Sight Size from the Archives

Steven Sweeney · 03-17-2002, 07:16 PM

[COLOR=#BC6852]Moderator

Karin Wells · 03-17-2002, 10:38 PM

As far as O.M. drawings go, I'm suggesting that you choose any drawing that you like. But also choose according to that which you wish to learn (i.e., Ingres sensitivity of line, Michelangelo's anatomical renderings, Veronese's composition, Leonardo's halftones....whatever....).

Good composition is certainly an important component of great art and repeated exposure to it will help the principles sink into every fiber of your being. Being around great art (OM's) is sort of like having the good fortune to grow up listening to good classical music...you're bound to recognize and have a greater appreciation than one who has just been introduced....

Frankly, I never heard of the sight-size method until recently...I trained my eye and hand by copying. I doubt if you can develop a bad habit drawing anything and everything without learning the sight-size method first.

When I suggest that you copy, I do want you to reproduce the tones and shapes and not be a slave to re-creating the drawing line-for-line. I am suggesting that you trace for proper proportion, anatomy, etc.

If you post, I think that it should be in the Critique section, but be sure to say that it is meant to be a copy and also post the original. I don't know Harold Speed's book, but loved G. B. Bridgman's "Complete Guide to Drawing from Life".

Good luck!

Debra Norton · 03-17-2002, 11:19 PM

Steven Sweeney wrote:

Quote:

In any event, I'd be glad to write up a description of the sight-size set-up for you if you'd like. It would get rather lengthy, so I won't post it here for now. (A first for me!!)

Steven, I would be interested in that too, as I'm sure many others would be.

Debra

Nathaniel Miller · 03-18-2002, 11:35 AM

Quote:

In any event, I'd be glad to write up a description of the sight-size set-up for you if you'd like. It would get rather lengthy, so I won't post it here for now. (A first for me!!)

I've been looking all over the internet and libraries, etc. for months and found only a short, sketchy description in an online studio manual, and a mention or two on a website, so it's kind of exciting for me to read your offer to explain it.

I'd greatly appreciate it if you could do the write-up when you have time. If it's too lengthy to post, you can paste it into an email and send it to me at [email protected] (or attach it as a file if it's easier for you). Again, many thanks.

Quote:

When I suggest that you copy, I do want you to reproduce the tones and shapes and not be a slave to re-creating the drawing line-for-line. I am suggesting that you trace for proper proportion, anatomy, etc.

Thank you for clarifying those points. It's good news as that's what I'd been doing, but really just for fun before, not seriously. I'll get on with the actual drawing now that I have a few good books of large O.M. reproductions.

Many thanks to Karin, Steven, Virgil, etc. for your generosity. I've got no way to return the favor unless you need help with math homework or solving theoretical physics problems.....if it ever happens don't hesitate to send me an email!

Nathan

Cynthia Daniel · 03-18-2002, 11:51 AM

Nathan,

I prefer that any write-up of this nature be posted in the forum so all can benefit from it.

Thanks

Linda Brandon · 03-19-2002, 01:30 AM

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?

Steven Sweeney · 03-19-2002, 02:31 AM

Having been asked to try to explain

Karin Wells · 03-19-2002, 08:34 AM

Quote:

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.

Jesse C. Draper · 03-19-2002, 12:11 PM

Steven,

Thank you so much for your post. Yesterday I was trying to teach this principle to some of my students, but I don't think I was getting through to them. I feel it is one of the more difficult concepts to teach. Your last post gave me some very good ideas on how to explain the Sight Size method to them. I've heard of marking a model's position with tape, but never the artist. What a good little trick. Thank you so much for all your good advice.

Steven Sweeney · 03-24-2002, 09:42 PM

Sight-Size, The Sequel

Some comments by folks (thanks Linda and others) who have had a go at this sight-size work suggest that a couple more observations might be useful.

The matter was raised about "losing" what you wanted to do, between the time you left the artist's viewpoint and arrived at the easel. A related matter would be to remember quite well what you intended, but now that you're in front of a big sheet of paper or a canvas, instead of back behind your calibrating plumb lines, you can't remember quite where to put that mark. This is normal broadcast static. Do not adjust your set.

As you're standing at the taped artist's viewpoint, you take your plumb line measurement and walk forward to the easel, where you often feel that you're left guessing where that mark or line is supposed to be. Don't worry about it. To use a writing metaphor , you want to write the rough draft first, then edit. So just make a mark or line where you think it should have gone. (As you train your