[Fred Flick Stone]

ozenzo, you ask a big question, and there are just too many answers. But let me see if I can find a light in the tunnel for you...
First, every time you create something on a picture plane,you are composing. Where did you draw the circle for the head first? On the bottom of the page, on the top? You have composed. Every line you lay down on that paper takes up space somewhere, say for example in an 8 1/2 x 11 field. YOu started your drawing at the top, and worked your way down, how did you connect the dots. Or, how did you put stuff on the page. That is how your brain composes. If it is random, and kinda all over the place, then training is necessary to overcome this loose cannon approach.

If you want to study great composition, look at the likes of Rockwell, J. C. Leyendecker, Mead Scheaffer, Titian, Bougeureau, Waterhouse, Sargent, Zorn, Sorolla, Mucha,etc. The masters who came before us, did it right. They had the right education. Why? They were the cameras of their day. Before the technology existed, and the idea to use the camera for consumer use was implemented, these guys were the cameras for the kings and queens, governing bodies, parliaments, historians, etc. Artists were in vast demand. There were great schools for all the science and practice of picture making. Now adays, film and other technologies have taken away some of the needs and necessities that artists relied upon back in the day, like perspective, atmosphere, color harmony, etc. Film sums all that up for us now, even composition to a certain degree, if a trained eye is behind that camera.

So study these guys. And don't just rip them off. STUDY THEM!!! Put tracing paper over a copy of their work, and draw the basic shapes over each of the components. Study how the figures flow around on the page, the way elements from the background to the forground lock together, with mysterious rythym and harmony. Look at the way color blocks push and pull shapes to the forground, to the background, etc. Look at hoe the artist focuses on one area and leaves everything else sparse, or vague. This might all confuse you, because it is all confusing if you don't get a grip on what it takes to really compose. Great artists dish out all this stuff in one pencil or paint stroke, sit back, attach another, and so on till the image is complete, and correct. Because in their brain, they are assessing all these particulars all at once, intuitively, because of all the practice , patience a,d studying they have put into it. Don't ever expect to be great overnight just because someone has enlightened you to one minor particular. That one little tidbit of info is only one little crumb of the whole pie. Rockwell stated that he was learning something new about art every single time he put implement to surface and produced an image, and through all the great work he did, he still felt like he was absolutely nothing, compared to those of the past. To a certain degree, he is right, but only a little bit. He under estimated his own worth, as so many great ones seem to do.
Study, observe, copy, but for practice only, then try and invent your own composition. I would direct you to a good book that is available if there were any available, but composition is one thing so many artists have absolutely no clue about, and because of that, they don't write about it. For books available, I would start with photography composition books. Photographers still adhere to the basic principals of composition. Otherwise, go to Loomis, Creative Illustration, Successful Drawing, The Famous Artists Courses that are also out of print. As I have mentioned in the past, you want to find the RIGHT info, your gonna have to hunt for it. I know it sor of, but not like a Rockwell. I have been studying composition now for over 12 years, and still don't feel totally confident with it. But I think that is a good thing. If I felt too confident, I would probably be making all sorts of horrible mistakes, and mistaking them for great peices of art.
I hope this helps a bit, composition is a nasty bugger to tackle, but it can be learned. You are just in for the hardest climb of your life. But the most rewarding if you find the right stuff to get you there. Good Luck

[samdragon]

As usual, great advice!
Something else, that may help you out is good design sence. Don't just throw images onto paper, think them out first. You could have the greatest talent in the world, but bad design will ruin any picture.
Look at this artist.
http://www.cale.com/brom/main.htm
Pay attention to how he aranges elements, even if the object is centered on the page, he will add elements to make it interesting.
As fred said, don't just copy stuff learn from it. Learn how to look for things in other artists works. Always ask yourself, "What makes that a good picture, why am I attracted to it" There is more to art than just drawing. "life long learning process". Don't be fooled by the fantasy and sci-fi artists, the majority of them had to study fine/classical art before they could render those types of images.
good luck

------------------
VISIT SAMDRAGON'S HOME

[samdragon]

oh, yeah, here is another page of brom's work if anyone is interested. http://people.gojasper.com/therion/brom/brom01.htm
I would be more than happy to di-sect one of these to show what I'm talking about when I say good design sense.

