[eyewoo]

I've done a search and see that this topic has been discussed before, but since it really has no resolution in the artworld as yet, why not bring it up again if anyone, other than myself, is interested.

Rob Howard from the Cennini Forum is what might be called an authority on art and artists' materials. He's also a fine artist and portrait painter. Here's what he had to say on his forum:

"A rational study of the master's working methods shows that they were preoccupied with efficiency. Their goal was to produce the highest quality artwork in the least amount of time. They enthusiastically embraced any useful method, tool or new device -such as the camera obscura. Camera obscura means "dark room." Years ago, the artist went inside a room with a lens installed in the wall facing the subject. The image was projected (upside-down) onto the opposite wall. The artist could trace the image, saving hours of toil."

In later years, the camera obscura became smaller and evolved into a portable box with a lens projecting the image onto a mirror which was fixed at 45 degrees. The image bounced off the mirror onto a piece of glass, like the viewfinder in a modern reflex camera. The artist would draw on the glass or transparent vellum. A later development, the camera lucida (light chamber) consisted of a prism held above the paper and aimed at the subject (more about that, later)."

Today, we have an astounding array of aids for the production of art. Photography, projectors, Xerox, computer generated graphics, and rub-down type are just a few of the new tools. It's interesting to ponder how the Old Masters would have made use of these new tools. One thing is certain, they would have no qualms about using them."

There are still some artists who equate Art with a sporting event. They try to impose arbitrary rules, as though Art was a game of volleyball or bridge. They say you can't use photographs, or tracing is cheating, or a real artist should be able to draw solely from imagination. Rubbish!"

Remember, unlike volleyball or bridge, there are no rules for producing art. Yes, plagiarism is immoral but there can be no such thing as "cheating" at drawing. The truth is - the better you can draw without visualizing aids, the better you can draw with them. Many unskilled people try them only to be shocked and disappointed by their results. They draw as badly with the aid of a visualizer as without one. No mechanical device can compensate for a lack of skill. You just can't fake it!"

You can check out the whole thread on his Cennini Forum at: http://208.56.97.244/forum/Forum3/HTML/000295.html Keep in mind that his forum has the latest entries at the top, so scroll to the bottom for the first entry. This is opposite the way most forums read.

In the thread, he also mentions an ability he has to focus one eye on subject matter and the other on his canvas and then trace the image that way... uh... yup... that's what he says he can do... and I believe him...

[ February 13, 2002: Message edited by: fleabrain ]

[BooMSticK]

heya flea

yes, the whole 'camera obscura' is a wonderful subject. But I still think one should be careful to with accusing this and that artist for using the camera obscura. To my knowledge there's no proof of any artist(the old masters, I mean) ever using it. Only through observation of their works can we assume that they did use some means of projetion. That is all it is - assumptions.
But I can certainly understand your fascination of the subject - when I first heard of it I was in fact taken with quite a shock...

Now to quote you:

"..the better you can draw without visualizing aids, the better you can draw with them."

This is spot on I think. Further more I believe great artists can improve on their trace. For example Drew Struzan (who is a wonderfull person to bring forth in discussions like this). Sadly most people that do tracings do not improve the pose/gesture or whatever thus it comes away looking stiff and boring... At least that is the way I see it...
,Boom

[eyewoo]

Boom...

Actually that is not my quote, it is from Rob Howard's words... a man much more articulate than I.

As for proof... I think you're right, there is no hard proof for the old, old masters, but since the advent of photography, there is clear proof that some of the newer masters like Thomas Eakins did use projected photographs to trace.

As Rob wrote, art is not a sporting event. There are not hard and fast rules.

Creating a piece of art to me is a production. It involves materials, process and creativity. Using tracing techniques is just one, rather small part of the process.

[ February 13, 2002: Message edited by: fleabrain ]

[Lunatique]

I agree with you, fleabrain.

The hardest part comes AFTER you finish tracing the outlines. It wouldn't make sense to say that an accomplished painter traces his outlines because he "couldn't draw."

But, if traced onlines was ALL the artist had to offer, that would be a different story, right?

In of case of someone like Tim Bradstreet, he does stylize his traced lines with spotting black and other things. I don't know if any artist has ever gotten away with presenting JUST the traced outlines and nothing else.

