil paintings, since I've been told by my teachers that it is time to start doing simplest oil paintings. I think I need to keep my reflected light darker.

Well I need to work faster, light changes rapidly and I'm often left with some unfinished areas, though it is still good practice to understand light better;

Lemon is more of work in progress, since while I managed to put my main masses, I'm trying now to learn how to make textures look natural... there's something off in modelling I guess.

I'm also working now on how to create varied edges in oil painting... since there will always be a great deal of variety in half-tones near bed-bug line.

Anyway, C&cs are always appreciated.

[kv_ak]

Here's a bigger update, mostly recent assignments from Loomis- two figures,
a still-life (thanks to Dave Palumbo for his help with modelling), another Loomis exercise with tonal sketching; Arms from Speed and Bridgeman, and finally some studies of unfinished heads from mind, with varying time-limit on each; like Mentler recommends, to draw one third from life, another from Old Masters, ant the last one from mind. And finally a planar study from mind in progress.

[the_allejo05]

nice studies...modeling is good but it will take time..fine modelling is a hard thing to do..just keep working from life and the best examples of flat work as you are doing.. you can try modeling on tone paper..the craft paper they sell everywhere is fine..you can use school chalk and charcoal..this way you are also touching the forms on the light side..and you will be able to see light/dark tones in a simpler way..(dont forget to squint also to simplify your shadow shapes) It works bset for me when i do tone work to start with the darks..(to practice previous to painting)

also think of getting a cast ..a real one..for the study of sculpture and the way it falls on a white object will make your drawings to be more solid..
your tone work is excellent..but remember Line..to use pen and line only so these way your are hatching and modeling the form as if you were a sculptor chiseling the form.. take a look at michelangelo,Rodin..even Durer or rembrandt drawings (fine examples of etching),,if you have a chance do some clay sketches and play with solid mass..to get a real feeling for 3dness..try to sculpt using one light source to..to check your light planes..If your light changes fast..use an artifical one :)..

[kv_ak]

Hi, Allejo; those are good ideas to try, epecially on drawing from clay models.
I'm hoping to get some charcoal soon and experiment with it. Thanks for suggestions !

Recent massing study- not sure about reflected light though.

[kv_ak]

Well here's another update, a study from life after a swan figurine,
another Loomis, experiment with digital oils from life according to Speed-
I still need to figure how to model lights and low lights and be more accurate with edges; and finally a short sketch of tree. I think I need to do some massing studies.

[kv_ak]

Study after Loomis, ear from Bargue, my first charcoal sketch- I completely ruined ear with smudging and some edges are off- guess I need to practice with charcoal more, sketch from imagination just for fun and setting sketch from life.

[sweetoblivion314]

cool stuff man.

heres my question and it may sound dumb but, why does everyone use pencil on their Bargue studies? I have read through the beginning of the book and even he says it was designed for charcoal reproduction.

[sparkyy]

Great drawings! I like the loomis studies especially the shading and blending on them. Keep posting more!!! :)

[kv_ak]

I've been away for some time, I see I've missed some comments. Anyway:

Hi SweetOblivion, to answer your question regarding charcoal, I would say that it requires some good working skills with medium, and a guiding hand of someone who knows exactly how it is supposed to be done.

There is more than a single approach, but one must be familiar with at least one.It is true that in Bargue book we read about preferable medium, but it is also true in my opinion, that Bargues are not about medium, and even not about making perfect copies- they are about understanding, as my good friend and teacher says, understand, not eyeball. Form that is not understood can't be rendered with believability.

Pencil gives very limited range of values, and blacks will be often shiny, which is not desirable-- those are main drawbacks of medium. So I'm trying to figure how to use charcoal at the present time.

Hi Sparkyy, thanks- will try to.

Here are some recent studies- torso after Proud'hon, some charcoals- I'm trying to build my skill with medium, and charcoal cubes/perspectives from Mr.Mentler's workshop, and finally my attempts at color.

