[Jack]

It’s my pleasure. My general advice would be to experiment, see what works and doesn’t. There’s obviously a long tradition of using hatching for rendering, notably with ink, so if that’s the style you’re after there is plenty of precedent. I just think it’s harder to achieve subtle value changes as a beginner.

I’ve copied a page from a book that helped my portraits considerably, The Artists Complete Guide to Drawing the Head by William Maughan. It’s something of a misnomer, as it’s far from a ‘complete guide’. In fact, it teaches quite a narrow approach to head drawing. But I’ve provided it as an example of building up shadow tones gradually. I think it’s similar to the painting approach that Joseph Todorovitch takes in the NMA’s portrait painting course.

Anyway, I’ve overstayed my welcome. Good luck! Do provide more updates as you progress 🙂

 

[Jack]

The far side of the face is well foreshortened, it turns the head nicely and gives it a good form. Along with the nose, the form immediately reads as three-dimensional – which is sometimes the toughest part of head drawing! You have a real eye for proportions, which lends itself to achieving a likeness, I already know the model as I’ve drawn himself a few times myself. A lot of effort went into the focus point of any head drawing, the eyes and nose. The nose in particular is well structured. 🙂

In terms of areas to improve, it’s worth remembering that there are no lines on the body. Form is suggested by the play of light and shadow as forms face or turn away from the light source; or cast shadows by blocking it. Differentiating form shadows and cast shadows is vital. This is a key principle to understand because what we often think of as lines are merely sudden form changes. The more gradation from light-to-shadow, the greater the suggestion of a soft edge (and vice versa). Think of a cheek or forehead slowly turning away from the light, how their recession into darkness describe the form. Next, think of the hard cast shadow by the nose or eye socket, by blocking the light, describes how the nose sticks out from the underlying form, or the how the socket sinks in. In its simplest form, this can be thought of by depicting a sphere – where the gradual turning of the ball is a gradated shadow, but the shadow it casts on the table is hard. Ask yourself whenever you’re depicting shadow, is this edge hard or soft? Imagine as you’re drawing, that you’re drawing over the form.

The reason I mention this is two-fold. One, is that all of your rendering is hatching. This may be the style you’re after, which is fine. (I’m dreadful at hatching). But line can be very hard to create soft edges and subtle changes in values that you need to describe delicate areas, like the temple, cheeks or ears. That isn’t to say not to use line, only, that for rendering purposes you might want to try slowly depicting shadow shapes, not with line, but by building up tone gradually. Keep it very light to start with – you should almost never need to erase your work. You may want to consider the overhand grip for pencils, if you haven’t already tried it.

Secondly, use line sparingly and purposefully. There are sections of the drawing that detract from the  overall effect because of poor line quality. You’ve essentially outlined the entire head/body. Less is often more with line, and lost lines can suggest form without having to depict it.  Each line should be considered and beautiful in its own turn. If you’re putting down line after line because of incorrect placement, this is a sign you’re working too dark and without purpose. In places like the back of the neck, top of the head and the body, the drawing looks rushed.

The drawing shows real promise, keep at it!

Cheers

[Jack]

Hey Boris, looks like you’ve moved onto the Zorn palette? The self-portrait in colour continues to show improvement, especially for a more difficult dynamic pose. The brushwork shows some excitement, like you had fun in the process. I feel like there’s good storytelling with your pictures; it’s easy to imagine this being the cover of an adventure novel! Like the previous piece, I enjoy the abstraction of particular sections – like the marks you laid down under the lips and the swirl of light on the ear. It’s like something caught your attention, so you just tried to capture it, free but not out of control.

I know bugger all about colour (and less about the Zorn palette), so there’s little I can offer you there. In terms of modelling, the ear has form but doesn’t look like it could be true to life (my apologies if it is!). It reads a bit gnarled. Not a biggie, given it’s in the shadows and not a point of focus.

The only other point I might raise is composition. This may be a result of photographing the painting, but the space around the head (left, right, and above) are fairly equal. This is compensated by a dynamic diagonal head position, but you may want to give some thought to the negative shapes around the subject.

Keep grinding!

[Jack]

Hey there Natalie – thanks for the response and providing a sneak peak at the roadmap for NMA! It sounds like there are some exciting changes coming up.

I think replicating the ‘in-person art college experience’ is the name of the game these days. Personally I find online instruction more informative and, well, instructive, than the classroom setting. But some elements are harder to reproduce online, like figuring out a learning path, coaching, feedback on assignments, and a sense of community; anything NMA can do to fill that gap will keep me paying 🙂 That’s not to disregard some of the brilliant new courses that have been added in the last year, which keep getting better imo.

[Jack]

Hello there Carlos,

Thanks for taking the time to provide feedback and support – very helpful! The bottom-left male portrait was my first attempt at bringing together all the features w/ value in one go. A lot of erasing went on as I juggled things around before settling on what you see. It’s a mess, and you’re right about part of the skull missing… or something being off. I’ve done a further six of these types of drawings and hopefully there has been some improvement. The initial lay-in is still a big weakness; I am constantly on guard for nicely rendered features in the wrong place or size.

As you suggest I’ll include a 20-minute lay in my routine, practice getting the right proportion/size down. It’s always tempting to keep working on a drawing post-lay in, I need to get better at moving on!

