Results 1 to 18 of 18
Thread: Beginning a painting
January 12th, 2011 #1
Beginning a painting
When beginning a painting what are the merits behind blocking-in and line drawing?
I recently began a painting and I didn't know what I should start with. Are they both separate approaches? Or are they traditionally meant to be used in some order?
Hide this ad by registering as a memberJanuary 12th, 2011 #2
Good question - but too general. Depends on so many factors as there are many ways to start a painting. I'd try the exact same painting twice - one from line-work and one by blocking in. You'll start to figure out which approach you like. Nice work in your sketchbook by the way.
January 12th, 2011 #3
I agree with Jeff.
However, a few things to consider:
The best method (in anything actually) is the one that puts down your thoughts as directly and immediately as you can possibly conceive. This will depend on what you are thinking about, how you think about it and all this stemming from the kind of temperament you have.
So, whatever is the most immediate way of regestering what is on your mind.....anything else is veiling your intentions with untruths.
Last edited by Chris Bennett; January 13th, 2011 at 06:42 AM.
January 12th, 2011 #4
I did start the painting with both approaches and it was curiosity that led me to the question. I wasn't sure if line-work in the early stages of painting was an accepted technique, or if it's a beginner error that is subsequently replaced by blocking. I'm not looking for a right answer, just a discussion in order to shed some light.
Thanks for taking a look at my SB by the way, you've got some nice life drawings yourself - all that anatomy study pays off.
January 12th, 2011 #5
So, which method did you find put down your intentions most directly FUSH?
January 12th, 2011 #6
Well Chris, I would have to say blocking in this case. But if what you say about temperament is true, then I must have been in the appropriate frame of mind, as the study before I started with line-drawing and that worked out.
January 12th, 2011 #7
Are you using oils? Going for full color or monochromatic? When I do my plein air I usually start with just a quick, linear sketch in thin oil to establish all major shape boundaries - then go right in to the blocking stage. If it is very complex, like an architectural scene, I might spend more time developing a more accurate sketch. For portrait/figure I tend to stay monochromatic and like to wipe the paint out. If I'm doing an illustration I develop a fairly tight drawing and various color/value studies - eventually I do a final drawing for the illustration, have that copied and adhere it to masonite with matte medium. Then I go in with paint and just follow my drawing and studies (pretty much the way Gurney works or Giancola).
Richard Schmid talks about four different ways to start a painting in his book "Alla Prima" - which is excellent.
The Following User Says Thank You to JeffX99 For This Useful Post:
January 12th, 2011 #8
I'm using full colour digital means.
So in your case you use the line sketch as scaffold, before going into the blocking. However, in your portrait/figures you start with blocking and skip the sketch altogether. Is this because the elements of a portrait are intuitive enough that you feel comfortable forgoing that step, whereas architecture is not yet as intuitive so a sketch step helps?
At the moment I understand that a line sketch helps to define boundaries, after which blocking is used to define planes of value (and subsequently also boundaries, where different places meet). Where I am confused is: if blocking can also define boundaries, what is the point of a line sketch?
January 12th, 2011 #9
First before we begin I would like to recognize the traditional owners of this thread, the KIWIS. (What's 3 + 3? Lol)
Now, you can block in and define boundaries as well as using line sketching to get your point across, it depends on what works for you, and what's easier for you to visualize the final product and/or the style of the painting. For example, if you find yourself blocking in forms of light and tone, you may find it easier to establish a more realistically oriented painting, which will have good spacial perception (in theory.) Using line sketches will make it easier to navigate the flow of your image in terms of linear design, because your eyes will follow the flow of the lines you place. Since you're using digital, it's extremely versatile so you can really block in your core shadows underneath lines that you already established, or vice versa.
These are my observations but again, whatever works for you.
January 12th, 2011 #10
I gather from this discussion so far, the aid of a sketch is to provide a scaffold; lines of a feature, placed down after assessing the relationship to the features surrounding it: angles and distance toward other prominent physical areas and major changes of value. These enable use to critically asses the scene, note down feature relationships and construct an accurate representation before we commit paint.
