Michelangelo`s Sculpture
 

Hello!

I read many postings here and I think I took the wrong way to become a serious painter, immediately starting with oil portraits without any drawing and painting before.

Now I'm trying a "classical" (academic style?) drawing in charcoal. Inspired from Michael Georges' Aurora project. (One thing I know, I could never do that.)

I recorded a program on an Italian culture, style and art channel (called Leonardo) about Michelangelo. (By the way, they make superior camera paths over (old and new) paintings, you can see the brushstokes as in a museum.)

So here is my first charcoal drawing. I think this is a sculpture of Moses, but my Italian is very, very very poor. Today, I searched on net for it, to have a reference photo.

It took about 3-4 hrs. Size is A3. The beard is not so detailed.

Any critiques are welcome!

Sincerely,
Leslie.

Leslie,

You might want to revisit Baumgaertner's value-massing "lecture". This is one of the most important issues in translating life to two dimensions. Your darks are the same value in the lit area of the cast as they are in the shadowed area of the cast, which flattens the form.

Many others on the forum give excellent advice on value-massing; try your forum search feature with the terms "values," "value-massing," and "single light source".

Leslie,

This isn't bad for a first cast drawing, while trying to learn to manipulate the charcoal medium as well. You selected a very complicated cast to draw. (I'm unable to tell from your notes whether you actually drew "from life" -- that is, whether you had the cast in front of you -- or whether this is from a photograph. If the latter, then that would explain some of the difficulties with value massing.)

It may be of interest to know that even the academy student would begin with a much simpler, less detailed cast, on which the value masses tended to "group" naturally in fairly large, distinct areas. In my own practice, I tried in my initial drawing to assign to the entirety of each of those value shapes a single value, chosen from a range of only five values, running from white to black. Even in the beard area, you want to think of it as a form, rather than "hairs" (or "whiskers") and be very broad in laying in the form-defining, rather than hair-defining, shapes. Later, you can go back into those larger value shapes and pull out some variations that still lie within that narrow value range. Even on a fairly complex cast, you'll find that values trump detail. As an example, look how much of the beard in the cast drawing in this Classical Drawing thread is without detail, in both the dark and light extremes where form was more important than detail.

The only other thing I'll mention for now is that you have the cast shadow (a bit confusing -- I mean the shadow being cast by the sculpture, not the body shadow on the sculpture) on the same side of the sculpture as the light source. Perhaps you weren't really thinking of that dark form as a shadow, but rather merely as background, but even background has to be consistent with the overall lighting and value scheme.

Good first effort. You'll be surprised at how quickly the next drawings improve as you begin to train your head to look for things and your eye to find ("see") them.

Hi,

Thank you, Mari and Steven.

I'm a nut, (but glad, too). I had the stage you meant (not perfectly but I had it!) Then my mistake: I continued to "expand" my work, to see THE black of charcoal. (Now, I call that: the trap of charcoal. :)) I wish I hadn't done it. (The tone range "shifted" too dark.)

Mari, I try to keep in mind all that I read here, but it's not always all on my mind, yet. The drawing was from a video tape (screen). I think there was one light source and many indirect lights. I tried to focus as if there were only one.

Steven, WOW! At first I thought it was a picture of a real sculpture shot in artifical light (warm tone). It is phenomenal, but I still believe you sent a photo of a real sculpture. Paper? Size?

I must be read the topics about value etc. when I have more time (weekend).

Yesterday I found this picture of Moses (NOT my referece picture! Just the same viewpoint.)

Thank you for your time in responding.

Yours,
Leslie

P.S. Steven, I posted a picture of a pastel on velvet - my mistake at translation, not velvet, velour for soft pastel, not Cont

Hello Leslie,

Do you use a spreader (paper stump) to redistribute the charcoal? or your fingers or brush? or all of the above?

Leslie, the drawing to which I referred you was done on plain white Canson Mi-tientes paper, on the smooth side. I used three hardnesses of charcoal to help -- the lighter the value, the harder the charcoal used, and then the darker, the softer. This prevents your having to grind charcoal into the paper to get a dark value. I sandpapered the charcoal sticks to a sharp point, and used them in conjunction with a kneaded eraser, also shaped to have a sharp point. It's a slow drawing method but works well to get a certain result.

I haven't seen the drawing for some years now (it's in storage in the U.S.) but it was done sight-size, with the easel next to the cast, so I guess the dimensions of the cast must have been roughly 18 x 12 inches, since as I recall, the Canson paper runs about 25 x 19 inches. (I could go check, but that's close enough for our purposes.)

Hello Josef!

I used my fingers (mostly) and a paper stump (estompe) but no brush. And a A3 block paper for general purposes.

Thank you Steven, I didn't have a slightest notion that charcoal has more than one hardness! I found mine in a set for children (school-set).

As for the background, it was my idea, simply for higher contrast.

Happy drawing,
Leslie

Leslie,

Try hammering the stump (the part where charcoal is applied). I find it softens the stump and it is more friendly to the paper. Try using a hog bristle too. I just started using it and I love it. I almost don't use my finger anymore.

Josef,

Thank you for your hammer tip. Do you yourself make the stump or buy it? Next, I'll try make myself, so I can make a sharp point.

