I have been very busy trying to setup my workspace so I can get back to exploring traditional media. This means that I have to go to and fro looking for materials and stuff and that takes time. Work also keeps me busy so I didn’t really have a chance to really sit down to practice anything yet. With that said, I want to write a quick post to share something that I have been pondering today while walking.
As Artists, life for us doesn’t come with a manual. Most of what we know, we know by observing. We study life, we dissect and break things down and that is how we come to know the thing that we seek to bring to life through art. Rembrandt once said: “If you want to paint an apple, you’ve got to be an apple!” You’ve got to carefully study an apple, and get really intimate with it so that you can come to know it and know it well.
Suppose you have never drawn human eyes before, where would you begin? These days with the internet we can look for tutorials. But how did these artists come to know how to draw human eyes? You can say that they also looked up tutorials but if you keep going with this question, eventually someone somewhere had studied the human eyes, had carefully observed it and deconstructed it. One Artist did it this way, and another that way. I say this to encourage you to observe and not be afraid. We can only draw what we know. As our knowledge and understanding of our subject grows, so will our drawing grows and improves. If you have only three photo references of the human eyes, and if you study these three photo references then your drawing will reflect your understanding of the human eyes based on these three photo references alone. That is okay! Your vocabulary is limited because you have only three photo references to study from. Now suppose you have 100+ photo references of the human eyes, ranging from male to female and with many different races. Soon you’ll see patterns and similarities and your vocabulary will grow. You might even come up with your own constructions, and when you sit down to draw, all the knowledge that you have gathered through observations will help you in your drawing.
NA: “Why do you draw the female eye like that?”
AN: “I have gone through 100+ photo references of the female eye and I notice that they all look like that.”
NA: “But I notice that there are female eyes that don’t look like that. In fact, some male eyes look like female.”
AN: “True. We can say the same with other parts of the body. Some male’s hands look like female’s hand. But this doesn’t mean that we should start drawing male hand that look like female hand (unless that is your intention to begin with and you have a reason for it!). The whole purpose of studying and observing is to know what a thing is [generally], not what a thing is in rare and exceptional cases. On the flip side, we know that an average male is roughly 7-8 heads tall, but that doesn’t mean we can’t make him 10 heads tall if we wanted to. Before we improvise, know what a thing is generally and common.”
Here’s a word of encouragement if you’re struggling. This is the spirit behind this weblog that I am running.
I think it’s such a disservice to the public that galleries and museums display only artists’ successes, but never their failures. There should be a Museum of Failed Art. It would exhibit all the terrible art that would have ended up in trash bins and garbage cans, lost and unknown to the public. My museum would give a true picture of the artist’s life, and provide much consolation to fellow artists. — R. O. Blechman (Dear James: Letters to a Young Illustrator)
A great site for art collections and references of old paintings and drawings. Great for inspirational and study purposes!
A free course by Marc Levoy (18 lectures)
An introduction to the scientific, artistic, and computing aspects of digital photography. Topics include lenses and optics, light and sensors, optical effects in nature, perspective and depth of field, sampling and noise, the camera as a computing platform, image processing and editing, and computational photography. We will also survey the history of photography, look at the work of famous photographers, and talk about composing strong photographs.
Don’t be afraid to try out new things. Roughly 16 years ago, I surprised myself when I painted a picture with a mouse. It was a picture of one of the characters from Starwars. Then I got a Wacom Tablet and painted a landscape using a photo as a reference. I was also surprised by the result (took me roughly two months I think). We all have potential and you don’t really know what you’re capable of until you play around and experiment. And in case you’re wondering where all my paintings are, sad to say that I don’t have them with me. Over the years things got moved here and there and perhaps in the process harddrive got erased or data got corrupted.
Be a child and explore, experiment and play around. You never know, you might end up discovering something about yourself.
Something I can relate because I kind of left the art world after I became a Christian. Didn’t plan on coming back but something is leading me back into it for further experimentations.
In 1923, rumors circulated that renowned artist Marcel Duchamp was renouncing art to devote his life to chess. “I am still a victim of chess,” he explained at the time. “It has all the beauty of art—and much more. It cannot be commercialized. Chess is much purer than art in its social position.” Duchamp’s retreat from the art world wasn’t total, however. Instead, it gave him space, away from the distractions of the art scene and its attendant market pressures, to make his final work (in secret) for the last 20 years of his life.
Throughout history, many great artists have opted out, taken significant breaks, or withdrawn from the art world altogether—whether in search of a mind-clearing reprieve from commercial and social stresses, as with Agnes Martin, or as the final act of a practice animated by institutional critique, like Lee Lozano. Below, we take a look at seven such instances. (Read more)
There are two kinds of people that are against the use of photo references:
- People who are ignorant, don’t know art, and or simply don’t know how references can help in the learning process,
- Artists who are ruled by pride. Thinking that they are better and or want to make a name for themselves as “the one” that doesn’t use references.
You can and should ignore them both because they’re not out to help you grow but to hinder you from advancing, and from finding your strength, weakness and creativity. And let me encourage you to use references with this post. I did some searching and came across these. There are a lot more famous painters out there that have either copied photographs or live models (regardless of how you want to look at it).
Vincent Van Gogh [1853-1890]
Norman Rockwell [1894-1978]
Alphonse Mucha [1860-1939]
Gil Elvgren [1914-1980]