[Art_Addict]

Hi, nice studies so far.

couple of things I think about when looking at your drawings. Don't think of the Bargue plates as a true
representation of how light works. They are not.

One thing I notice is how flat your shadows are ( as in the Bargue plates )
Remember that there is as much form in the shadow as their is in the light !
The only difference is that they're usually in a much closer value range.
Therefore appearing flatter. But it is a bad habit to think of your shadows as
being flat when they're not.

Secondly, in most of your drawings there is no dark light and when there is,
like in the drawings of the fruit for instance, it is spread in almost one value
over the entire light plane. Apart from the occasional highlight here and there.
In reality there can be a lot of transition in value from the lightest part in the
light to the darkest part in the light ( dark light) .
Depending on the relationship of the subject towards the light source
( proximity and orientation ) this will vary in how fast or how slow that transition is ( close values ).

About your comment in the first post about the masters. Remember that in line with what I said above,
that reflective light will usually be much closer in value to the shadow then the light.
Don't let reflective light and what's actually in
the light compete with each other in brightness!

Last, Your perspective studies. You're practising 2 point. But in reality everything is 3 point ( except when you're facing something dead straight )
That's why they look a little off. Especially the ones with the higher view point.
All your vertical lines need to come to a point somewhere too. It's much further away but if you completely ignore it looks kinda funny.


Happy drawing!

[sweetoblivion314]

some nice still lifes you got there keep it up.
However, your second perspective drawing is wrong. In multiple point perspective when you have 2 rectangular prisms (a box where every angle measures at 90 degrees), rotated at different angles, they cannot share a vanishing point. There must be 2 completely separate sets of vanishing points. Otherwise, such as in your drawing, one of them is no longer a rectangular prism.
Also when you have both vanishing points for one object on the picture plane you must realize that you have put the viewer inside the picture. So remember when you do an actual drawing in perspective to crop it so that at least 1 VP of every object is outside the image border.

good luck :)

[kv_ak]

Hi Art_Addict, thanks for good and detailed critique, - your comment made me curious about how exactly light works-- perhaps maybe you can develop your thought somewhat further since I feel it is important. I hope you won't mind answering some questions?

I'm aware that Bargue used a combination of special lightsource and shadow box. So do I, only without special lightsource... since I've been told that if I strive to study academic drawing, I should use his book as an excellent source of plates to study. That it would be good for me to leave shadow quiet and supress reflected light by using shadow-box and carefully assesing shadow side's modelling while looking into light and vice versa to maintain visual unity. And, like my teacher told me: but, as Ruskin is quick to point out, one must sacrifice to keep visual unity and truth. That may mean suppressing the reflected light, as Bargue generally does.

Anyway, Bargue plates, especialy some from the end of the first part of book
show all the modelling that I've been taught about- lights, low lights, light and dark halftones; core shadow with well mapped bed-bug line variations and reflected light; combined with accents in the darkest parts of his model. So I have no idea which representation of light modelling can be more true than one which has all the masses and modelling bands included. I've always thought that he represented volumes and masses quite accurate, and it goes well along with idea of keepin my light side light and my dark side dark, which is often mentioned in the old books, and Harold Speed's idea of quiet shadows. So I'm somewhat puzzled by your words, and would like to know more.

Can you show some visual examples for me to understand what you meant?

I also do not understand what do you mean when saying about dark lights- are those low-light planes, or light halftone planes? should I state my light halftones stronger, or should I spend more time accurately rendering low-lights?

Thanks again.

Hi SweetOblivion, thanks- You're right there was something wrong about perspective in that study, but I couldn't figure what-- now I know exactly --
thanks again! I still need to do more perspectives, so I'll give this one more try later.

[Art_Addict]

Hi Art_Addict, thanks for good and detailed critique,
- your comment made me curious about how exactly light works--
perhaps maybe you can develop your thought somewhat further since I feel it is important.
I hope you won't mind answering some questions?

