Book recommendations for a beginner
Vic20Owner
Hi, I've been lurking (and searching the archives) of this group off and
on for a year. Could someone suggest a book which describes some basic
theory and techniques? I'm not looking for a book describing the
painting of impressionistic landscapes, clouds, or crappy portraits.
I'm more interested in a book that describes basics like smooth blends,
color theory, examples/use of different brushes, rules (fat over lean),
etc, by someone who actually has some talent and some type of art
background other than teaching water color at the local community
center. I'm actively painting, but my lack of artistic knowledge is
holding me back. At this point in my life going to art school or
painting classes isn't really possible (2yr old daughter, work, etc),
but I'm planning it for the future. Help! I need to learn more about
painting! A good human figure drawing book would be helpful too.
Thanks
Tom
Flobby Bischer
Your best bet is to get a good materials book (not Mayer) (Gottsegen's or
Smith's books are OK, lots of pics of materials in Smiths) or print out or
read pages on what you're interested in from one of many excellent websites
maintained by .edu types and manufacturers of materials.
Another trick is go into barnes and noble and get about twenty 'painting'
books by those still life painters, landscape painters -- you know the crap
type in large formats. Then skim them over a latte and write down any useful
ideas.
As for good drawing books, the Chaet book is useful generally, and Drawing
Lessons from the Masters (or something like that) is not bad. But to learn
to draw figures you should take a figure drawing class where they DON"T
teach outlines or anything from Drawing on the Idiot Side of the Brain.
Good luck and have fun.
"Vic20Owner" <REMOVETHIS...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:kZJHb.149749$b01.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
Mike Stengl
something called "the big book of oil painting" i beleive. it was the
best of the books i came across before i began oils. if i'm wrong (in
any way) i'm sure someone will correct me. also, it's not that huge of
a book and a rather enjoyable read.
Michael
Charles Sovek's "Oil Painting: Develop your Natural Ability" is an excellent
book for beginners. Unlike most books, this book has specific exercises for
you to do. I'm only in chapter 2 but I've learned so much from it already.
it's great. You can find it used from ebay or new from sovek.com.
michael
Phan C. Pant
REMOVETHIS...@hotmail.com says...
Seems to me you have contradictory needs. You
want "someone who actually has some talent and some type of art
background" to have published a book covering
all possible methods and mediums and you're
simply not going to find a person like that.
It really comes down to this. You can read every
"how to" book ever written, but when it comes
to actually learning how, there is only one way, and
that is "by doing it!" And that is particularly
applicable to figure drawing - drawing from the
actual figure.
There are a few books that most working artists
will agree afford invaluable information for the
professional as well as the beginner. Mayer's
ARTIST HANDBOOK is one of those. Another ARTIST
HANDBOOK in use is the one written by Ray Smith.
The latter covers a variety of artistic mediums.
Itten's book on color theory is another. I have used Nita
Leland's book EXPLORING COLOR as a textbook for
first semester art students. It has the benefit
of drawing from all previous color theory publications.
Chris
"Vic20Owner" <REMOVETHIS...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:kZJHb.149749$b01.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> on for a year. Could someone suggest a book which describes some basic
> theory and techniques? I'm not looking for a book describing the
> painting of impressionistic landscapes, clouds, or crappy portraits.
> I'm more interested in a book that describes basics like smooth blends,
> color theory, examples/use of different brushes, rules (fat over lean),
> etc, by someone who actually has some talent and some type of art
> background other than teaching water color at the local community
> center.
Try Ray Smith's "Artist Handbook", it sounds a lot like what you are looking
for. There's a new version out, but I haven't read it yet. But the last one
was pretty good.
> I'm actively painting, but my lack of artistic knowledge is
> holding me back. At this point in my life going to art school or
> painting classes isn't really possible (2yr old daughter, work, etc),
> but I'm planning it for the future. Help! I need to learn more about
> painting! A good human figure drawing book would be helpful too.
