So you wanna be a pro?

[Karin Wells]

When someone is beginning to seriously undertake the study of drawing and painting, "originality" is not particularly emphasized during the learning of basic techniques.

Copies of Old Master paintings and drawings are therefore exercises, just as this had always been the general practice for apprentices in the painting studios of the past.

Nevertheless, I believe that it would be helpful for others to view the kind of study that is necessary to achieve the painting and drawing techniques which are meant to allow for unhampered self-expression later on.

After my last post, I fear that if Nathan posted a "copy" in the "Critique" section, he might get criticized for not being "original" by those who were clueless as to the powerful learning value of a copy...

Does anyone agree that a new section be created on this forum...."Copies" ("Learning Tools," "Basics," or somesuch) might make sense as a method of viewing/learning basic technique here?

Cynthia?????

[Karin Wells]

How about a new section called simply, "Copies"? (and it would be clear that nothing in this section would be original).

I do think of the "Critique" section as containing only original works and any copy posted in this section doesn't work for me.

Heck...I'll even post one of my copies sometime. I have a ton of 'em (and some of the early ones are really awful...proof, I suppose, that eventually I learned something by doing this)

[Karin Wells]

As far as copying two-dimensional work is concerned, I often get better accuracy and speed if I turn the source material upside down. I wonder, though, if this is a good "learning experience" when it comes to learning from the masters. Any thoughts on this?

LINDA...Sometimes this is what it takes to active your "right" brain. After all, you are training your eye to "see" and this is a legitimate method if it works for you.

Another helpful way to "see" something with a "fresh eye" is to turn your back to the easel and view your work (reversed) in a mirror.

The last method is to turn your work to the wall and don't peek at it (sometimes for a week or two). When you finally "see" it again your "fresh eye" will often be able to quickly resolve the problem.

STEVEN...Thank you for the information. Would you consider starting a new post and repeat your "sigh-size" material in it? I fear that all your hard work will be buried to most of us in this unrelated thread.

[Karin Wells]

Cynthia, I think that your idea is valid and does indeed apply to painting.

[Karin Wells]

For starters, this is worth repeating....the most comprehensive image search tool on the web is: http://images.google.com

But for ordering prints of artworks, I suggest that you check out the following:

AllPosters.com

Printmaster Inc.

Barewalls.com

AllAboutArt.com

Art.com

PosterGallery.com

ArtPrintCollection.com

Web Gallery of Art

Art Renewal Center

Meanwhile, many Museums carry posters of the masterworks in their collections...so be sure to check out museum shops too.

[Karin Wells]

Here's another thing I do when I want to copy a picture that I have seen in one of my books...I remove the page with a razor blade. (I don't tell many people THAT because it is a "no no" for a lot of bibliophiles.)

It is nearly impossible to work with a book next to your easel...and yes, you've messed up the book, but the lesson you'll learn by copying can be well worth it!

I check out used bookstores looking for books with good prints in them....and alas, accurate reproduction in printing is very hard to come by...

This is a wonderful resource for bargain Art Books - Edward Hamiton (and the shipping is inexpensive): http://www.edwardrhamilton.com/

Hamilton has a book listed right now "Van Dyck Drawings" with 370 illustrations (107 in color) for $54.95 (reg. price $95). It sounds like a pretty cheap bunch of "drawing lessons" to me....

[Karin Wells]

Got any ideas on the best way to remove a page so it can eventually be reinserted into the book?

Please indulge me here...I've always dreamed of being involved in a Perry Mason Moment: I confess that I shouldn't have done it! But after the first time I desecrated a book, it got easier. (I wipe a tear from my cheek). As I continued to morally degenerate I began to remove the tags from matresses (sobbing uncontrolably now). Alas, now that the Book Arts Police have read me my rights concerning those deeply closeted crimes against minor art books, I am in a quandry (voice wavering). Do you recommend a course of intensive book crime group therapy and rehabilitation...(I gain control and begin to smile through my tears) or should I just plead guilty and pray that the judge lets me off with a light sentence?

[Karin Wells]

Alexei Antonov said this - and I wholeheartedly agree with him!

"My experience has shown that the classical school of painting can be studied without having a special "talent." The only condition is a passionate desire to learn and a little patience..."

[Linda Brandon]

There is a discussion of using the sight-size method on page 84 of Roberta Carter Clark's North Light book, "How to Paint Living Portraits". Clark calls it "the 'Looking Spot'" but I think she's describing the sight-size method as referred to in this post. It's not a long discussion, but at least the book is still in print (I think!)

As far as copying two-dimensional work is concerned, I often get better accuracy and speed if I turn the source material upside down. I wonder, though, if this is a good "learning experience" when it comes to learning from the masters. Any thoughts on this?

[Mary Sparrow]

When painting from a photo and I just can't "see" what the problem is anymore, is to take a picture of the painting. I scan the original photo with the picture of the painting and make them the same size and place them side by side and print them out. It is amazing to me how suddenly, it is very clear what is off.