I'm aware that Bargue used a combination of special lightsource and shadow box.
So do I, only without special lightsource... since I've been told that if I strive to study academic drawing,
I should use his book as an excellent source of plates to study. That it would be good for me to leave shadow
quiet and supress reflected light by using shadow-box and carefully assesing shadow side's modelling while
looking into light and vice versa to maintain visual unity. And, like my teacher told me: but, as Ruskin is
quick to point out, one must sacrifice to keep visual unity and truth. That may mean suppressing the reflected light,
as Bargue generally does.


I don't mind at all.

Let's see. It is true, that if you want to study academic drawing that Bargue
and Gerome's book is an excellent resource since it was developed for use in
the Ecole des beaux-Arts, part of the Academy in 19th century Paris.
The only question is whether that is something to strive for....
A lot of marvellous art and artist were produced in the centuries before
and none of them had ever copied Bargue plates as a way of study. And
Charles Bargue didn't either :)
The plates in the book are lithographs of Bargue's cast drawings which were
then printed. So basically you're copying a copy of a copy of a drawing. It's not
hard to understand some information is bound to be lost.

I don't believe any of the methods you describe btw are nessecary to maintain
visual unity ( whatever the subjective definition of that may be.. ), let alone
truth. How you define "sacrifice" in Ruskin's quote is important. I for one think
it's very different from using the word " surpression".... hehe.

That may mean suppressing the reflected light, as Bargue generally
does.
Don't mistake the lithographs as a representation of Bargue's artistic work.

Now, having said all that :) I personally think there is something to gain
from copying the plates. Like, learning how to slowly and gently build values,
requiring some sensitivity to change of tilts and direction, hand control and
coordination..
I just don't think it's useful to come to the understanding of light.

I've always thought that he represented volumes and masses quite accurate,
and it goes well along with idea of keepin my light side light and my dark side
dark, which is often mentioned in the old books, and Harold Speed's idea of
quiet shadows.

About the shadows, I did say in my previous post that it's best to let the
reflective light ( which is in the shadow ) not compete with the light parts in
your drawing. But there IS a lot of form in the darks and shadows !! The
important message from my post was to be careful with set rules when making
a drawing from life. Because nature is full of surprises and should be embraced
in all it's diversity ! :}
(**edit** You also talk about using a shadowbox while discussing Bargue.
That's a bit confusing. Note that I only referred to the Bargue plates. A shadowbox
is something used for minimizing 'bouncy' light in a still life setting for example.
which has its advantages.)

In the approach of drawing that I was taught there's no such thing as "halftone".
Which is basically an undefined mixture of light and shadow. Every part of the surface
is either in the light or in the shadow. That's all!
"Dark light" and "light light" are terms used to describe "form light"
Dark light when the form rolls away from the light receiving less light.
Light light when the form rolls towards the light receiving more light.

Hope this helps
Draw intensely
Tom

[kv_ak]

Hi Tom, thanks for taking time to answer. I'm not familiar with this school of art thought you're talking about- In my studies a good deal of time was dedicated to halftone modelling since they help to turn form from shadow towards light, and textures are more apparent there.

I just feel that division of light only in two modelling bands is too vague for my understanding, I mean I still can't figure where there lies a distinction between light light and dark light you're talking about-- is dark light closer to halftones in their darkest parts or to low-lights?

How dark it would be on Munsell's scale, how light? Won't it make my light planes too heavy, what Loomis warned us to avoid? I'm more familiar with what I've been taught, so I usually use that system.


A lot of marvellous art and artist were produced in the centuries before
and none of them had ever copied Bargue plates as a way of study. And
Charles Bargue didn't either

True, many of the Old Masters studied from life and antiques, not even doing a single Bargue. Studying from life is going to be the soundest approach, according to Loomis, which I'm also trying to do. Course was intended partially as a substitute for cast drawing, and Loomis suggested in his books to invest some time into casts. However I do not have access to casts or live models, and therefore I use Bargue's book as a substitute. Plates may not be 100% accurate to originals, yet I can only hope that being a litographer himself, Bargue ensured decent quality.