[Fred Flick Stone]

Brom is interesting. His designs are pretty good, but man, his paintings are stiff as a board. No life in his characters, just great surfacy details. What I commend him for is his ability to do this stuff in oils. Oils are not an easy medium to work with, and he handles details very well with them...I would look at Stephen Martinier, Joe Johnston, Shirow Masamune, Otomo, Yukito Kishiro, Syd Mead, Ralph Mcquarrie for great design, and great compostition. Not that I wouldn't look at Brom. I own his book and his card set, just not that impressed with his stuff. But his details, yes, are rockin'. He certainly has the eye for detail...

[ozenzo]

thanks a great deal!!!!!!!!!
oh and by the way Fred....I got a couple of Loomis books today...haven't had a chance to look at them yet...but they are:
The eye of the painter and the elements of style and beauty
Figures in action
Creative Illustration

samdragon....by all means show me....I need to learn...I've had about a 5 year layoff from art and I think I've suffered for it...you know job,.. mortgage,ect....but I have more time these days and need to get back to one of my first Loves...the second being music....but anything that you think can help...I have an open mind, and sketch pad!!



[This message has been edited by ozenzo (edited June 10, 2000).]

[samdragon]

I agree Fred, his(Brom) stuff is very stiff, but he's one of the few artists I know that has very very strong compositional skills. He's one of the few people than can take a centered image and still give it enough energy to hold your eye.
If I could fit Brom into a catagory, it would be a graphic designer illustrator.
I hope brom doesn't read that

That's just my personal impression of his work. The first words out of my mouth when I saw his book was "wow, look at how he composes stuff with angles and simple shapes." Ok..enough blabbering..
I'll see if I can give you an example ozenzo.
I don't think Brom would be too happy if I was to post one of his images here, so I'll just provide a link to it and then some simple sketches to show what I'm talking about when I mean strong compositional skills.
In the meantime, you lucky turd! read those books. I can't afford them, maybe I'll get some as a graduation present yeah yeah, I'm an art nerd...

[ozenzo]

hey...go to ebay...they have some good deals there....I also ordered.some from budplant...very expensive....I won't say what they cost, but.....

anyway I'm still waiting on a couple to get here they should be here on monday, tuesday at the latest....

I'll be at the book store tomorrow trying to locate anything with Rockwell, J. C. Leyendecker, Mead Scheaffer, Titian, Bougeureau, Waterhouse, Sargent, Zorn,Stephen Martinier, Joe Johnston, Shirow Masamune, Otomo, Yukito Kishiro, Syd Mead, Ralph Mcquarrie, Sorolla, Mucha..if I can....I actually have a Waterhouse book, but most of my collection is Dali, Boris Vallejo, Michael Parkes, Franzetta, Raffaello, Rembrant, Picasso, Da Vinci...and some coolections....now some of those guys you mentioned, Fred , I hadn't even heard of so soon I'll have some new additions to my collection

[samdragon]

Ok, I'm going to give this a try...
I feel extremely bad about posting Brom's work, so I'm sorry about having to do it this way.
Here is a link to the original image, open this in a new browser window.
http://www.cale.com/brom/images/lonestalker.jpg
Below are the two image I want you to look at after you study Brom's image.



You may want to save these images and look at them off line.

This is all based on how I usually look at images, this doesn't mean it's the way everyone should look at them, just one of the many... on with the show...

