Claudemire

Well, I'm retired. Put myself out to pasture. Sold my businesses, and my home in Omaha and headed for Mexico. I was going to a place called Real de Catorce (Road #14). Strange name for a town. Never been there, but I figured it would take most of the rest of my life to paint everyone in that town, including the church and church mouse. However, I stopped off in Tulsa to see a girl I had dated back in the mid '50's. I made it to Mexico, but kept coming back to Tulsa. We got married a couple of years ago.

So, I have plenty of time to go hang out at the library. We live on 5 acres, keep a few hereford calves, and have a bass pond 200 yards behind the house. I had my faithful killin' dog, Spike, (a blond peekapoo) but he passed a few months ago. We eat fresh bass, fried taters, and watch the sun go down.

Right now, I'm painting a couple more soldiers who died in the Iraq conflict for a project called Faces of the Fallen. Makes me realize how good life is.

I occassionally use the grid method and I find that I often, ironically, have to correct my grid drawing quite a bit by freehand. Go figure.

I have used tracings also for a quick placement of the features. I then still draw the features freehand. The exception is complicated fabric folds or patterns. I don't feel bad at all tracing this. (I get lost trying to grid fabric folds and everything is in the wrong square, so I trace this.) And even when I trace, I have to adjust the fabric folds because I'll end up with a weird little shape or the folds are too even or I have to simplify it anyway.

I am not good at gridding and tracing drives me crazy because something always moves and the tracing is off so I have to correct that. My eyes get tired using the brush or pencil to measure. (I wonder if this is because I wear contacts?) So because I am lazy, I try as much as possible to just draw what I see and measure in my mind. I do scan and enlarge the photo to get at least the head the same size as I want it on my canvas even if I am freehanding it. This makes it easier to just draw freehand without worrying about scaling. Often this means printing out the head by itself. Often this is the only thing I print out.

I'm not all that great at drawing a likeness freehand. I usually have to correct everything at least once, but I'm good at catching the errors if I step back and look a bit. It also has taught me to make the first lines very light, and this way, I still am free to use quality of line as expression later on in the drawing once I have things in the right place. I don't do very very detailed drawings for paintings, but I do draw outside of painting because drawing is my first language. Painting is still a foreign language to me.

I am lucky and go to a studio with a live model every Friday. I usually try to just "sight" it and only measure for the initial placement of the figure. Then when I come back after the break I can look and see where I went wrong and correct it. (More about this later). If I get completely lost I'll measure. I find that if I draw a line along the nose (between the eyes down to the middle of the lips), that keeps the angle of the head good.

I like the proportion calipers described above by some of you. This may be handy for me when drawing from life.

But the reason I'm posting this in the first place is my gripe. I love drawing or painting from life but the model never NEVER ever gets back in the exact same position after a break. It could drive me insane if I let it. I have tried getting the face down as quick as possible in the first 20 minutes so I don't have to worry about getting the model back in the exact same position. This is bad because there are details I need to reference later and of course they are all different because the head is an inch more angled or whatever. So I've tried waiting to do details in the face and then I have the same problem and it's worse because the model has shifted slightly at every break and so the neck is now wrong for the head and I still only have twenty minutes to get it right. I've tried taking a photo of the model home with me to correct features at my leisure but I look at the photo and it is not what I saw in person. due to camera distortion and limitations.

This is traveling from the original subject of the thread but ...

How do others deal with the slight shifting problem in models from life?? Or am I the only one bugged by this?

Brenda:

That part about the model moving: I used to study with this old guy in Colorado. He would assing to one of the members of the class the task of keeping the model on pose. Thus, after every break, or at the beginning of the new day, the appointed person would allign the model according to HIS/HER canvas. It worked pretty well. This task fell to me a couple of times, and I noticed that it kept me a little sharper since I felt the responsibility of all the others who were painting. It solves the problem of having "too many cooks in the kitchen," so to speak. Actually, no one ever complained that the person in charge of the model's pose got it wrong.

As for folds of clothing: Andrew Loomis, a now deceased, but one of the best illustrators in the world, says that folds of cloth should further the story, and that there is no need to slavisly reproduce all the folds and wrinkles you see.

I have studied with several portrait painters, and all of them have said much the same thing -- Measure, measure, measure, and simplify, simplify, simplify.

Thank you, Richard and Sharon.
I think I will look for a transparent ruler; that sounds like a good idea..much better than a pencil or brush handle.
I will have to be more assertive about getting the model back in the proper position. I often feel like I'd be nitpicking if I tried to get her/his head back in the exact position. But I will be a little more assertive. Usually the other artists do whole body paintings or drawings and I'm the only one who tends to focus on just the head or head and torso, so i guess that makes me the "pose monitor" if I want the head to be in the same position!
Thank you both for the good advice and wise words. Measure measure measure. And simplify those baroque, intestinally twisted folds of fabric!

I have long used a gridded transparent ruler, but because it lets me see past the plumb line. That would be LITERALLY so.

The grid marks help in evaluating both horizontal and veritcal plumb lines. There is, however, a HUGE downside - because there is a tendency for students to want to use the numerical measurement on the ruler. Unfortunately this causes them to sometimes get sidetracked in minutia.

It's not the number, its the relationship.

Brenda:

Another thing this Colorado guy used to do was to either put a piece of tape on a wall where the sitter had chosen to "look" during his/her pose, or he would tell them to pick a spot, a thing, or something through a window (not a car that could move) to fix their gaze on. This would help the model find his spot.

I think the thing is that it is important for artists, who are usually paying good money for this, to get their money's worth, and that no one should be offended if someone says something in the beginning of the session that sets out a few guidelines. Not about the money, but about the importance of an unchanging pose, and that so-and-so has been appointed the "pose monitor" for this sit.

My Colorado guy made light of it. Not a joke at anyone's expense. Just that it was important to keep a pose, and that today, this or that person was responsible for keepint the model on point. It was always "light" in nature. Never had a snit or a rant.

Chris,
It seems to me I've seen transparent grids without numbers on them. Maybe I was dreaming. Even so, I will remember to focus on the relationships, not the numbers.

Richard,
The spot on the wall or wherever for the model to look at is a good idea. I will use that. Thank you!

A word of caution is in order regarding methods of transferring an image from photo to canvas. Do not proceed on the assumption that if it's true to the photo, it must therefore be also true to reality. That's a big fallacy. A lot of bad work is done because of that, with everything that is wrong with the photo being brought into the painting transfered verbatim, without being corrected. Cameras distort images, in addition to exaggerating value contrasts, missing important information, and giving too much detail where it isn't needed, among the many things an artist needs to understand about photography before it can be used to good effect as reference material. It takes a good eye to recognize photographic distortion, and the knowledge and the confidence to correct it and get it right come from much work from direct observation of the subject (not photos of the subject).

Virgil Elliott

Inexpensive proportional dividers
 

I'm experimenting using a proportional divider to check points on my drawing for accuracy. I've found using the device saves me time and I'm happier with the final results.

Drafting quality proportional dividers seem to cost around $150. I tried making my own tool, but found it to be inaccurate. However I found a person on ebay (search: "proportional divider") who seems to always have 9" metal ones on sale for about $25. I ordered one and found the accuracy to be right on. The only drawback I have found is that the screw needs to be tightened by pliers, because hand tightening allows it to slip. For the price savings, I've found it worth a little extra trouble. The sellers name is "tedamr"

April,
I have made a proportional divider and experienced the same problem. You can see my divider at reply # 25.
The problem was solved by putting an extra iron ring on the one side and placing a rubber ring between the two. When i tighten the screws the rubber ring will apply a constant soft pressure and keep the divider in place.
Allan