I study academic drawing since I tend to have way too much looseness in my drawings, and I hope to get solid foundation in basics by getting good at it, and then use gained knowledge for whatever future project I may start, be it fine art, concept art or something else. I thought that Ecole which produced such great paintings in XIX century could pass along a lot of information, so I did some research on it and decided to study their methods to improve my own art.

What do you mean about volume in shadows- there are accents and reflected light, and some transitions inbetween, and that's all I know about-
whenever I try do too much modelling in shadows, I end with very uneven mass, which breaks unity. Maybe you mean that I need stronger reflected light?

Thanks again.

Well here's my first charcoal Bargue- it took me eternity to get how to
feel charcoal and reach modelling level I have with pencil, there are some inaccuracies as I see now, however I'm content that I finally managed to get it more or less ok in charcoal. Though it's far from a 100% perfect copy, I relied here on eye measuring rather than on tools, which resulted in some flaws...

Two figure studies after Loomis and Capullo's crashcourse, I'm trying different approaches now, and another still-life.

[Art_Addict]

I just feel that division of light only in two modelling bands is too vague for my understanding, I mean I still can't figure where there lies a distinction between light light and dark light you're talking about-- is dark light closer to halftones in their darkest parts or to low-lights?
? In my previous post I mentioned that halftones are an undefined mixture of light and dark. So I have no clue which it is closer to.
Dark light is referred to as the part in the light that is further away from the lightsource then the lighter light.
Most importantly they both have shapes. But are still subject to the big underlying light effect, global light, fall of light.
It's funny you mention that to be vague since you only work in one : halftone.
Research a bit more into what I'm trying to convey here. Many fine artists living today work the way I describe. Ted Jacobs, Anthony Ryder, Jacob Collins,...

How dark it would be on Munsell's scale, how light?

? Wholly Depends on the circumstances.

Won't it make my light planes too heavy, what Loomis warned us to avoid?
No, remember the light is always right :) It's the artist that messes up

However I do not have access to casts or live models, and therefore I use Bargue's book as a substitute.

Well... you do have a mirror don't you? And any round organic object is perfect for studying the effect of light.

I thought that Ecole which produced such great paintings in XIX century could pass along a lot of information, so I did some research on it and decided to study their methods to improve my own art.

I'm by no means an art historian here or an expert on the subject. But many great 19th century artists revolted against the ecole. They had their own ways of teaching as it had passed on to them from generation to generation in artists ateliers. They did not want to have an institute telling them what and how to teach something they had been doing a lifetime themselves. ( Courbet, Thomas Couture, Charles Gleyre, Paul Delaroche,..)
Research a bit more into 19th century art and life and maybe you'll come to different conclusions

What do you mean about volume in shadows- there are accents and reflected light, and some transitions inbetween, and that's all I know about-
whenever I try do too much modelling in shadows, I end with very uneven mass, which breaks unity. Maybe you mean that I need stronger reflected light?

I mean that the form turns as much in the shadow as it does in the light. If you take a ball with a light source that's perpendicular to it for example. You will see the form turning in the light, but it turns the same way in the darks.Only in a much closer value range ! So no, I don't mean you need stronger reflected lights :)
Form turns from the shadow's edge to the lightest part in the light, but it also turns from the shadows edge into the lightest part in the shadow ( reflected light ) ! --- NO FLATNESS !

Hope this helps
Enough talking, time for drawing :) !

[kv_ak]

Hello Tom, now it's much clearer to me-- you meant progression of values inside shadow. I'll try to do some research, since I'm not familiar with Seth Jacobs or Ryder's approaches, I just use what I understand and know more or less. Do they have any books on their approach to light modelling?

Well I should be drawing, not talking-- thanks again!

Some new studies- my attemt at doing robot concept from mind, and some more fruits- I'm doing pastel value underdrawing studies to get better control of my modelling when doing color studies. I feel I'm missing something with color.