>
There's all kinds of books out there aimed at different audiences, and the
best thing might be to decide sort of art interests you, and use that as a
basis to select a figure drawing book. For example, books by Robert Beverley
Hale are quite in with the Classical Realist crowd; "Drawing on the RHS of
The Brain" is popular with the art-as-home-therapy-for-boredom crowd; and
Nicolaides' "The Natural Way to Draw" is de riguer for those who don't want
to study and are hence attracted to the idea that "natural" is better than
not...(Actually, there's value in all of them).
Personally, I like Vanderpoel's "The Human Figure", it's readable, with
good - though somewhat dated - drawings - but you should also be working
before a model if you use it. Bridgeman's books on "Drawing From Life"
provide a very structured approach to the figure, which is useful for
remembering the approximate relationships between things. I also like
Reginald Marsh's "Anatomy for Artists", but that may be because I really
like Dos Passos' "USA Trilogy", and Marsh did the illustrations for them.
BTW - if you can't find a model to draw from, then use yourself, and a
mirror or two. And pick up books of great drawings - there was a thread on
this earlier with some titles - and copy from them. ("Copy" as in trying to
understand the original artist's decisions, not just blind replication)
Good luck;
Chris
Vic20Owner
I do have Mayer's "Artists Handbook". It's great as a technical
reference for materials but is lacking in methods. I managed to find a
couple electronic versions of Loomis books on the internet, one of which
is called "Figure Drawing for all it's worth".
I almost ordered "The Natural way to draw" but may hold off for awhile
on that one. I'm afraid it'll take me down a long road of mindless
scribbling (at least thats what I get from what I've read here). It
does sound interesting though, in that it has a set of drawing
"exercises" to be practiced. Not sure how I feel about that. Opinions
welcome.
Thanks
-tom
Fred Mason
Check with you local recreation dept. they may offer some form of painting
or drawing classes you could work into your schedule.
Fred
"Vic20Owner" <REMOVETHIS...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Zu4Ib.154196$b01.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
Michael
> on that one. I'm afraid it'll take me down a long road of mindless
> scribbling (at least thats what I get from what I've read here). It
> does sound interesting though, in that it has a set of drawing
> "exercises" to be practiced. Not sure how I feel about that. Opinions
> welcome.
The exercises are so vague they're worthless. It's almost like a drawing as
a self meditation. I don't see why this book is so popular.
b b
Maybe it depends on how you learn best. I find that this book
describes very well the work we did in art school in the 60s -- an art
school that was well known for its firm grounding in drawing. The
exercises are not vague if you do them, not just read them. Many
people here talk about 'skills'. The skills we need to draw what we
see are the ones that we work on until they are physical second
nature. It is not a linear method, the brain doesn't work alone.
Putting your pencil to paper and concentrating on the 'feel' of the
object by focussing on edge or negative space is something you do not
KNOW until you have done it many many times with full attention.
Self meditation? What does that mean? Yes, the work of drawing is
done by your self and it is the best kind of meditation. Meditation
isn't meant to be a lazy pastime. The previous posts about getting the
impression are on the mark. You "get the impression" anew every time
you put your pencil to paper. I haven't taught so I can no longer
break it down to say what develops after that -- I could break it down
if I had energy and time I suppose but I haven't needed to up to now.
All I can say is that if you follow these exercises -- and others --
you end up with an orchestra that comes into play when you start to
draw. The channel is open to receive impressions and to carry out
complex drawings.
b b
>On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 07:29:29 +0100, "Michael"
><please_do...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> I almost ordered "The Natural way to draw" but may hold off for awhile
>>> on that one. I'm afraid it'll take me down a long road of mindless
>>> scribbling (at least thats what I get from what I've read here). It
>>> does sound interesting though, in that it has a set of drawing
>>> "exercises" to be practiced. Not sure how I feel about that. Opinions
>>> welcome.
>>
>>The exercises are so vague they're worthless. It's almost like a drawing as
>>a self meditation. I don't see why this book is so popular.
>>
............ I forgot to add (I start talking and then can't turn off)
that drawing isn't something that happens only on the paper after you
thought and measured a long time. It comes out of your gut as a
physical experience, not mental and not emotional.
There are artists who haven't studied a damn thing and break all
the rules and do convincing work. There aren't many.