First, ask yourself "what is the artist trying to tell or show me" Is it the woman, or is it the decapitated head?
Where is the weight of the image? By weight I mean visually..where is it heavy at. It's heavier at the bottom of the image, there is more information there, so we say it's heavier at the bottom.
Is the object of the image centered on the page? No it's not, Again, it's more towards the lower part of the page.
What is the basic design element most present here? Well, it's repetition, look at all those diagonal lines in the metal.
Now look at how those lines are interrupted by the figure crossing them. Pay attention to how the hair of the female and the leg comes outside of the diamond shaped plane to cross diagonal lines. This Brom's way of telling us "hey, look at this first!"
Look at the vertical line in the upper left corner, now look at the woman's arm just under it, now look at that dark vertical line next to the decapitated head. See how all these elements lead your eye down the page?
Look at the way the lines of the woman mimic the lines of her surroundings. Brom is telling us to look at this woman, but more importantly, look at what she just did! That's the nice little treat he has thrown in there for us.
The sketch I provided with all the arrows, shows (in theory) how the artist wanted your eye to move through out the image. This is one of the ways the artist controls his/her viewer to see what he/she wants them to see.
The next sketch(red) shows intersecting lines, areas of interest the artist wants you to notice.
See that chunk missing out of the diamond shaped area in the mid right area? Why do you think that's there? Would that area still be as interesting if it was smooth? By putting in that missing chunk, he has added more life to an area that would be otherwise boring.
Now, ask yourself "what is the woman in the painting telling me?" Look at what she is pointing at, her figures are slightly forming a pointing gesture to the head, as well as her knife. Everything in this image says.."look down!"
I guess it's easy to see what Fred meant by "stiffness." If this woman was to move, she might crack in half. Very posed.
If you have Photoshop or something to load this image into, turn it upside down and see if it looks different. It should. The weight should be shifted to the top.
I haven't even touched on his use of color and I didn't get into his use of shapes, but I think this is a good starting place. You can apply this to any image. All of the old masters used this very same technique, it's nothing new, been around for many years.
The one image that comes to mind is "Oath of the Horatii" by David (wouldn't my art history teacher be proud I'm sure you can find it on the net somewhere. But look for those lines and intersecting lines of interest.
Basic design is pretty much natural for everyone. Most of this stuff is usually seen subconsciously.
Composition is way more than just throwing objects on paper and making them look pretty. This image of broms would still have the same properties, if it where just lines and boxes.
That's alot to keep in mind when working on something, but with alot of practice this stuff will start to come in to play with out even thinking about it much at all.
If you have the chance, take some art history courses. You'll learn a whole lot about composition.
If you want more info I can pick another image of Broms or someone elses to further explain this.
I'm sorry if I confused you, I really enjoy talking about art, and art theories, I sometimes get off subject.
good luck


------------------
VISIT SAMDRAGON'S HOME

[ozenzo]

I was wondering if I could draw(no pun intended) from the great resources here.....

How does one go about working on the composition of a piece?
What are the elements of good composition?

I think Veb may have something along these lines....I can't remember and I can seem to locate it any where...but.....any suggestions?

[ozenzo]

hey thanks a lot....and sure if you have any other suggestions...by al means let me know!!...just trying to get better, so anything you think will help....I'm all ears...um eyes...you know what I mean?...bring it on please!!

thanks for your time!!, and suggestions

[ozenzo]

I think what might help is if you gave me someone you didn't think had very good compositional skills, so I could compare them to the people you already mentioned...as a comparison.......maybe , maybe not.....?
I picked up some Rockwell, you might get a laugh out of this it was in the bargain bin at a Walden Books.......

[This message has been edited by ozenzo (edited June 11, 2000).]

[Fred Flick Stone]

Bad compositional skills? Boris V and Julie Bell. Wayne Barlow. His designs rock, his paintings suck, and his compositions are horrid...Thomas B Kinkade painter of crap...I know there are many many more, but I don't look at them. Can't, just too rechid of work to stomach...oh yeah, try any of the illustrators annuals I think they are on number 39 or 40 or something like that now. Page after page after page of crap. Maybe ten to twenty great guys tops, and all the rest, are just neato techniqy geeky art wanna be's...it's too bad to, there is a lot of potential there, but no guidance for them...I guess they will never know what we know, right?

[Frost]

Jeezus Fred... what do you think of MY stuff? =)

(actually, don't answer that.)

[This message has been edited by Frost (edited June 11, 2000).]