[Frog]

I think any one person is entitled to use whatever methods they choose, it doesn't matter. All that matters is the end result. If its about pure skill we should all go back to painting frescoes.

If you're into realism then its all about observation, and tracing may help but its only a very small step towards a completed image.

At the end of the day my personal preference is for more stylised work anyway, so tracing isn't going to do much good there!

[Pat]

If you can draw it and you trace, you're cheating time. If you can't draw it and you trace, you're cheating yourself. Personally, I don't care who you cheat.

-pat

[roundeye]

wow, very well put pat!

[eyewoo]

hahahahaha... nicely phrased, Pat.

Though I would like to see the day when tracing re: artwork, doesn't have any "chete" conotations... when it is just considered another tool in the arsenal.

hhmmmm... maybe the art schools should put some tracing classes on the curriculum... I'd teach it...

Here's my example - totally traced light and shadow...


CLICK HERE for a full rez detail...

...and this cutie...

CLICK HERE for a full rez picture...

This is tracing for tracing's sake... not the type of tracing I do for a digital painting or portrait. In that case, you'd not want to see the tracing... they are not meant to be seen, being simply an early part of the production process -- really roughand generally ugly...

[ February 13, 2002: Message edited by: fleabrain ]

[BooMSticK]

hmm.. this I don't get, Flea. Are you trying to prove that you can trace without it being noticable? Well, if so, then 'bravo!'. You succeded! You are skilled, there's noone denying that!

But, I think you are cheating on yourself doing art like this. I know you don't feel this way. But I know I would, though. Maybe it's because you are being quite frankly about it?

Saying: "See I traced this, and I'm good at it too, don't you think???", is just something I will never do!
Call it pride or stubbornes (like c probably will) or whatever you like - but it will never happen!
,Boom (...off to bed)

[eyewoo]

I think you've missed the point Boom... These are tracings for the sake of tracings... that's it... no other deep meaning to it. I just enjoyed doing them... several years ago. That's all.

They are not meant to challenge the artworld or you or anyone... they were just fun to do...

Anyone else want to show their tracings for tracings sake... I'd be delighted to see them.

[roundeye]

whatever, boom. 99.8% of what makes that zebra pic look cool is from fleas talent, so who gives a shit? im a huge fan of both of yours, but this argument sickens me. its such elitist bullshit.

[ February 13, 2002: Message edited by: roundeye ]

[BooMSticK]

uhm, round. I believe that was just what I said above - I also think those two drawings are very nice. I would probably never have thought of them being traced if not mentioned by Flea himself.

elitist - Me? you got to be kiddin'!
,boom

[roundeye]

"Saying: "See I traced this, and I'm good at it too, don't you think???", is just something I will never do!"

i just thought that to be condescending, is all... no worries.

[Awetopsy]

I personally dont have a habit of tracing.. but on occasion Ill find a pic I need as reference and trace the contours of the given subject to get a feel for it.. then Ill try to do the same contours w/o the trace subject.

tracing is a means of getting something done.. in the commercial art world its used constantly. I think what bothers most people is when an artist traces something and tries to pass it off as an original pose/pic/image/idea.

Once I drew a 6 foot tall image of Batman from a smaller image I had traced. I copied the image to overhead plastic and projected it onto the wall and then went to town with watercolors... I didnt make any money off it (only because my stupid art teacher at teh time didnt appreciate it and threw it away... even tho I expressly asked him not too... ) and I certainly dont claim it was original... so does that make me a cheat?

[Frost]

(Sorry to jump in here guys, but "elitist bullshit" is a trademark I own since a few months ago. You may resume.)

[roundeye]

YOU WISH, SUCKA! my lawyer will be in contact with your lawyer shortly.

[V Shane]

quote

Quote:

"A rational study of the master's working methods shows that they were preoccupied with efficiency. Their goal was to produce the highest quality artwork in the least amount of time.

AH the epitopmy of making a living in the commercial realm. Often Art Directors say; " I don't care about the process, just so long as it looks good and like your other work"

It toatly true though, if you can't draw, you certainly can't trace. Nice touch on the above pieces Fleabrain, not unlike a photographer with thier many lense effects.