[kv_ak]

Metal surfaces study. While Ruskin rightly warns us about metal and shiny surfaces, there still exists a need to do metal objects from time to time.

[kv_ak]

Some more experimentations

[panchosimpson]

Some nice studies here, some things to consider:

1. the shadows on these still life setups look too black, consider the color and temperature of your light and make the shadow correspond to that, for instance, with a warm, yellow light, your shadows would generally have a cool, purplish tinge.

2. Cast shadows begin to fade the further away they get from the base....so in your last study, the portion of the shadow on the left side would be softer than the right side.

3. In your drawings I see that you're following the bargue/academic method of adding a uniform value to your shadows, and shading along the length of the form. However, that can create a great deal of flatness in your forms (like in the Prud'hon study...mainly the arms). I would advise you to try to shade across the form, to get a greater sense of volume and to visualize yourself wrapping lines around the surface of the form, think of those bumps on the surface of the torso as spheres nested into larger forms and shade them accordingly...I'm still trying to come to terms with this concept too, but it's been very helpful so far.

Good progress so far, keep it up!

[kv_ak]

Hi Pancho, thanks- you're doing great stuff yourself under Vilppu's guidance,
good luck on that. I can't figure cast shadow's color- I use studio northern light which is whitish... so I'm not sure what color will I have for cast shadow... You're right on shadow's edges though- I don't have precise control of value modelling with black pastel yet, and essentially I model color on value drawing. I think you're talking about method similar to hatching when using round lines to describe fullness of form -- though problem here lies in that it will be obliterated anyway after stumping, so I either need to apply one of Bargue's finer techniques where he hatched on already stumped tones, or to model reflected light with better accuracy.

Anyway, here's something Dave Palumbo suggested to do some time ago, and which I started to understand in sense of massing/modelling only recently.

[kv_ak]

I'm still experimenting with color, unable to figure exact approach to shadow's color and color temperature concept.

[kv_ak]

Some recent Bottega assignments in charcoal

[panchosimpson]

That last batch is very nice, really fine modeling there. In answer to your question about shadow temp, you say you're using a north light, why only allows light from the sky, and consequently is cool and bluish. In very general terms, your shadows will be warm and have some subtle orange-ish qualities (complement to the blue light). Of course the shadow color will also be affected by the surface on which they fall (cast) or the local color of the object itself (form shadows)....but again, in general there will be a slight orange-ish tinge. Also, try pulling stronger value contrast in your color studies.

Good luck!

[kv_ak]

Hi Pancho, many thanks for taking time to critique- I think I understand it more now-- I think I just haven't done enough color studies and theory reading for it to start click in my head... time to draw!

Durer drapery study-- I feel I need to polish fine charcoal modelling skills... making more even tones especially in narrow and hard to model planes...
and Bottega charcoal number three- mr. Mentler really knows how to teach.

[kv_ak]

Some figure sketching after Bridgeman whose book is cool addition to Loomis

[kv_ak]

Here's another charcoal, I'm trying to focus on fine modelling.

[kv_ak]

Decided to focus on proportions of figure from third part of Bargue book...
Happy holidays, folks!

[the_allejo05]

start drawing with pen..this will force you to think of form..more..like all the masters..they drew with pen to start with..look for Durer..but try to match his awesome hatching..

[kv_ak]

Hi Allejo, thanks! I'm occupied with charcoals and value studies at the present time, hopefully I'll have some time for pen soon-- hatching is cool, yet I still need to work on my basic values and edges before trying something complex.

Here's another still-life I've finished recently according to what I've been suggested to do... I'm still thinking whether to add a cast shadow behind him or not -- it's not like it adds to drawing... and another line Bargue

[kv_ak]

Another small update, mostly Bottega stuff- first is freehand experiment with values after Mr. Mentler's tutorial-- I find it amazing that so much can be shown with only 5 values, like light side of black block is equal to shadow side of white block... while I skewed perspective it is clearly boosted my knowledge of values... and another color sketch- I'm trying what Dave suggested on backgrounds... though I work too slow and the light was gone by the time I finished lemon and I was left with unfinished bg...

