Copy of Boucher Drawing

[Nathaniel Miller]

Hello all,

I don't want to put up too many of these pre-student drawings, but I'd like to at least make sure I'm doing what I'm supposed to be doing with the copying, so any comments, criticisms, or advice (other than the obvious "don't quit your day job" ) are welcome and appreciated. I'm not overly sensitive, so please feel free to say what you think. I know it's not up to the standard of most of the work in this catagory, but you should have seen the stuff I was doing at the end of last summer (the "beginning" for me)!

Here's one of a drawing by Francois Boucher. I noticed that the pencil I used lead to a different look than the sanquine chalk he used (duh), especially in the background, hair, and deepest shadows. I tried to get it to look as close as I could, and managed to resist the urge to smudge the graphite for the most part.


I was a little shy about the tracing thing, so it took me about 6-7 hours and a lot of erasing to get it to this point, and I'd say it's 'overworked' in places, with some errors of course.

Anyway, here's the original, my attempt will follow

[Nathaniel Miller]

Here's my version. I notice now that the error in the shapes of the eyes changes the whole tone of the guy's expression. That's sad because it's the most expressive part of the drawing in my opinion. Maybe I'll do a copy or two of the head alone.

Also, I don't know if it makes a difference, but it's about 1.5 times the size of the reproduction in the book.

[Geri Comicz]

Nathaniel,

I think I missed something. When we practice these master paintings we are supposed to trace the original? I have been doing free hand. No wonder I am not getting it. If we are supposed to trace, where would one get a picture to trace. In a book? That would make it very small. I am either having a very bad day or I am truly not understanding..

I have enjoyed your effort, by the way. Keep going and post some more. geri

ps Could I ask where you found such a lovely drawing to work on? Is it in the book about painting with the masters? It must be a bad day....

[Mari DeRuntz]

Nathaniel -

It's really beautiful. I think it was in one of your posts that you commented how difficult it is to copy from one format into another (using different media, or in this case, a different toned paper or support). I've read that when you use a wood palette and are painting on a, say, grey-toned support, you end up having to translate the colors. This may be great and surprising if you're painting from life, where "accidents" are sometimes a great part of the process. But in a copy it's more difficult if the audience expects to see an exact replica.

This brings me to the only criticism of your drawing compared to the original: yours seems starker, with fewer middle tones. Because of the original's cooler and somewhat darker grey tone, the middle tones are richer, and your drawing is more "black and white" if this makes any sense. Maybe you simply need more hatch shading?? I am also a beginner, so don't know exactly what else to say.

Also, there's a quality to all the old masters drawings I've seen, and it seems to be the "mortise and tenon" approach (Bridgman refers to this) to rendering the human form that is the heart of the difference. If you get a chance, I highly recommend any of the Bridgman guides to human anatomy. After reading him, I understand more clearly the look of the old master drawings. I'll post a passage if I can figure it out.

So from one beginner to another, Good Luck!!

_Mari

[Mari DeRuntz]

Here's an attempt to attach a scan of a page out of Bridgman's "Complete Guide to Drawing from Life"

[Nathaniel Miller]

Geri,

Karin Wells suggested that tracing master drawings was the way to go. After tracing a couple of lines, though, I started to feel not so good about it, so this particular drawing is something like 99% freehand (thus the mistakes and the long hours spent on it). I suppose you could do it whichever way works best for you, and I'm finding that freehand copies take me much longer, but I do seem to learn more from them, so I think that's the method I'll stick to from now on. I'm not sure there's a "supposed to" except that we're to learn as quickly as possible.


As for where to get drawings to copy, I go to the library and type "drawing" or "drawings" into the online catalog and I get about a dozen decent books. The drawings are sometimes smaller than I'd like, but if I want a better look, I can enlarge a section with my scanner/copier deal. I'm also lucky to have one of the best libraries in the country at my disposal at U. of missouri-Columbia. There are over a hundred books of master drawings there, not to mention practically anything else you could possibly want to read. It's also a terriffic research library (physics research (and study) is what I do in 'real life'....exciting, I know).

Anyway, hope it helps, and I'd like to see one of your copies sometime.

Nathan

[Nathaniel Miller]

Mari,

Thanks so much for your reply. I actually have Bridgman's complete guide to drawing from life, but have only read through the first 15 pages or so. It's hard to find the time to do reading, drawing, studying, and working....oh yeah.....and spending some time with my wife too!

Anyway, I hadn't thought of it, but now that you mention it, yes, that aqpproach, with the seprate forms 'mortising' into one another is something I don't yet grasp fully, and is a real difference between OM drawings and my weaker ones. I don't think using pencil is much of an excuse for me though. I also agree about the higher contrast in my drawing. Perhaps I should have lightly toned the paper and/or gone a little easier on the edges of the shadows.


Thanks again,

nathan

[Lon Haverly]

I don't know what the original size was, but it was probably close to 14" x 17" or larger, by the looks of the pencil strokes. What softness are you using? I have settled into 4B full time. I use nothing else. It is soft enough to give me the dark tones, and hard enough to not break under pressure. I use the sand paper pad ALOT to keep the lead in a chisseled point for quality in my lines. In my view, the quality of the line is everything. The form will come. If you have quality lines, you will have a quality drawing. That means, the lines are beautifully formed, parallel, and have the right pressure. If you go too slow, you lose the effect of the repitition of the line flow, particularly in the shading type of line where the lines are parallel.

Most artists put form first. They never achieve the quality in their drawing because they do not pay attention to each line. If the lines are weak, the drawing will be weak. The line is everything.

Great job! Keep it up!

[Nathaniel Miller]

Thank you Lon,

Line quality.......yet another thing to keep in mind. In fact, I noticed toward the end of this drawing that my lines, especially in the background, looked pretty bad due to their irregularity.

I didn't measure it exactly, but it's about 12X14 or so. I used 3H pencil for the first part of it, until the shapes were right (or as close as I could get them), then used HB and 4B for the rest.

Do you suppose that it would be better (or maybe more akin to painting) to try to get a tone in an area (with no real lines), or do the hatching as in this drawing? I've heard good artists suggest dong it both ways (Harold Speed's terriffic book "the practice and science of drawing" suggests undertakng line drawing and mass drawing as seperate studies). Most of the time I find myself hatching and then smearing a little. When drawing from life I find I'm a little unsure which to try for.

Thanks for taking the time to look,

Nathan

[Lon Haverly]

3H? Very hard. Not to my liking, but that's OK. Cross hatching is fine if the lines are not "scribbles." I cross hatch in portraits where there is extra shadow. I never draw backgrounds on pencil drawings, but if I did, I surely would utilize cros hatching in certain areas, with moderation. I don't like too much of it. You must realize, my drawings are quick. 10 minutes. I don't draw much background. Here is one - just a 10 minute thing.