Check out for more sculpture pics:
http://www.eleganza.com/index.html
http://www.sculpturegallery.com/

I bought mine. I have several of those stubby ones, really fat. I use them with the sandpaper block. Just rub some compressed charcoal, charcoal pencil or vine Charcoal, and you are ready to do some shading.

Those sites are awesome. I am looking a good reproduction and these are pretty good. But pricey, too.

Three Dimentional Casts
 

Leslie,

When I was in art school, we had to work with simple shapes and forms in black and white. Cones, spheres etc. In the classical ateliers the drawings were done from actual casts not photos. The purpose of this was to increase the students ability to translate form onto a flat picture plane. Then the student went on to draw drapery, also in black and white. The student was not allowed to work in color until the teacher felt he had mastered form.

I was only taught really how to draw and paint after art school, by a very fine master, Eugene Tonoff. I remember painting from casts. It was great for a novice because they did not move and they were one color.The many errors I see on this forum by the people seeking criticisms, is that their art foundations are very inadequate. They rush to color before they have any understanding of form and there is much too much painfull rendering of photos and snapshots. That is not painting and drawing, it is simple copying.

We are all so anxious to start our masterpieces that we are unwilling to take the time to learn the underlying knowledge that makes a successful piece. Anxiety and enthusiasm are two sides to the same coin. We need to have more patience to really hone our skills. Then the arrows will hit the target with seemly little effort.

Sincerely,

Leslie, I am not qualified to critique your drawing, but I can tell you about this sculpture.
It is one of my favorites.

It is in the Church of St. Peter in Chains, originally called Basilica Eudoxiana, Rome.

Now I am not making a statement about any religion, but the way this sculpture was treated when I had the pleasure of seeing it in Rome way back when.

You entered the Church, which was very large, and it seemed way down on the right tucked away by a Pope's tomb is this lovely sculpture which is part of a bigger facade. But what really blew me away was under (or near) the Altar, is a jeweled case with the "chains" of St. Peter. (We had to find relics all over the city as part of our assignments). There was one church that had a splinter from the crib of Jesus, which I get confused with the chains. The real topper was the "footprints" of Jesus at St. Sabastine's Catacombs. Anyway back to the sculpture.

I just remember the lighting was very dim, and there was such a crowd around the case with the chains, and you could have missed this lovely work by Michelangelo.

I want even go into the Etruscan pottery at the Villa Guilia!

Hello!

Elizabeth, for me it's always magical to see old artworks, too. I wasn`t in Rome (perhaps this summer), but Florence (David! and many others), Pisa, Sinopia Museum, Sienna, Neapel. If you see what Michelangelo could make with 16 years...you would have no words.

Italian joke in Italy:

Italy makes money in a very simple way:

1. Take a little, no-name village.
2. Hang a few old pictures (having mass) in the Church.
3. The next year is full with tourists!

(The whole thing is impossible: you never find a no-name village.) :)

Sharon,

Thank you for your kind and important words! You are right, of course. One can not write any great novels without knowing the alphabetic characters. I read the thread, "Classical Drawing", too. In fact, it seems to be an important rule: one must master (at first) the conversion of 3D to 2D in monochrome. I think this is so especially for underpainting, since this handles form and color separately.

I have a statue of Venus (Boticelli), and now a little head from W.A.Mozart, bought on the antique market. I promise spheres and cones, etc. Practice first, before I attempt that one from "life".

I hope you can understand why beginners probably succumb to the fascination to make something fine, and begin to copy. Perhaps the idea behind this is, "this is only for me." But, as you said, without a solid background it makes all that more difficult, even if one is satisfied with the quality. It's similar to playing a violin. When I was young, I learned it from a friend (a grandiose gypsy master in Hungary), but only up to a certain level (determined by talent at "birth") and NOTHING above (total equal what you try!)

Back to painting, I feel many things, but still in an unadvanced manner. I think, I learn many things here (and from books), therefore I am clearly NOT still an artist. I hope Steven is alright with this: BTW: In this connection, I found this somewhat funny: by chance last weekend I received a "commission" for an oil portrait of a a Turkish child, with a smile (teeth)! Perhaps the sister, too! For me, it would be my 3rd or 4th pieces! I really fear starting with it. (Fortunately no deadline.)

Best wishes, Sharon.

Leslie

P.S. Is your Hungarian pastelist friend living in the USA or in Hungary?

Leslie,

A cast drawing is more effective if you work from an original figure. It doesn't move, you can turn it, or pick an angle and set the light as you choose.

This appears to be a drawing from a photo of a sculpture. It does not have the same benefits. This drawing has problems, but none that practice will not cure. I recommend finding a sculpture, setting it up, and drawing it. You may find it much more rewarding, in terms of results, and enjoyment.

Thank you, Lon!

After I practice on simply shapes, I'll start with Mozart. (Perhaps try Venus, too, but can't post it.)

I bought a special set with 2 charcoals, 2 sepia, and red, white crayons, etc.

Wishing you a happy day,
Leslie

To Beth
 

Beth,

I wish I had the time to sit with you over coffee and listen to your stories of being in Rome and discovering all these wonderful relics, art historical facts, etc.! If I ever get there I will know where to look, thanks to you.

Right up my alley,
Denise