To me, skipping the sketch step means we aren't placing emphasis on correctness of structure - for the sake of either style or speed - but perhaps instead placing it on the colour.
January 13th, 2011 #11
In all cases I start broad and general trying to see and establish the correct light and value pattern....working toward more specific detail as the painting develops. I have no real idea how I would approach it digitally...my digital work is entirely non-painterly.
Edit: I'll try to find a couple demo shots that shows what I'm talking about...it may be tomorrow though...
Last edited by JeffX99; January 13th, 2011 at 10:46 PM. Reason: added note...
January 13th, 2011 #12
There isn't a single "right" way, you do whatever gets the job done. How you approach it may also depend on whether you're painting directly from life, or doing an elaborate invented image, or what. If you're painting directly from life, odds are you don't need a thorough drawing to start with, because you've got your subject right in front of you.
If you're doing an invented scene, though, there may be many stages of drawing, studies, refs, etc. culminating in a finished drawing on which you base your painting. In that case, many people use the finished drawing as a starting base for their painting (transferring it to canvas or scanning it or whatever.) Personally I project the drawing onto the canvas and trace the main lines of it so I know where stuff goes (or scan it if I'm working digitally,) then block in roughly over that (my underpaintings are messy, so I don't fuss too much about sticking to the line drawing, it gets completely covered over in the first stage anyway.) Meanwhile I have the final drawing tacked up beside me as a "model".
Some pros like a very finished underdrawing, though - for instance, Donato Giancarlo does a very tight drawing, then xeroxes it and pastes the xerox to his canvas and uses it as a base for his painting.
January 14th, 2011 #13
I was never looking for a "right" way, I was looking for discussion into who uses what, at what stage and ultimately, why.
I use sketches because I like the scaffolding they provide; however, it seems common to start a digital painting with blocking in. I was interested to hear other work-flows, particularly those from a traditional background.
The Following User Says Thank You to FUSHANDCHUPS For This Useful Post:
January 14th, 2011 #14
OK, I'll see if I can throw something in a little more concrete. It is interesting in that it does not really involve 'blocking in' or 'linear scaffolding' in the usual sense of the term at all....you may find it of interest as an example of what I mean by the process directly responding to and reflecting the means by which one is thinking about an image. (By-the-way FUSH, I love your avatar!)
Here is a method I use for a certain type of image that I'm shooting for where everything stems from graphic forces and holds to them even as the painting 'tightens' up. You can see see how I start with fundamental pulses of gestural energy that buckle the canvas right from the start. I then proceed to overlay further forces that articulate and impinge or redirect the first ones. I continue this right down to even painting the smallest forms that 'become' eyes and noses and arms and cloths.....
I'll load some other examples of different approaches I use for entirely different means when I have a moment later.
Last edited by Chris Bennett; January 14th, 2011 at 06:25 AM.
January 14th, 2011 #15
Wow, Chris. I wish I could hear your thoughts as you painted those.
January 14th, 2011 #16
But at the end of the day, there isn't even one traditional way, it really depends on your approach. People who go in for traditional glazing typically apply thin layers of paint over a very tight value drawing, for instance. But people painting alla prima are more likely to go straight for blocking in, or loose scaffolding and then blocking in, or some such variation... Both approaches are pretty traditional.
I've also seen people use an approach similar to glazing when painting digitally, instead of blocking in (I don't remember the exact techniques, but it usually involves painting on semi-transparent and effects layers over a tight value drawing.)
January 14th, 2011 #17
OK - here are a couple of "process" examples that are pretty typical of the way I work. I get kind of wrapped up while painting so forget to take shots of every step - in both cases I left out the sketch/"scaffold" stage but you can still see it in the landscape a bit and in the models hair at top and shirt/shoulder area. Hope that gives you a better idea.
And I really recommend that Schmid book - I think you'd get a lot out of it - easily one of the top ten must have books for anyone interested in painting.
January 15th, 2011 #18
Chris Bennett: Thanks for the process you put up. Nice and clear.
QueenGwenevere: No worries, what you described was really helpful and just what I was looking for.
JeffX99: Thanks for the post, those processes are really helpful, and for reminding me about the Schmid book, it's finally on the list.
Tags for this Thread