I’d love to include figure drawing soon – I’m signed up for a live class in the Autumn. I’m only sticking to portraiture for now as I’m trying to get the most out of the 10-15 hours I can spend on art each week. And for whatever reason, I find the systematic approach to portraiture easier than drawing from nature (although my long-term goal is actually landscapes!). Plus there is enough to keep me learning – but perhaps there’s room for more subjects!

Thanks again

[Jack]

I like the brushwork you used to give the feeling of wool catching the light, and how the shadows contain finer details – making the lights really glow.

[Jack]

Ah yes, I know what you mean Vera. I’m supplementing Huston’s course with Villpu’s (which I find slightly more involved/advanced) and his approach is ‘construction’ exactly as you described. The book I’ve been using to date, The Artist’s Complete Guide to the Head, barely mentions proportion, let alone construction. He advocated an approach which sounds more similar to Todorovich – seeing and replicating shapes of value. Two different approaches, I suppose.

 

[Jack]

Hello there Boris – I was waiting for someone more experienced and proficient to provide a critique, but I thought I’d jump in to get things started. As you know, I’m a beginner who hasn’t dabbled in painting yet, so my thoughts are limited to that of a spectator rather than a do-er! It might be helpful to others to know what your goals are, stylistic aspirations, known weaknesses, etc?

What I enjoy most about your self-portrait is the broken brushwork – especially how it’s used to describe the form around the mouth, chin, neck, and right cheek. It provides an abstraction, with bold placement of values, whilst also being purposeful and quite delicate. It’s great. It also provides contrast with the flat value applied to the left/right planes of the forehead –  focusing the viewer on the important features of the face. There is an immediate ‘read’ and sense of character.  There’s a little glint in the smile suggesting you’re enjoying yourself! Nothing stands out as being particularly off to me.

There are a few things I might consider if I were you. The mouth, nose, and eyebrows appear to track almost horizontally – but the right eye is slightly raised. This might be true to likeness and part of the character of the piece. It doesn’t immediately strike me as off, but thought I’d mention it. The second thought is the value range. It might be the photograph being a bit dark (or my computer monitor), but when I use a colour-grabber your lightest light is still quite dark. As the face is framed by dark hair, it still pops – so this may be a stylistic choice. But for future pieces it might be worth experimenting, pushing the range of values to see what effect it has. A final thought is about the hair – whether the reasonably uniform value has a flattening effect, or perhaps it’s the more blended brushwork? But then, I’m so thoroughly rubbish at hair I’d feel like a total imposter offering any advice!

An enjoyable painting, makes me excited to try Todorovitch’s course myself!

[Jack]

Thanks Boris and Vera, I really appreciate the input.

@Vera, you’ve honed in on a few of the features I struggled with in the bottom-right. I tried to simply put down value shapes as I saw them, but the mouth is definitely facing a different direction. It’s skewiff. And the ‘reverse C’ shape was an attempt to depict the shadow of a loose curl of hair on the reference. I ummed-and-ahhed about just ignoring it. I think it was a case of either rendering the hair more intentionally (I struggle with hair and lazily resort to just blanketing it in value), or leaving the shadow out – as it stands it’s a shadow shape without much depiction of the object casting the shadow. It doesn’t ring true, as Huston might put it!

Can you explain what you mean by ‘constructive approach’ vs what Todorovich teaches? One of the things I’ve been struggled with is the process to get pieces started.

[Jack]

Great, thanks Natalie!

I wouldn’t call it the most crucial new feature, it certainly isn’t going to stop me from learning on NMA 🙂 content is, of course, much more important. I just thought it’d probably save NMA editing time and the need to purchase the rights to music!

Thanks.

[Jack]

Hello Laurie, I’m going through this process myself. As Joshua mentions, I conceive off Ben’s “masses” as akin to value groupings or, in some compositions, planes. They don’t necessarily have to be singular unbroken patches of value as there’s likely to be, in real life, a considerable range of value. The purpose here is to simplify what you see, to give you a standing chance of painting it.

I’ve had some good results by finding reference landscape photos and c&p them into Google Slides to trace what I think are the value masses- similar to how Ben himself does it. This is typically easier on paintings than photographs, as the artist has done the hard work for you. If colour is making it difficult to judge, I’ll turn the picture into greyscale or even cut and paste segments of the drawing into little squares of value to compare against each other. This allows me to create a value hierarchy, which I number on the photograph. Some compositions lend themselves to this process, others less so. But as Ben mentions, if a picture doesn’t “work” at this stage, then it isn’t likely to be improved by adding more detail. Instead, the composition may need to be revisited.

A second exercise to get the hang of it can be to use thumbnails; using both reference photos and paintings. Challenge yourself to quickly copy what you see using only 2 value masses, then 3, etc.  You’ll soon be crying out for more gradations of value, but you’ll also find that more than 5-7 makes a composition too complicated to work with.

Both of these exercises can be useful starting points for a more detailed “value study”. Also, as mentioned, Bill Perkin’s has a great few videos on a similar subject (albeit, different terms used).

https://www.nma.art/videolessons/beginners-program-lesson-7-landscape-drawing/

• This reply was modified 3 years, 7 months ago by Jack.

[Author]

Posts