Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Tabriz
    Posts
    58
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts

    construction drawing and generic results

    lots of us who want to get into the illustration and concept design industry study the constructive way of drawing, we use forms to build things, for example for a head, starting with a sphere and diving it and creating planes and going from there, but recently I doubted this way of drawing, I think drawing with form and constructing everything leads to generic results every time.
    take a look at Sargent portraits, it's almost impossible to construct them with balls and planes, because they are so organic, eyes never line up in a straight line, nose doesn't have the perfect planes, jawbones are not symmetrical, nothing is symmetrical, I tried to copy one in a constructive style, I couldn't achieve likeness, it looked generic, next time I laid in shadow shapes and started with the big shapes, I literally copied what I see, and it was close, which is the academic way of drawing, Sargent just copied shadow shapes, but I think we need both of this methods, construction for visualising forms and inventing and analyzing shapes with an academic eye, but I see every beginner starts with the Loomis' ball and they never train their eye and genericness is the result, while I always suggest beginners to copy Bargue plates and tune their eyes
    I think this is a good topic to discuss, what is your experiences with the drawing methods?


  2. Hide this ad by registering as a member
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,842
    Thanks
    304
    Thanked 549 Times in 460 Posts
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...art-education)
    Both are valid way like with everything both have pros. and cons. and those are just tools, its up to artists which way they want to take their art later

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to stonec For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    5,482
    Thanks
    3,148
    Thanked 6,549 Times in 2,760 Posts
    Sargent wasn't a production artist. If you want to work in production you need to be able to ideate quickly. Sargeant would spend weeks on his portraits building them up and then scraping them down and then repainting them to get that sense of solidity and volume. If you want to paint like that go into gallery art where you paint what you want and deadlines are self-imposed.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dpaint For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,842
    Thanks
    304
    Thanked 549 Times in 460 Posts
    Sargent worked from life and sight size or similar method can be used there but if you don't have it in front of you its not that useful

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to stonec For This Useful Post:


  9. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    107
    Thanks
    49
    Thanked 54 Times in 28 Posts
    I'm happy I found this thread because I've been thinking about this recently.
    I was comparing the model drawing lessons at the academy with other things I learned about drawing and I noticed that safe for one lessons, we never drew from geometry. Not really anyway.
    Sure, whe were thought to roughly measure angles and dimensions with out piece of charcoal, and how the human body is build up of basic shapes... but mostly we where thought to observe lines and gradients, and just apply them.
    I remember spending hours on hours finding lines and darker area's I thought to find within my model, creating abstract appearances on my paper untill they suddenly came together in a coherent image.

    In all fairness, the days I would build a model up from geometry, dimensions where often more on point. I had more controle of what ended up where so to speak. But when I didn't.... I drew all the things that mattered just right:
    The tangibility of the model, certain remarkable feats... the model felt present on the paper rather than represented. I know that sounds a bit vague, but I'm not sure how to express this otherwise.

    Recently I've been experimenting with utilising this technique when not drawing from sight, but these experiments have been too little to really say something.
    The tricky thing in this case, is that normally the technique works because the pencil follows the eye rather than the mind... but who knows... I'll keep you posted.

Similar Threads

  1. Drawing Using Construction Method, Resources on Shading/Rendering?
    By AsterPixelberry in forum Art Discussions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 21st, 2018, 05:08 PM
  2. Drawing with Construction
    By Prophet in forum Art Discussions
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: August 28th, 2011, 05:51 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: May 16th, 2011, 04:32 AM
  4. when drawing from life construction vs eyeballing
    By PeteJ in forum Art Discussions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2011, 11:01 AM
  5. Art: Three comics pages: Generic Ork vs Generic Dwarf assisted by Noble…
    By ristesekuloski in forum Finished Art
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: May 30th, 2007, 06:49 PM

Members who have read this thread: 28

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Designed by The Coldest Water, we build the coldest best water bottles, ice packs and best pillows.