Tracing to learn - fast - Page 2

Enzie Shahmiri · 04-23-2005, 05:59 PM

Every time I think I have read every post here I keep finding a new one.

Well, I have to say that when I want a dead on likeness I grid. I can't say that it is a time saving method compared to drawing freehand, but I am not faced with nasty surprises half way into the process.

One thing that working with a grid has taught me is to see everything in abstract shapes. As the shapes kept falling into place (sort of like a puzzle), it became necessary to learn the value relationship between each shape. This alone has been a god send, because I have always struggled with value relationships.

I love to draw and my sketchbook is full with images of people with noses too long, chins too full and god knows what other errors. But the purpose of the sketchbook is just for quick observations and to get something down in the shortest amount of time. This allows for a certain freedom of hand eye coordinations, which gets better over time. As a matter of fact I just recently discovered an old sketchbook and had to laugh pretty hard at what I was seeing. Just about everyone in it has some malformation and looked more like creatures out of horror movies. But imagine how satisfied I was to actually be able to see the growth from one book to another. So I agree with Karin, using shortcut tools like tracing can help you grow as an artist, as long as you balance it with free hand drawing as well.

John Crowther · 04-23-2005, 09:06 PM

I missed this thread first time around, and I answer now with a great deal of trepidation, since the subject seemed to arouse quite a bit of passion. So I quickly add that this is just my opinion. Still, I was surprised that tracing had the approval of so many as a way of learning to draw. It's a way for beginners to get satisfactory results quickly, but getting quick results isn't part of learning anything, building a solid foundation is. And learning to do anything well is a laborious process without shortcuts. We mustn't confuse "quick fixes" with effective pedagogy. Going back to the music analogy, tracing is the equivalent of singing karaoke. The essence of learning to draw is hand-eye coordination, getting the hand to obey the impulses it gets from the brain. The way to do that is constant practice. Copying from the masters, or from photographs, is extremely helpful insofar as it brings the eye and the brain into the process. Tracing doesn't do it, because it bypasses both the eye and the brain. It's a purely mechanical process that doesn't even really develop appreciation for form, since all you do is see lines through an opaque piece of paper. And understanding form is the essence of good drawing.

And by the way, Michelangelo didn't trace on the Sistine ceiling, he transferred to the wet plaster drawings from full-size "cartoons" that were a penultimate step that followed on the heels of many, many drawings made from life models.

Again, just my opinion. I'm not trying to change anyone's way of doing things. Honest.

John C.

Rebecca Willoughby · 03-16-2002, 04:24 AM

I have to agree with Karin on this one.

I spent 12 years in art schools, from a wonderful high school art teacher, private lessons, Georgia Tech, and LSU. I have multiple art degrees and I absolutely love to draw. I always have. Since I was two years old I would draw everything and everyone. And just to toot my own horn so to speak, I am very good at it.

I would study my father's vet books on animal muscle and bone structure and do countless drawings of our horses and dogs and foxes and any other animals my father had at the time.
But right now it is easier and faster for me to trace my drawings under my paintings than to draw them, especially my large ones.

I also run transparency acetate through my ink jet printer and lay it over my paintings to double check facial features and hand details.

Art for art's sake is a wonderful thing, but portraiture is a business for me and with two small children I need all of the extra time I can get. To me drawing isn't a chore. It is a luxury. And since I am currently driving a Dodge minivan and not a Lexus, I can't afford it right now.

Margaret Elvin · 03-19-2002, 07:24 PM

Wonderful post Rebecca. I'm a busy parent, and have two part-time jobs. You've nicely summed up my feelings on this subject. I hereby give myself permission to trace or project or whatever.Thank you!

Stanka, thanks for reminding me what a great habit it is to carry around a sketch book. It's nice to know that a pro still benefits from it. I'm getting mine out again.

Karin, Thank you for the encouragement and instruction on copying the masters. My fingers are practically itching to do so!!!

Steven, Have you considered writing an art textbook?! You are more than qualified, as you must be aware. Thanks for the (original) reference material on sight drawing.

Lon, LOL's on your tracers anonymous post! Made me laugh.

-Margaret

Steven Sweeney · 03-21-2002, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Steven, Have you considered writing an art textbook?

Thanks, but no way. I have an intense but short attention span and I'd probably . . .

Oh . . . right. I'd probably get to about Chapter 3 and start obsessing about those cello lessons I've always wanted to take.

Mark Branscum · 10-18-2002, 03:11 AM

OK, allow me my 2 cents. Just a question...

Tracing is interesting thought: as a teacher how would one teach his or her students to trace the live model and, uh, wouldn't that tickle the model a bit? Hehe - OK, couldn't resist.

Mark

Michael Fournier · 10-21-2002, 09:11 PM

Why do we think anyone can learn to draw?