[kv_ak]

Some more experimenting with looser approach to charcoal as it was suggested by someone, with less detalisation, going for overall values and such.

[kv_ak]

A drapery study after Leonardo, and some color sketching

[kv_ak]

My recent attempt at drawing glass objects- thought I'd start with something relatively simple, like this glass stopper.

[kv_ak]

Some more still-life value studying:

[kv_ak]

Some of my recent work-- figure study after Flandrin, still-lifes with various time limits

[kv_ak]

Drapery from life, I'm not happy with black spot from some paper defect which only became visible after I put my first layer down. Squinting really helps with values in such studies.

[kv_ak]

Recent personal project preparatory drawin mostly form mind, and 15 min study from life

[agentouchie]

i think if you pushed your darks a little more (make the 'darkest darks' REALLY dark) they will really pop out at you even more than they do now. great stuff, looks very smooth.

[kv_ak]

Hi, thanks-- I agree, I could've got my darks better here-- thanks for noticing!
Some fresh works, pastels, still-life, Bargue, Rimmer Bottega drawing, oil study.

[kv_ak]

Some fresh oil grisailles and a drawing of old flash-drive. I'm experimenting with Munsell value approach to painting.

[OmenSpirits]

:D

Don't have much to say, man. :D

[kv_ak]

Hi, thanks!

Another oil study, after Harold Speed.

[kv_ak]

A study after Loomis

[kv_ak]

Some recent oil stuff and close-ups, charcoal experimentations in technique that I began to study recently thanks to some very helpful and generous people.

[kv_ak]

Another Loomis study, some colors and skin-tone exercises after Ron Lemen's tutorials. Critiques are welcome as always.

[DSillustration]

These studies look fantastic.
The problem is, they are just that... studies.

Take what you've learned here and start to apply it to your own work.
Try creating a scene, a character, a narrative.
Things become MUCH more complex when you have multiple elements in a single picture.

If you keep doing studies, waiting until you are good enough to start an illustration, you will be waiting forever.

Just jump in, make some mistakes, see where your weaknesses lie, and then do studies to strengthen those new found weaknesses.

Good luck, these are all very promising.

[HunterKiller_]

If you keep doing studies, waiting until you are good enough to start an illustration, you will be waiting forever.

That's very sound advice. It's exactly what I need to stop doing.


You've made some great improvements, dude.
Keep it up.

[kv_ak]

Hi Mr. Dos Santos, thank you very much for taking time to critique. I can wholeheartedly agree with your suggestion, main problem for me seem to lie in creative department, that is how to make my own designs to look good, general creative process and invention of believable characters, and illustration process as whole-- that is, I know for example how to draw some certain object and how to use reference, but I'm stuck when it comes to actual combination of smaller pieces into whole big picture... I guess I've been focused on technique and rendering too much. What would you suggest me to do to in such case? Maybe I just need to experiment with personal characters, settings and design, I'm just not sure where to start with it, I haven't seen any books that would go into it. Thanks!


Hi HunterKiller, thanks! Advice is really solid gold.

I've finished yesterday a skin-tone exercise after GregPro's tutorial:

[the_allejo05]

Kv ak..there are many creative process and it varies within your artistic purspose..but a good approach i can outline it..
You are acustomed to studies..so the only thing is you have to decided on what you want to paint or draw..you are the designer you take the desicions..

