|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Topic : "Illustrative Cliches?" |
YeeWu junior member
Member # Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 24
|
Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2004 9:34 pm |
|
|
I'm not entirely sure where to post this, but the Discussion area seemed most appropriate.
I had my Drawing II portfolio review today. My teacher made some interesting comments that I'm not entirely sure how to interpret. I foolishly nodded my head throughout the review, and I'm kicking myself for not having asked him to elaborate.
He compared these two images I did:
and
Sorry for the poor quality of these, but these were taken using a digital camera, and I couldn't get the toned color of the paper to reproduce correctly and maintain decent tonal range.
Anyway, the top image was one of the first drawings I did in the class (1 hour drawing) , and the bottom one was one of the last drawings I did. I feel that I did a much better job on the bottom one (2 hour drawing), and that it is one of my more successful attempts (well, her upper torso turned out somewhat decent....I'm not too thrilled about how I handled her lower torso) during this summer session. My professor thinks the exact opposite though. He said the one at the bottom was more "cliched" and "illustrative" and was a much weaker piece than the one on top. Though the one on top isn't "resolved" and the white highlights aren't as clearly "defined" and seem to "float" over the figure, it fits into the space better, and is a stronger drawing.
My question to the much more experienced and much more skilled artists on this board is...What makes a good figure drawing? Is anyone else more familiar with what this "illustration/cliche" is and how it weakens a figure drawing? |
|
Back to top |
|
spooge demon member
Member # Joined: 15 Nov 1999 Posts: 1475 Location: Haiku, HI, USA
|
Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 3:36 am |
|
|
hmm, I know what he is saying, but it is difficult to explain.
When a person from a fine arts background says something is illustrative, they usually mean that a drawing is a little too eager to please, if you get what I mean. Use a full value range, push contrast, emphasis on facial features, surface effects, decorative treatments, etc. Think of a naturally beautiful person as opposed to a hooker in hotpants with too much makeup.
Like I said it's hard to explain, but look at enough drawings and you will get it.
But to say one drawing is better than the other because of this is a bit of a stretch. An illustrative drawing can be tasteful and beautiful, to (almost) anyone if it is done well. |
|
Back to top |
|
YeeWu junior member
Member # Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 24
|
Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 9:06 am |
|
|
Errr...something happened while I tried to submit my post, but here is what I remember:
Thank you for your response Mr. Mullins. I think I understand a little better now.
With the longer 2 hour drawings we did, we were expected to "finish" drawing the model. But when is a drawing "finished"?
My professor commented after looking through my sketchbook that I should work with "representational" art from a live model more. I was always under the impression that what made representational art representational was that it contained many of the elements a drawing eager too please would have. Am I perhaps making too many arbitary decisions in my drawings that would qualify them more as illustrative rather than representational?
Or is this just more evidence that I don't have a clue what I'm doing?
Sorry for my babbling |
|
Back to top |
|
Fobulous junior member
Member # Joined: 03 Jun 2004 Posts: 8 Location: SoCal
|
Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 9:35 am |
|
|
i agree with your instructor that your first drawing is better, mainly because it has more of your own style. but i'm hesitant in using the word style because my instructors are hesitant in using it for me aswell. they say its not developed enough to be called my own style. but i guess thats what your instructor is saying about your first ddrawing being better even tho it might not be as resolved as the second one. when it comes to style in drawing, it is how you view the objects, in this instance the figure. iguess your instructor is saying that the first darwing is better because it is how you see the girgure: your lines, and your shape.
i also agree with what Spooge said about illustration when he said its "eager to please". i guess the difference between FA and illustration is that illus. tends to be for someone else, and FA is more how YOU see the gifure, whether it is with more shape, more lines, more values, etc. its more of an expression of yourself.
my stuff isn't that great and i wouldn't say that i have a style yet. but i'm moving towards one:
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v299/CongeeSTAR/DSC01214.jpg
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v299/CongeeSTAR/DSC01213.jpg
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v299/CongeeSTAR/DSC01210.jpg
oh btw does anyone know how i can just post the pics up rather than having the url.??? _________________ K.eep I.t S.imple S.tupid |
|
Back to top |
|
YeeWu junior member
Member # Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 24
|
Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2004 10:53 am |
|
|
Thanks for your input Fobulous! I guess I still have to learn how to look at things before I figure out in what direction I should take my art.
I don't think the digital picture I took of the second drawing does it much justice (it really does look a lot better in life), but I guess that really isn't the point here =P
If you want to directly post an image, put a "[img]" (Without quotes, that is)tag before the URL and a "[/img]" tag after it.
So...it'll be like "[img]"http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v299/CongeeSTAR/DSC01213.jpg "[/img]"
Remove quotes and voila!
By the way, of the 3 images you showed, I like the second one the best. I like how the figure blends in with the environment. |
|
Back to top |
|
jfrancis member
Member # Joined: 08 Aug 2003 Posts: 443 Location: Los Angeles
|
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:23 am |
|
|
This is the big dividing line, as far as I'm concerned. I used to think it was an East Coast / West Coast (usa) thing when I was a kid. I used to think it was because all the fine artists were in New York, and all the commercial artists were in California.
A while ago I sat in on an uninstructed model session or two. There was an ex-Disney animator there that used to draw beautiful drawings of the model. In fact, they were even better than the model: better lit, more clearly muscled, or more clearly fat-padded, for that matter, but just "clearer."
I used to think, "boy that guy's not very good. I mean, his drawings are great, but they are off in their own little world. They seem to use the model more as a springboard to a drawing than as something to closely represent."
Later I took an anatomy class with someone from the animation industry, ( http://www.vilppustudio.com/ ), and he was very specific about it:
The model is not for copying. It is is an inspiration for an idea of form. If a cast shadow of your own invention will better communicate the surface form, then by all means, invent it. Use your x-ray eyes and your knowledge of anatomy to see inside the figure, find the important bony landmarks, and use them.
So there you have it. Fine artists don't want you to be a camera, but they seem to get uptight if you stray too far into your own head. Commercial artists don't want you to just invent any old thing, but they encourage you to blend what is in front of you with some idealized version of what is in front of you, for the sake of clarity of communication.
That's my take. |
|
Back to top |
|
YeeWu junior member
Member # Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 24
|
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 5:38 am |
|
|
Thanks for the link, jfrancis. Do you recommend his books or videos? I'm kinda tempted to invest in some of them
One thing that puzzled me during class was that my instructor would point out areas I didn't manage to capture the model's anatomy quite right, which gave me the impression that I was supposed to copy the model as close as possible. Other times he would say we should aim to capture the impression of what the figure was doing. I never really was sure what it was he wanted, or what I should focus on.
I quickly realized while doing these drawings that my knowledge of anatomy was too poor for me to see what was inside the figure, and ended up kinda fudging things hoping things would turn out right.
I appreciate your advice, and will have to do some serious work on the basics. |
|
Back to top |
|
jfrancis member
Member # Joined: 08 Aug 2003 Posts: 443 Location: Los Angeles
|
Posted: Tue Jun 15, 2004 6:20 am |
|
|
I have some of his VHS tapes. He has DVD's now with all new material, some of which I saw him taping (I was in some of the classes which were taped), althogh I don't have the finished DVD's.
I do recommend his stuff, but it comes in two flavors: anatomy instruction and drawing demonstration. The anatomy instruction was helpful to me; the drawing demonstration was interesting to me, but not interesting enough to buy a lot of it. It's a little hard to tell which is which from the web site, so if you have a preference for one type of content over the other, it's best to call or email first. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2005 phpBB Group
|