[COLOR=#BC6852]Moderator

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!

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

Debra

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.

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

Nathan,

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

Thanks

Sight-size method
 

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?

Sight-Size Method
 

Having been asked to try to explain

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.

Sight Size method
 

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.

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

I've actually done a couple of sight-size drawings now, using your instructions, Steven, with good results (simple subjects.....display of fruit, crumpled paper bag and such). I think the constant flipping between the subject and drawing really trains your eye. It seems like I got better at it even after the first drawing.

So now I'm doing sight-size drawings, old master copies (finishing a copy of an Ingres drawing now), and drawings from life in my sketchbook when time permits (also reading/working through those books I mentioned earlier to learn anatomy, etc.).
My drawing wasn't too horrible before, so after a few months of this, I hope to see some good progress.

Thanks again for allowing me to shamelessly mooch advice and instruction!

Nathan

Steven,

This is wonderful!!! Thank you. Geri

Even I can't bear to wade through my previous posts, but I do fear that I've left out a very critical requirement for sight-size work, and that is that your drawing or painting surface MUST be vertical. Use a level. If you're using a tripod-type easel, you need to shore up the top edge of your drawing board or canvas to ensure that the surface is vertical. Otherwise, the toes will be the size of tomatoes and the head an orange, or vice versa. (If your subject does look like that, then you're an animator for "Shrek", but most families won't enjoy a similar depiction of little Hadley.)

No offense meant to vegetarians or ogres.

I got that figured out when the paper bag was wider on the paper than in life, but the measurements were accurate......I had the easel tilted to the right a little (the right side was a tiny bit further back). So I realized the same would be true in all directions.

I'm assuming it's normal to erase nearly twice the amount of charcoal you end up leaving on the paper (at first at least)? And for a drawing of a crumpled paper bag to take upwards of 12 hours of work?

I hope so.

Nathan

Yes, Nathaniel, sorry I forgot to include that detail earlier -- I had thought of it, but my short-term memory is . . .

yes, that's it . . . fading. (Also, I fear that I'm scooping into the site too many shovelsful of stuff, so sometimes I just omit a scoop.) But the fact that you discovered the event yourself is FAR FAR more important than if I'd remembered to say it first and you'd just followed my lead. So congratulations, you've made a huge leap. Fifty Chess Master points.

As for time of work on a drawing, I've done lots of pencil drawings in four hours -- some of which were execreble and others were, dare I say, a lot more than okay. And our so-called "long poses" at the studio gave us -- whether working in charcoal, pastel or oil -- about 80 or more actual hours' worth of work on a piece. Admittedly you probably can't make a living on that rate of production early on, but it sure trains you for the long run. A writer friend of mine used to call this work "right-brain sit-ups."

Do 'em.

Steven

One More Note for Sight-Size Practitioners

I'm duplicating a post from elsewhere, because it implicates sight-size procedures discussed earlier in this thread:

One last note on one-eyed viewing, and that relates to sight-size drawing. In order to view your subject "through" the plumb lines, you're going to have to close one eye. Because one eye is dominant (it may or may not be the one you decide to close), it's important to always close the same eye when you take your measurements. Don't switch back and forth. One of my instructor's first questons when beginning a drawing critique was always, "Which eye are you looking with?, because he'd do the same in order to assess my accuracy.

Incidentally, if you want to know which is your dominant eye, pick out an object across the room and hold out your arm with index finger raised and sight "through" the finger to the object, with BOTH EYES open. If, when you close your left eye, the relative positions of the finger and object stay about the same, your right eye is dominant. Keep the left eye open and close the right, and the finger "moves" some distance to the right of the object. The opposite effects with left-eye dominance. In a non-art context in which this really "matters", if you're trap shooting and you hold the shotgun on the right but you're left-eye dominant, you'll swear your aim is perfect but the clay pigeon will just fly away unharmed. Switch to the left side and you'll probably have much higher percentages.

Finally, this is important to know because the "'Artist's Perspective' Eyepatch" is to be worn over the nondominant eye.

Steven