first think of the image you want to do..(how do you get to that image,well look for it ..inspiration exits but you have to hunt it...read a book and decide to illustrate a scene..or maybe a poem..thats a start..or just doodle in your sketchbook ..it may come...) you can also reinterpret someone's piece , havent you seen how many depositions there were, Titian,rubens,michelangelo,raphael..there is nothing wrong with taking what has been done and improving it in a fresh way
treat your design simple, dont get too complex too soon..that will come in time as you paint piece by piece..you challenge yourself...(it doesnt matter if you design a painting,sculpture,to architecture,to anything), have a clear idea of what you want to say..or want the image to look)
do a sketch a try to visualize the elements..since i see you are into figures..well decide that..do as many sketch compositions as you can..until you are satisfied with it..always treating the big composition as a whole..dont worry about details..
after you have decided in your sketch where people go, how many there are ,what they would be doing, wearing..background foreground elements etc..only done from your imagination
then you proceed to refine that little piece of music..
you brake it down into steps before venturing to the final piece..
that means..
study each figure, down to details, first nude, then dressed them , focused studies of mainly hands and head..you might decide to change your initial concept..its ok..changes occur at the last minute. if you have problems in draftsmanship these is where anatomy comes..your studies of the positions of your figures are better if they are done from life..but i guess its ok to use pictures and reference and work from your imagination. Do research (as in going to the library, if you are doing a subject that you might not be familiar with..this is where the fun is ..learning new stuff!!)the studies are better suited if they are in monochrome or rapid in execution..you can venture into little color studies for things such as skin tones..then try to do studies of the things they wear and accesories.(it is better always to work from life..even if its time consuming and harder to do!!)
At this point your are bringing that image you first had in your mind to mature, to assimilate visual information, to bring that dream into reality..do not worry about where the light comes from at this stage..your are mainly looking for form and how these elements are made off..feel like..look like..your source= Nature.

then check your elements in perspective , point of view, compositon angles..work small in perspective..try working in plan module (looking up, so its easier to subdivide the areas whithin your picture plane..(im asumming you know a bit of perspective),focus now on your background elements..
simpllify the poses of your figures geometrically (boxes and the like)to study your lighting..your main tones (direction of light,darks ,lights,middle tones) in the composition
Again do more studies from life or imagination, or reference..individually..say you are drawing some trees as background or some sort of animals..
after perspective,individual studies ,and light there comes the color compositon

here you rehearse from your mind again..that sketch again..but this time will feel more alive ,because your image from your mind is growing after all those "studies" so you do one, small study.. , (this time again you go back into sketching mode..be free..treating as a whole..this time your piece is more decided..you have it in your head..you see it in your mind's eye, you know the tunes of music that will be playing)..of the main colors of the elements that you already have studied in detail. try different combination to match your mood of the piece..you can use photoshop now to change your colors easily..(you can scan the color study and modify it in the computer,if you dont want to do many the old way..but is better because you rehearse your tru colors you will be using in your final "performance"
After that you do a your preliminary final drawing..to work the last "kinks"it doesnt have to be the same size as your final piece..(you can always enlarge, even photocopy)but is better that in this stage your approaching the final design ..short of color..this will be like your foundation for a house..what holds your piece..and that means good drawing!!
after that you are ready to start painting your piece...either transfer your final design or redraw it. have your studies at hand while you do your final piece..as reference..It is better if you work in stages..so at the end the piece will look flawless Hehe..
Hopefully you have a process of painting..or try your own..will you work alla prima on some elements?..some will be glazed ? will i start in monochrome then paint on top (it is better!!), will i have tight and rendered elements..or some will be loose and show strokes....etc..the idea is that when you execute your painting you already probably know the piece by heart after so many studies..so you just flow..
Like a musician..he plays and practices ,100 times before he goes into the stage..so it looks perfect..that is why you prepare..you work out the kinks in those preparatory studies
Work..step by step..so you see is like building a house.
you have a vision, you put it in simple lines on paper..your sketch..then go down to working drawings..do the details, the separate elements, the location of the house, its colors, materials..to finally have the design and put it back together to match that initial vision..then well , it comes to building, things might get changed (be ready for that)but they still maintain the first intention of the artist. this will guarantee at good professional piece..

it is not art yet haha ..only technique..and procedure..art comes when you communicate that idea to the viewer..which that I think is really the hardest thing..what to paint..why do you paint it? what you wanna say with it..but you oughta start somewhere..and always listen to what non-artist people have to say..they know what they like..listen to them...if you want to communicate with them.
Once you become a Master you might skip some of those steps and ad few,take a few..depends on you..but even then u might not ..:)