Mani Deli
>On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 07:29:29 +0100, "Michael"
><please_do...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> I almost ordered "The Natural way to draw" Not sure how I feel about that. Opinions
>>> welcome.
someone wrote
>>The exercises are so vague they're worthless. It's almost like a drawing as
>>a self meditation. I don't see why this book is so popular.
Art schools are filled with teachers who can't draw and don't know
their craft. The book is for those who want inspiration rather than
information. In the end the achieve neither. Its full of pep talk.
> Maybe it depends on how you learn best. I find that this book
>describes very well the work we did in art school in the 60s
It certainly does describe the average Modern Art Academy from then to
this day.
>-- an art
>school that was well known for its firm grounding in drawing. The
>exercises are not vague if you do them, not just read them. Many
>people here talk about 'skills'.
We don't want any skills do we.
> The skills we need to draw what we
>see are the ones that we work on until they are physical second
>nature.
Sure, lets see the results.
>It is not a linear method, the brain doesn't work alone.
>Putting your pencil to paper and concentrating on the 'feel' of the
>object by focussing on edge or negative space is something you do not
>KNOW until you have done it many many times with full attention.
Nicolaides' most idiotic famous statement "THE SOONER YOU MAKE YOUR
FIRST FIVE THOUSAND MISTAKES THE SOONER YOU WILL BE ABLE TO CORRECT
THEM. Most students will spend a lifetime at this.
Imagine a math teacher telling you to figure out arithmetic and
assuring you that after 5000 adding mistakes you'll be able to correct
your result.
> Self meditation?
Known as art school mental masturbation. They have courses in this but
omit the proper name.
> What does that mean? Yes, the work of drawing is
>done by your self
This is rather hard to avoid.
> and it is the best kind of meditation. Meditation
>isn't meant to be a lazy pastime.
It isn't meant to be.
>The previous posts about getting the
>impression are on the mark. You "get the impression" anew every time
>you put your pencil to paper. I haven't taught so I can no longer
>break it down to say what develops after that -- I could break it down
>if I had energy and time I suppose but I haven't needed to up to now.
>All I can say is that if you follow these exercises -- and others --
>you end up with an orchestra that comes into play when you start to
>draw. The channel is open to receive impressions and to carry out
>complex drawings.
The usual meaningless BS! Complex drawing? Lets see yours.
No skill no art!
Tired of Modern Art? check http://www3.sympatico.ca/manideli/
Mani Deli
>that drawing isn't something that happens only on the paper after you
>thought and measured a long time. It comes out of your gut as a
>physical experience,
This is a good point for Modern Academic Art students to remember.
Their result often compares with what comes out of theirr gut.
> not mental and not emotional.
> There are artists who haven't studied a damn thing and break all
>the rules and do convincing work. There aren't many.
Those who don't know rules can't really break them.
Bob C
> The exercises are not vague if you do them, not just read them. Many
> people here talk about 'skills'. The skills we need to draw what we
> see are the ones that we work on until they are physical second
> nature. It is not a linear method, the brain doesn't work alone.
> Putting your pencil to paper and concentrating on the 'feel' of the
> object by focussing on edge or negative space is something you do not
> KNOW until you have done it many many times with full attention.
I understand completely. I've had the pleasure of knowing and taking art
courses from several local artists who have outstanding rendering skills
and work in a traditional realistic manner. They'd understand also. The
skills of knowing which marks to use, where to put them, and what to
make them say are more important than your manual skill at making the
marks.
Learning to draw what you see is a misnomer - human vision is about
knowledge, not images. Turning knowledge into image is a skill, but I've
noticed that many people who have a natural talent for that skill are
convinced that skill is all about being able to make your hand do what
your mind wants it to. These are the ones who expect their art
instruction to be little more than a cookbook of methods and techniques.
People without that natural talent who are taught in that manner come
away from the class fallaciously convinced that their lack of success is
due to the inability to make their hands move in the manner in which
their vision knows to be correct.
Instruction which focuses entirely on technique works for some people.
Then again, no instruction at all works for some people. Most students
I've taken classes with seem to do best with the type of instruction
you're talking about.
- Bob C.
b b
wrote:
>The usual meaningless BS! Complex drawing? Lets see yours.