V Shane

[eyewoo]

...so come on guys... Show some of your traced artwork... I certainly can't be the only one that has examples...

[Icannon]

i might as well add that i'm with ya flea. especially now, being in art school and all, i get to see such a variety of artworks and ways of selfexpression. the teachers here seem to care very little for somebody who can paint realistically and so they end up asking "after somebody paints a head, what is he going to do with it" .. well, that head can be great on it's own, but i think we've almost seen too many heads already. so the big idea is to come up with.. a big idea! we have so many possible ways to achieve an end result now days, it doesnt seem to matter to the outside world which route we take.

still, i think that somebody who can build up such technical AND creative skills, in the end, will have the almighty advantage. my name is inigo montoya, you killed my father, prapare to die.

[Krauze]

he, The Lawyer Posts are good.

"My lawyer can take out your lawyer with his little finger!"

[Eon]

Someone should make a "Pimp" Icon that they could use, LOL. That would be cool.

Anyways,
Tracing is a method, used to help an artist learn to draw. If it is abused it tends to hinder the exelment, of an artist. Graphic artists, those who do it hands on (Not digital) trace all the time. You can use it to mix and match parts, to tighten up your piece. Copying is redrawing something else. Tracing is line over line copying. Is it cheating? ... If you think of it as a game, sure. But this is realife, it is a tool. I have traced a *hitload, and sometimes I have abused it, but realy, it was something I used to learn quicker. If you want to become a GREAT artist, you have to learn how NOT to use it.

At least thats my opinion... HA

[Groady]

Ironically I was considering starting a similar thread after reading Fleabrains candle tutorial. I think the saying "what you don't know, don't hurt" works here, after all it's the end product that matters. I guess anyone can colour in some traced lines but (i think) there's still skill required to render it well. The book "The New Drawing on The Right Side of The Brain" documents artist's such as Picaso using various "visual aids" to help get perspective and proportion correct. He used a frame with string creating a grid he then set up on stakes and look through. In turn a kind of tracing wouldn't you agree?

[surferboi]

i think what makes tracing so bad in my mind is that often i want whatever im working on to be as good and as acurate as possible when im drawing. i never wanted to wait to become good i just wanted to be good. im sure most of you have gotten that feeling, when you spend hours maybe even days on a drawing or painting... and you dont like it. always wanting to be better and faster. i learned that even when i started out my trace jobs didnt turn out as good as people who just practice every day and eyeball it. i think ive gotten better, and i think its because i stopped tracing. i think tracing teaches some bad habits. for me the worse was ignoring 3d form, and just focusing on the silouette. i dunno now a days if i have the option to trace i dont.. i use the image to check myself, and im always off either on scale, perspective, or anatomy. One day id like to think ill be able to nail it, not for just the ability to be able to draft, but to be able to see my mistakes before i make them.

[Germ01]

This topic is by far one of the more interesting topics I have read in a long time. It's funny, when I first learned about these art forums online, I was like, " This is awesome!" Until I made a couple of posts, then BAM!, it was like getting burned at the stake or something for doing what you were taught to do! Now,when I went to school a few years back. I was in a 3 year career program called Illustration and Design. Before enrolling I went to an Open house to see the students work. I was blown away by all the photo-realistic illustrations. I was overwhelmed by the talent and I was determined to learn these techniques. Now, before entering this program I didn't even know what tracing was, or even considered it as a way to draw. I guess I was doing everything the hard way.
Classes began and we had had our life drawing clases and again to my surprise,I discovered the models were naked I'm like this is cool we're going back to basics on drawing. The first year was like this, we relearned how to draw, we learned how to see. This is the good part, year 2, we were taught how to ...."now say it with me....Trace." 80% of the class was in shock. What,what,what, we can't trace that just wrong! Our teachers carefully explained to us that this is an "Illustration and Design" program. They gave us the example: Say we have client that wants an illustration in 2 days (and this isn't unheard of either)So we take our own photo reference. Now are going to take the time to draw the photo the old fashion way, which would probably take you a better part of the day just to get it as accurate as posssible, ORRRRR you could trace the image and save yourself a whole bunch time you could use on rendering time. Chances are you will have your illustration on time with this technique. I guess you could say it was like revelation, it just seemed so clear to all the students. The teachers did say one more thing, " You HAVE to learn how to draw before you can trace!" By the 3rd year we were calling the program "Tracing and Design" . What it all comes down to is that tracing is just a tool and a great one if you are a proffesional illustrator, it saves time and money. Well thats just my two cents. Oh yeah, Fleabrain your work is truely inspirational!