[samdragon]

Good idea, I'll take some of those people Fred mentioned and show what not to do compositionly. Give me a day or so to gather some good examples. I may even use one of my images as the bad example.
You would be surprised at how much an image can change by just moving something every so slightly.
I'll start a new post, because I can get long winded at times

I'm always learning, I look back at the work I've done receintly and just wanna puke. My main problem was getting away from 3D and back into 2D. I had the skills outside of the computer, but while trying to get them into the computer, I totally left out solid design skills. I've been using photoshop for a very long time (version 2.0)! But I didn't really start to "paint" with it untill a couple of months ago. The same with painter. I can remember buying it when it came as two packages, one was the painter program, and the other was some sort of add on. Version 2!
So I guess what I'm saying is, Learning software is quick and easy, but learning how to draw, design, paint...that takes time.
I saw on a site somewhere, maybe Pixar or Digital Domain.anyway, they had an expression. We can teach you how to use the software, but we can't teach you how to be artists!
I know for sure Pixar sez. "computers don't animate, people do"...think long and hard about that!

[Fred Flick Stone]

Frost, I am not being harsh on people, just the work they call professional. There is a big misconception that a solid technique is sound art. Or sound illustration for that matter. Not true, technique is one thing, saying it with conviction, let alone, saying with sound understanding and conviction are two different things. If you look in those books, there are lots of ideas trying to happen, but they just hold up to the real deas, like Rockwell, Leyendecker, Sargent, Lord Leighton, Alma Tadema, Mucha, Remberant, Sorolla, Van Dyck, Etc,Etc. this is the true test. Compare, contrast, don't just be wowed by the technique. Can this person really say something with his art, and is he free of any technical issues that are plaguing his message? Most of the time, the artist is cancered with problems and he can't get away from them at all, because they aren't aware they have them. See what I mean? It isn't the fact that the artist isn't good with the technique, it is that the artist thinks he is a sound artist because of the technique. The art training to provide him with the technique didn't tell him/her what was being done wrong outside of the technique, like say, anatomical errors, compositional errors, value errors, color errors, perspective errors, just the errors that elude the student from performing the technique correctly.
There is a very big difference. I enjoy looking at anything that someone created, just don't tell me that the dog poo you smeared on a canvas sold for $100,000 and I won't go off on a mealstrum of rants...and don't tell me you are as good as Rockwell(not you in particular Frost, anyone in general)when you can't even draw a portrait convincingly. And definitely don't tell me you are a kick ass artist if all you do is trace photos all day. You are a great xerox machine, but no soul or conviction. See what I was trying to say now? If you don't claim it, youare humble in your approach to getting better with you art skills. If I couldn't do any more than copy photos well, I wouldn't be a game conceptual artist now, or a good illustrator, or a comic book artist. You need imagination for those, can't copy photos when doing that stuff. Plus you need solid foundation. Having these things allows you the chance to say "I might be a good artist". Or "I am damn good at what I do..." If you ask Francis or Wacomonkey, I claim neither of these. I just keep plugging away at getting better. You won't know how good you really are till your dead, then it wont matter anymore, time will tell the rest of the tail. I can garuntee you that 97 out of 100 of the artists in those annuals will never be heard of again beyond this years, or five years from now illustrator annuals. And not much further beyond that.
Now, back to what you said Frost, if I didn't like looking at anything do you think I would make any kind of useful instructor? My whole goal with my art instruction side of my life is to hopefully reach as many artists in training, and at least get them the information they need, the right stuff. I have it, been trained with it, and now want to give it up. I have the skills, andthe imagination, I am not afraid of divulging how to do it. I won't give you my ideas, unless you like it so much that you can't live without it. I will always come up with something else. So, learn baby, learn. Don't think I hate what I see, I like seeing the evolution of the individual. As long as you can handle crit's, and use them to your advantage, stay humble, and love what you do, I have no gripes. And for that matter, what should it matter what I think? If you get dicouraged from someone elses thoughts, that is a problem you need to tackle somehow within yourself. I am not getting hostile at all. Just expressing thought...Really, I get crushed for a moment everytime someone gives me negative feedback on something I have done, but I internalize it, and use it to my advantage. I know this person doesn't hate me, they just express their thoughts this sort of way that I heard fall from their tongue, so I need to validate what that person was trying to tell me, and pick that useful crumb from it. Then move on. The more you train yourself to this, the stronger an artist you will become. Andwe are stereotyped as sensative...well we are, because art is 10% technical, and 90%mental. The stronger you execise your mental side, the longer you will be able to stick out this art thing, and quite possibly transcend the times.

Getting off the soapbox now...good day...