Nope -- I don't do complex drawings -- it's not my thing -- when I
get a web page I'll post it here. However "a complex drawing" contains
all the knowledge you have.
Nikolaides statement about 5000 mistakes is simply another way of
saying GET STARTED. Don't worry about making mistakes. Those who do
nothing will never make a mistake.
Mani Deli
>Very well put. The Natural Way to Draw continues to be read and used
>because it works - and, as you said, you have to actually DO the exercises,
>and they amount to a lot of work over a period of time. Compare it to
>learning to play the piano. Reading the books is worthless, you have to sit
>at the instrument and work on the scales and exercises every day.
>
>This guy Mani Deli seems to look at art as a form of technical drawing or
>illustration. I don't think he knows what fine art is. Axonometric
>perspective? Plane geometry? Wow. Buy The Natural Way to Draw and use it as
>intended, and you will go a long way to being able to draw.
>
>That said, there is no substitute for instruction from a good teacher.
>
>Marcus Denning
>
>
>> Maybe it depends on how you learn best. I find that this book
>> describes very well the work we did in art school in the 60s -- an art
>> school that was well known for its firm grounding in drawing. The
>> exercises are not vague if you do them, not just read them. Many
>> people here talk about 'skills'. The skills we need to draw what we
>> see are the ones that we work on until they are physical second
>> nature. It is not a linear method, the brain doesn't work alone.
>> Putting your pencil to paper and concentrating on the 'feel' of the
>> object by focussing on edge or negative space is something you do not
>> KNOW until you have done it many many times with full attention.
>> Self meditation? What does that mean? Yes, the work of drawing is
>> done by your self and it is the best kind of meditation. Meditation
>> isn't meant to be a lazy pastime. The previous posts about getting the
>> impression are on the mark. You "get the impression" anew every time
>> you put your pencil to paper. I haven't taught so I can no longer
>> break it down to say what develops after that -- I could break it down
>> if I had energy and time I suppose but I haven't needed to up to now.
>> All I can say is that if you follow these exercises -- and others --
>> you end up with an orchestra that comes into play when you start to
>> draw. The channel is open to receive impressions and to carry out
>> complex drawings.
Mani Deli
>The Natural Way to Draw continues to be read and used
>because it works -
..for art teachers who can't draw in order to convince their students
that they can.
> and, as you said, you have to actually DO the exercises,
>and they amount to a lot of work over a period of time. Compare it to
>learning to play the piano.
---without learning the scales
> Reading the books is worthless, you have to sit
>at the instrument and work on the scales and exercises every day.
>
>This guy Mani Deli seems to look at art as a form of technical drawing or
>illustration.
Look at my art work. Tell us where you see technical drawing.
>I don't think he knows what fine art is.
Do tell us what fine art is.
> Axonometric perspective? Plane geometry? Wow.
That's too much for an Artzy fartzy bimbo.
>Buy The Natural Way to Draw
I agree.
> and use it as
>intended, and you will go a long way to being able to draw.
-like an eight year old.
>That said, there is no substitute for instruction from a good teacher.
>
>Marcus Denning
Lets see your work.
Mani Deli
>On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 13:58:22 -0500, Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca>
>wrote:
>
>>The usual meaningless BS! Complex drawing? Lets see yours.
>
> Nope -- I don't do complex drawings -- it's not my thing -- when I
>get a web page I'll post it here.
bet he doesn't
>However "a complex drawing" contains
>all the knowledge you have.
?
>Nikolaides statement about 5000 mistakes is simply another way of
>saying GET STARTED.
_on the way to a life of artistic failure.
> Don't worry about making mistakes. Those who do
>nothing will never make a mistake.
>
and those who only make mistakes might as well do nothing.
keith o'connor
working your time is limited to gathering information. Concentrate on
composition theory. Make a minimum of two small quick complete picture
composition sketches every day - no more than five minutes each - use your
memory for source material. At this stage don't waste time on painting -
don't consider selling your work - do it only for personal pleasure.
--
take care: Keith
The eye should not be lead where there is nothing to see.
Robert Henri - The Art Spirit
"Vic20Owner" <REMOVETHIS...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:kZJHb.149749$b01.3...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...