Drawing Books for Beginners
Jeff Topper
I have always had an "itch" to start drawing. I'm not artistically gifted
like some folks (who seem to draw well naturally) but really want to
dedicate the time and effort to drawing.
I know a class may be best but the classes around my area are VERY expensive
and I cannot afford to take them. Are there any books you could suggest for
the absolute beginner? Something that described the basics but also provides
detailed instructions and exercises?
Thank you!
Jeff
Marc Sabatella
> I know a class may be best but the classes around my area are VERY
expensive
> and I cannot afford to take them. Are there any books you could
suggest for
> the absolute beginner?
People seem to either love it or hate it, but I think "Drawing On The
Right Side Of The Brain" is a good book for beginners. It does a better
job than most of understanding and addressing the ways in which
beginners are likely to get themselves really screwed up through
misconceptions of what the process is supposed to be about. And unlike
the situation with painting, I think it quite possible to learn pretty
well from a book.
--------------
Marc Sabatella
ma...@outsideshore.com
The Outside Shore
Music, art, & educational materials:
http://www.outsideshore.com/
Ray9356
Do NOT purchase "right side of the brain".
Bert Dodson's "Keys To Drawing" teaches the same approach but in a simpler,
less esoteric manner and is a more complete "course" in drawing. It is hands
down, the greatest how to book on drawing ever written.
Dilettante
> Bert Dodson's "Keys To Drawing" teaches the same approach but in a simpler,
> less esoteric manner and is a more complete "course" in drawing. It is hands
> down, the greatest how to book on drawing ever written.
The proof is in the pudding.
Dilettante
Mani Deli
The proof is in the drawing, which I suspect the Dillettant doesn't
dare show.
No skill no art!
Tired of Modern Art? check http://www3.sympatico.ca/manideli/
Michael
I totally disagree. I couldn't draw before I read this book (and did every
one of the exercises!).. you love it or hate it, read the reviews on
amazon.com
Mani Deli
>People seem to either love it or hate it, but I think "Drawing On The
>Right Side Of The Brain" is a good book for beginners.
-for those who plan to remain beginners for the rest of their lives.
Check out his beginner work at
>http://www.outsideshore.com/
Mike Stengl
> "Marc Sabatella" wrote:
>
> >People seem to either love it or hate it, but I think "Drawing On The
> >Right Side Of The Brain" is a good book for beginners.
>
> -for those who plan to remain beginners for the rest of their lives.
>
> Check out his beginner work at
> >http://www.outsideshore.com/
many of his works are quite pleasant mani and you could perhaps learn
from his use of color, i don't think you made much of a point here
beyond disagreeing with him.
Pan T. Waste
eatn...@humboldt1.com says...
>many of his works are quite pleasant mani and you could perhaps learn
>from his use of color, i don't think you made much of a point here
>beyond disagreeing with him.
I had not looked at Marc's work before reading
your reply, above, but what I found interesting
in looking at his web page full of thumbnails
of his 2003 production (aside from his prodigious
output) is how similar his oils and pastels
appear in thumbnail format. This is something
I've noticed with other artists, including myself,
who work in multiple mediums. For example: I have
to label on the back of my paintings whether they
were done in acrylic or oil since I cannot tell
them apart myself after a passage of time.
And I share Marc's prediliction toward bold colors.
Marc Sabatella
art... and even for the possible compliment. My recollection is that
last year he called it "third rate". If he now thinks of it as only
"fifth rate", that probably means it's getting better.
> I had not looked at Marc's work before reading
> your reply, above, but what I found interesting
> in looking at his web page full of thumbnails
> of his 2003 production (aside from his prodigious
> output) is how similar his oils and pastels
> appear in thumbnail format. This is something
> I've noticed with other artists, including myself,
> who work in multiple mediums. For example: I have
> to label on the back of my paintings whether they
> were done in acrylic or oil since I cannot tell
> them apart myself after a passage of time.
Well, of course, there is no similar difficulty telling the difference
between pastel and oil in person, at least not up close. But I'm of two
minds on the whole idea of having similar styles between media. On the
one hand, it might seem that having similar styles shows you are in
command of your aesthetic vision, and are able to express that vision
independently of the means. On the other hand, it might make you
question why you work in more than one medium at all, as you are losing
out on whatever aesthetic benefits the medium itself is capable of
giving you. That is, if you aren't taking advantage of whatever the
unique properties of a medium are, why use it?
Frankly, my reasons for trying oil (after gaining some experience in
pastel) were. for the most part, not aesthetic at all but practical -
framing issues and public perception of oil as more "serious" than
pastel.
The one aesthetic concern had to do with color, but it came with a
caveat as well. In pastel, my natural inclination is toward bold,
intense color - ideally, about as far as you can go without looking
cartoonish (and I've crossed that line on many occasions). The medium
itself promotes this - if you use intensely colored sticks of pastel,
and don't go out of your wqay to overblend, you end with with intense
color in the finished painting. Whereas in my limited experience with
watercolor, the medium works against you in two ways. One, by allowing
you to mix colors more easily than with pastel, there is a tendency to
get more involved on "matching" the colors you see rather than
interpreting them using a fixed set of more intense colors. Second, of
course, its so easy to accidentally create mud. But on the other hand,
while none of my watercolor experiments were particularly successful,
some of them did succeed in capturing a certain mood through their more
subtle color tones than I generally achieve with pastel.