Sure, most can improve beyond their current ability, but that does not mean that they will ever be great. After all, I can learn to play golf and with practice I can play better, but I will never be Tiger Woods. Many might say that it is because I did not start as young as he did. But the truth is, if I tried to hit a golf ball at the age he started, I would not even hit the ball - never mind hit it well.

Most of us accept that some people were born with the ability to be great at an athletic pursuit and others are not, and some are so non-athletic that no matter how much they practice they will always stink. I feel that the same is true for art. Most can improve, yes, so I would not discourage anyone from drawing and painting for enjoyment if that is what they want. Who knows, they may get quite good.

But I also feel that some people were born with an ability, a God-given talent if you will, that puts their ability way beyond others. And the more they work at it the better they get. But it is much easier for them - it is natural.

We all started as children drawing for fun and along the way those who had that God-given talent for art began to draw things as they saw them and not as symbols that represented the world. This talent shows at an early age: if you have it, you know it - you were the one who stopped drawing trees that looked like lollipops before anyone told you that is not what trees looked like. And if you have this talent you do not need to trace, you may choose to trace to copy a drawing to canvas or to speed things up a bit when under a deadline or as a learning tool. But I would hope that drawing freehand brings you much more enjoyment and sense of accomplishment. Also, IMO, accuracy is not all there is to good drawing.

Now I will admit that there are some who have this talent and did not develop it, and so they are not as good as they should be. And there are others who were not as gifted, that with hard work, have gotten quite good. And the amount of this talent we have varies from one to another. But there is no denying that there are some that are just blessed. At the same time, there are some who, no matter how much they practice, will never have it.

So, yes, just as we can teach music we can teach art, but we must always remember just as there are very few Mozarts, there are also very few Bouguereaus.

So I will say IMO there is no shortcut to learning to draw well. Tracing can help you get to the end but without the ability to see, even tracing won't help you. In the end, only those with a true ability to draw ever will be any good at it. The rest of us must struggle with our weakness and learn to make up for what we lack in talent with hard work.

And the part I hate to say, but really feel is true, is some people should just put down the paintbrush and back away from the easel before someone gets hurt.

Peter Jochems · 10-28-2002, 07:02 PM

Michelangelo traced the forms on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. Just a thought...

Peter

Mark Branscum · 10-28-2002, 08:21 PM

Transferring is a bit different from tracing to learn, IMHO.

If I draw free form for instance, I can then transfer the form to canvas or to a ceiling.

The idea of searching for an easier method of learning is a good one. I believe we all are doing that to some degree: trying to master a method and learn what is wrong with it so we might make it better.

Tracing a form might familiarize you with the form, but I believe that's all it would do. The familiarity will assist you when you step away from tracing and endeavor to draw what you see freehand.

Then being familiar at that point would help. But no matter what, you will have to learn like everyone else, with a lot of hard work and practice.

As I mentioned in my other post with a little humor: trace a live model, or a live landscape... in order to accomplish these tasks they are back to square one, even if they are familiar with anatomy. To draw from life requires more than anatomical knowledge.

Ever see some doctors draw? My uncle is a bone specialist, surgeon. I have seen him draw out the skeleton. You know it's accurate as far as a skeleton goes, but its not pretty. (LOL)

The fundamentals of drawing or learning to draw simply must be put into practice if one is ever going to learn to draw.

My 2 cents - take it for what it's worth and I hope it is a help.

Mark

Steven Sweeney · 10-29-2002, 04:09 AM

Quote:

Tracing a form might familiarize you with the form, but I believe that's all it would do.

In the sense in which tracing is suggested here as an exercise, the point isn't familiarity with the subject, but with the choreography of line. What you're doing in these exercises is training your mind and hand to absorb and replicate the process of creating descriptive, accurate line that, paradoxically, disappears in its representation of form.

Ted Seth Jacobs' introductory remarks to his "Drawing With An Open Mind" are instructive as to what we're on about when we try to represent subjects and shapes within them with contour outlines. I very highly recommend the book, not just for the drawing instruction but for the profundity of the philosophy that Jacobs imparts along with it.

In sports, for example, there are many "Inner" regimens -- "Inner Tennis", "Inner Golf" -- in which the practitioners are encouraged to cultivate a mental image of what they're intending to do. Tracing, in the sense urged here, isn't about a scribe's copying of texts. It's about training mind and muscle memory to learn and remember what an accurate, uninterrupted, intentional line of definition and description -- whether contour or shading, hatchmarks or blending -- feels like, so that when you're not tracing, when you're working from life (or even resketching from another source), you can do the same with confidence and accuracy. Having worked through the scales, you can sight-read the sonata. It makes all those piano -- and drawing -- lessons worthwhile.