[panchosimpson]

what he said, and read this
http://e-pix.com/ArtMuseum/Dunnclassno.html
http://www.robolus.com/H.Dunn-EveningClassroom.pdf

[kv_ak]

Wow, Allejo,that's quite a lot information, I need to think about it for some time to digest it all-- thanks for taking time to explain! I'll need to decide which subject to choose and what reference do I need... hmm it reminds me process from Loomis books, where he was trying to draw some sort of sample illustration-- I'll need to check book once more to be sure.

Anyway it's quite logical procedure you're describing, will need to try and actually apply this to my process. I think I need to do some brain-storming and thumbnailing first to begin with. Maybe some value thumbs, or general light schemes... hmm I think I seen some execises on it in one of those mentoring threads, just can't really remember where exactly.

I need to think about your post to get better understanding of the whole process, I'll try to give more in-depth responce soon--- there are so many things to keep in mind... thanks!



Hey, thanks for links, Pancho-- quite useful material, and interesting reading!

[kv_ak]

Here's a big update, mostly oils and acrylics that I done from life, some charcoal still-lifes in new technique that I learned recently, some things I've been doing for character design workshop--
I finally started to work on my own projects, and so I added my first character portrait...
I'm slowly working on larger illustration project.

[kv_ak]

More oils, and I'm slowly working on my illustration project, trying to keep in mind what Allejo said, though it's still too early to show.

[kv_ak]

I'm still playing with limited palettes to get better at color:

[the_allejo05]

nice man! you work hard...those life studies will pay off in your compositional piece. for your color work.. try to concentrate on learning color temperature first..meaning warm and cool...just before you start your limited palette, i think you are quite confortable with grisaille(something im just getting into), so try painting with umbers (either burnt sienna,or burnt umber,i preffer the sienna) and cool grays (either black or ultramarine), also just like you are doing of separting light and dark..try to separate, transparency with opacity..meaning leave the darks translucent, the lights and middle tones opaque.
if you see really close this example by Rubens..all of his shadows are translucent, under the nose, under the mouth,the side of the check..slowly creeping up the middletones, keeping the most color in it, and then the opaque lights going gradually to the lightest light, being the highlights really thick (you see it on the reflection on the eye),very formulaic,but it works :), now this head here demands a higher level of drawing hehe..so be patient,
http://www.fine-arts-museum.be/site/img_db/Rubens%20copy-2007.jpg
try to start thinking about copying masterworks..or pieces of it..to get your learning curve much faster, a sort of guide to reality..hmm this is a nice close up of a Zurbaran still life:
http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/zurbaran/i/jars-detail.jpg
a simple lesson here, just using three main tones..the darks are to the right..look they are totally separated from the lights..no white whatsovever,(white pigment, reflects light physically so you dont want any of it in the shadow, unless you are using reflected light) the pure whites are on the hightlights, then the feeling of roundness is acomplished in the middletones..see how each indentation on the jar has a separate value (remember your value scale),notice how he has added light on the lower part of the pot,next to the metallic plate, how he sees each tone flatly ,each little element of it very clean (try to use separate brushes for separate tones)but still keeps in mind the main volume of the jar (which is basically an egg,with a cilinder on top,although i see you understand that already hehe)

[kv_ak]

Hey Allejo, thanks, man-- I'm very sorry for delay with answer, been having problems with web access last month. A lot of what you say is true, I need to re-read thoughts on color temperature that were posted on TSOFA. I did a painting in burnt umber, and tried to do digital study of Rubens that you've posted(btw, what painting is it? can't find it on web as a whole). Those examples are fantastic-- thanks for posting!

Generally I agree that I should be using less values, and work more in color. I need to think more on my painting habits anyway.

Anyway, my recent works-- and a wip of illustration I'm working on now,man it's so hard. Also I got into vectors recently....