I had some hopes that oil would allow me to achieve this in some places
while still keeing more of the sense of the chunky intense colors of my
pastels in other places. On the whole, I'd say it is working (and I'm
getting better at it in more recent paintings I haven't posted yet). I
still struggle to keep colors as vibrant as I'd like, but it is much
easier to create more muted passages than in pastel (given my reluctance
to actually use sticks of pastel that are already muted). So in this
sense, I think I *am* taking advantage of the different media for what
they offer, even though there are obvious stylistic similarities as well
(which also makes me happy).
Pan T. Waste
>Well, of course, there is no similar difficulty telling the difference
>between pastel and oil in person, at least not up close.
Of course! There is always the "difference" in
surface appearances from one medium to the next.
But if you know an artist's "style" from having
experienced that artist's works over time, it
usually is easy to pick the works out from those
of others in mixed company settings.
Here's an example for you. I was looking through
a book just acquired that has numerous artists
represented - all of whom are contemporary. And
as I was flipping pages I suddenly stopped, and
thought to myself, "that sure looks familiar."
And I've not seen the artist or her works in at
least 25 years, but sure enough, when I looked at
the credits, it was her work! It wasn't the
subject matter that was familiar but rather the
"style" in which it was rendered.
Incidentally, the book is titled:
ART OF THE AMERICAN WEST, by Caroline Lipscott
and Julie Christiansen-Dull, 1999.
All of the art work is "realistic" and most is
on the usual western theme. I recommend it to
anyone who appreciates finely rendered subject
matter in a variety of mediums, from scratchboard
to oils and mixed media.
Mani Deli
<ma...@outsideshore.com> wrote:
>I suppose I should thank Mani for encouraging people to look at my
>art... and even for the possible compliment.
Please do!
> My recollection is that
>last year he called it "third rate". If he now thinks of it as only
>"fifth rate", that probably means it's getting better.
Let the viewer judge!
I believe that viewers should look and compare. I usually write "take
a look and decide for yourself." If you find that a help,good.
Just because I believe that I've seen better work in the Dollar
discount store doesn't mean that everyone agrees with me. So I repeat
take a look at his artwork and decide for yourself.
Lots here dislike what I do. So be it.
Mani Deli
have ever seen and it is now available. There are several other superb
samples if you do a google search of Bargue.
Angel Blowing a Trumpet, after Michelangelo Lithograph for Cours de
dessin (ca. 1870)
http://www.arttimesjournal.com/art/reviews/janreview3.htm
Charles Bargue, a relative unknown to connoisseurs and patrons of 19th
century art, was in fact known well enough by his peers to be asked,
along with Jean-Léon Gérôme, to produce a course of drawing for art
students of the prestigious academic schools of Paris. Published by
the equally prestigious company of Goupil & Cie, the course (Cours de
dessin) consisted of three distinct sections: Drawing After Casts
(Modèles d’Après la Bosse); Copying Master Drawings (Modèles d’Après
les Maîtres); and Preparation for Drawing Académies (Exercices au
Fusain pour Préparer a l’étude de l’Académie d’Après Nature). Whereas
the first two sections were meant for the instruction of all art
students – commercial as well as fine art – the last section was
reserved exclusively for those fine art students who intended to go on
to serious painting careers. Designed to proceed from the simplest
objects – eyes, ears, noses – to more involved – hands, feet, limbs –
and finally to the most complex full-bodied figure studies, the
approach was absolutely realistic, the entire course based on the
assumption that the serious artist (again, whether commercial or fine)
tacitly subscribed to the academic canon that a strict imitation of
the natural world was the principal aim of art and that, above all,
the human figure represented the supreme creation of nature.
Part Three, the section reserved for the fine art student, offered a
series of exemplary examples of drawings from the live model. Since
the Cours de dessin was published by Goupil and Cie in "loose-leaf"
form, it was no great difficulty to translate the book into an
exhibition, each page serving as an individually framed "work,"
presented in their proper order so that the visitor might view the
course from beginning to end simply by walking around the gallery –
and this The Dahesh Museum has accomplished. Though especially of
interest to the art student, the exhibit is of universal interest in
the it clearly sets forth what efforts went into the education of the
19th century would-be artist. In light of much that we are subjected
to today as "art," this in-depth look back clearly demonstrates what
we have lost by neglecting such instruction. One need only reflect on
the by-gone age of great figure painting – work, say, of Boucher,
Bouguereau, or Ingres – to get some idea of the loss. And when we
further consider that such "moderns" as Vincent van Gogh and Pablo
Picasso availed themselves of precisely this course – examples of
which are part of the exhibition – we can see that we may well have
thrown out the baby with the bath water when present-day institutions,
succumbing to the pressure of trends, rashly dropped the art of
draftsmanship from their art curricula. So much the worse for those
patrons who must diligently seek the isolated studio or school for
artwork that honors the craft in all its past glory and
accomplishment. Almost as if to show (in addition to the examples of
van Gogh and Picasso) just what might be accomplished by absorbing the
lessons Cours de dessin offers, the exhibit closes with approximately
50 paintings and drawings of Charles Bargue – not only a surprise but
perhaps the highlight of the show.
*"Charles Bargue: The Art of Drawing" (thru Feb 8, ’04): The Dahesh
Museum of Art, 580 Madison Ave., NYC (212) 759-0606. A complete and
fully-illustrated catalogue is available: Charles Bargue with the
Collaboration of Jean-Léon Gérôme: Drawing Course by Gerald M.
Ackerman. 336 pp.; 97/8 x 10 7/8; B/W & Color Illus.; Appendices;
Glossary; Notes. $45.00 Softcover, $60.00 Hardcover