[Indian_Prophet]

These are interesting points. I have always thought as a rule of thumb, that tracing was for people who just couldn't produce the same quality work without it. But after joining this forum, I have learned different. Although, I'm not sure where I would stand on this, I have seen some really good render jobs here by people who have traced some aspect of a digital painting. Naturally, I venture off to their website to see what they're material looks like without tracing and if they are indeed a good artist, then I accept it as a time saver...
And if they aren't as good without tracing some aspect of their painting, then I look at their render work. I have seen alot of artist on board here that are really good at digital painting but lack talent or skills in other areas, like porportions. But nevertheless, I am still amazed and respect their painting skills. I guess my understanding of it changed when I ran across an artist online (don't have link) that didn't draw a single thing until he was 23. At that point he became interested in painting and started out a little rough but ended up being a master IMHO. Everything he does is measured out with a ruler and he has a very complexed method of arriving with his dimensions and subject correctness, if you will, mathematically. But his eye for color and lighting is astonishing. So if one can create pots and flower vases with a method relatively close to tracing then I guess I can respect one who traces to save time or to block in negative space for correctness.

All in all, it boils down to, it doesn't matter as long as one is being honest to how they have created their piece to themselves and others. I am trying to broaden my respect for art out there, in all its forms... I am still having trouble with a few like some abstracts... another debate?

Peace
IP

[balistic]

"...so come on guys... Show some of your traced artwork... I certainly can't be the only one that has examples..."

Actually I've never traced . . . not since I was five years old anyway.

I really didn't realize how common it was among artists until I came to sijun.

[el scoono]

i don't think of tracing as cheating at all. it can be a great time saving technique. i remember meeting a storyboard artist who amazed me with his work. he produced these incredible marker renderings under the tightest deadlines. well, the more i learned about how he worked, i found that he had all sorts of tricks. he carried tons of reference material around with him (photography books, magazines, catalogs etc.); he would often trace faces, poses, architecture out of these sources and then incorporate them into his final concept.

as a design student, i was already familiar with tracing as an artistic technique. you always have a pad of tracing paper with you if you're a graphic design student. however, i do object to tracing in certain situations. i don't like artists who rely solely on tracing and have no drawing ability. i also don't like artists who will trace a photograph and then try to replicate it as closely as possible by hand. this is fine as an exercise in rendering, but the finished piece is not great art, in my opionion. in addition, an artist who traces someone else's photograph and attempts to replicate it is in fact stealing the photographer's work. i think tracing is fine as long as you're working towards an original concept and an original work of art.

[Gort]

For the record, Norman Rockwell quite often used opaque and slide projectors for tracing figures to expedite his illustration process.

[CyberArtist]

It's curious to note that most of the "masters" that used tracing did so for work that was commissioned. Norman Rockwell was doing several high quality works each month. Other "greats" from the further past that may have used Camera Obscura for their work, those artists made their living purely from commissioned art, so the more paintings and the faster they could do them, the better they were getting paid. Not to mention the more time they had to work on any personal projects they might of had.

I trace as a matter of checking my work and understanding where I need more attention. Unforunatly, I usually do not have images of exactly the image I want, so I need to make it up. As such, I try to trace as little as possible as the better I am at drawing with out the reference, the less my subject matter will depend on it's existance in some form.

The only time I've used tracing on a constant basis is when doing animation, and even then that's not truely tracing, but instead checking one's previous drawing for reference of pose as animation often has to be so precise.

I don't consider tracing as cheating, only cheating myself. I know with some work I will have the skill to reproduce images that look like they've been traced even though I used no reference in their creation. At that point I may consider returning to tracing.

[jOnnywedge]

tracing is cheating...end of story.

word.

[ February 14, 2002: Message edited by: jOnnywedge ]