[ozenzo]

..heh heh..you bustin' on my boy Boris?.....
thanks....in my endeavor I need to know what not to study as well as what I should study..ok...um..so trash the vallejo books....I'm still looking for some of the other artists you mentioned....does Syd Mead have anything out?

[Fred Flick Stone]

Syd has plenty out. Go to Bud Plant, or go to Syd's web site...I think there are a total of nine books available on syd. I only have four of them, as they are a bit hard to find, and very pricey...gotta have the cash for them...

[samdragon]

Here is Mead's official home site...

http://www.sydmead.com/

He has plenty of his books on there, but not too many examples of his work. Just enough to get you interested

[Fred Flick Stone]

Frost, your work isn't bad and the time hasn't been wasted. Remember the airbrush boom? There were a lot of people after the fad wore off that feel the same way you do, but at least you are making an effort to better yourself now. You didn't waste anytime, in fact, you are a master of your own medium, you just now need to redirect your thinking to better attune yourself to the things you wish to accomplish, with astounding results. Most of those airbrushy guys never went the next step, they just beat themselves into submission. You aren't doing that, you are moving forward, with results. More power to you, and I am glad to see you have passions, that you don't see as passions yet. You really do, you have a passion for self improvement, that takes more courage than admitting you are great, and may not be. I commend you for taking that next step, and doing it with the hopes of finding your true voice. That is a passion not many people ever get a chance to start pursuing. Keep up the ambitions, and the work will eventually pay off for you, in some self satisfying way...

[Fred Flick Stone]

There is a book called Famous American Illustrators, available just about anywhere right now, but I know you can get it at bud plant. THe book has examples of just about everyone in the american illustrator societies who have made a greater or lesser impact on the art world. Very important for the illustrators library. Enough in there on composition, color, form, etc to keep you going for the next twenty years. Study them well and learn many things from them...

[ozenzo]

it's on it's way!!....thanks once again....syd mead ...forget about it.....I don't have that much money...besides I spent it getting those Loomis books!!....I'll be looking forward to it..........you never commented on any of my stuff though.. my digital work....it must be pretty bad...maybe that's why you're giving me all this info!!........just kidding around.....I'll be practicing...hey one question....do you think I should give up the digital work for a while and just work on the basics...like the cubes,head tutorial...or should I work on that in conjunction with all the other things I'm working on?...just wondering...cause most of my recent stuff has been to get a handle on using photoshop.........as always open mind and sketch pad!!

[Fred Flick Stone]

Commenting on your stuff? Do you mean cube reviews? I am a little unclear...also go check your other post, I think you will be happy to see those two pages you needed. Your hotmail address, as I suspected didn't take the email I sent you...go get em, and do you have an answeer for the proposition I requested?

[ozenzo]

I'm all for it...how do you want to go about it?

[Fred Flick Stone]

I will get the book copied by Friday. I am really swamped and I am not quite sure what day I will make it to KINKOS. But, I will get it by Friday. When I have it copied, I will post that for you, and then we can make mailing arrangements. I really appreciate you doing this. Can't wait to read that book...

[ozenzo]

I can have this sent to you tomorrow if you like.......just e-mail me....and take your time I'm in no hurry...I've got so much to work with right now as it is!!

[Frost]

Hey Fred,

Well, I didn't mean what I wrote in a bad way. You are a very accomplished artist, and in no way was I bitching.

It's obviously just me having great problems in dealing with my lack of talent, experience and knowledge. Obviously, seeing someone put down Borris and such just makes me realize just how much shit I am and how far I am from being anywhere near a "good artist".

Of course, if I had more time on my hands, and possibly more interest so I would devote more time to it, I might practise more and have better results eventually. I would definitely love to be able to draw as you do, but I'm not an artist at heart -- I don't want to be the next Sargent or such, in fact, I don't even like what they do (sorry Spooge). I just want to be able to express a mood, people, and scenes through proper geometry and lighting... at least, that would be my immediate goal. Unfortunately, I'm not even good enough to do a good job each time I lay a pen down... I have to hack form into it, and I hack TOO much around it.

Anyway, it's just a matter of me coming to terms with it, and investing more time to it... I just thought 12 years of digital-medium imagery on PC would make me a better artist then I am now... I'm very disapointed with myself.

cheers, and thanks Fred.