Love your errors
 

I confess that I get turned on by discovering and correcting errors in my work. There is nothing better than staring at a piece trying to work out why something doesn't look right and then finding the culprit. Fortunately I make rather a lot of errors and since I never find them all at the beginning of the process I get to prolong the pleasure of correction throughout the painting or drawing. What a boring job art would be if we eliminated these moments.

Peter:
Image of error:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...rom_moscow.jpg

There are exceptions
 

Sometimes it is better to cut your losses or not to attack (Napoleon should never have taken on Wellington without being sure where Blucher was). On the other hand why continue with a painting where all issues have been resolved at the start? This would become a mere painting by numbers exercise. The excitement is in the process not the result and where is art without excitement? I love to see drawing marks and corrections and the visual residue of the thought processes of the artist as they developed the piece - Coldstream is a classic example.

"I love to see drawing marks and corrections and the visual residue of the thought processes of the artist as they developed the piece - Coldstream is a classic example."

A, but not everyone cares to express their human frailties. Artist of the modern day are super men and women. Didn't you know. LOL

One of my favorite artist to listen to is Lafell. The man newer stops and one is challenged to find meaning to his words. I think him a grate artist by the way.

I too suck in my middle-aged gut when a pretty girl passes but there are many situations in which a before, during and after enhances the impact of the final result.

Thanks for introducing me to Lefell - powerful, direct and textural portraits - not so keen on his still lifes.

Great subject, Peter.

Mirrors, putting the image into Photoshop, and absence from the work for a time all seem to help. Even taking a digital photo and looking at the image in the camera can jog the brain to see something that it missed.
And drawing, drawing, drawing to better "see" before committing to paint.

Pardon my ignorance, but who is Coldstream? Would you mind sharing a link to his or her work?

Hi Julie,

I am all for all forms of measurement that our senses and limbs can give us but I draw the line at computer programmes doing the seeing for us. Superimposed images in photoshop for example do not seem more ethical in my book than tracing. Clients are buying our skill not that of technology and anyway how can we really measure our own skills if we resort to software? What enjoyment is there in using software to locate our errors?

Draw draw draw is excellent advice but only if done in a spirit of constant self criticism and rigour. I know that is not an exceptional view and that most here would subscribe to it but it should not be completed with draw draw draw then fix the problems in photoshop. Our eyes and thumbs are all we should need and if that is not enough then perhaps we are in the wrong job.

Tracing, projection and software may be great equalisers but is that what we really want? Here for example I want to be able to compare my skills, such as they are, with my peers and how can this be done when the peer in question might have traced the image then corrected periodically in photoshop?

William Coldstream - co-founder of the Euston Road School. He was prof at the Slade school in London from the 30's I think until the 70's and the dominent figure in analytical realist painting. My tutor on my foundation course had studied under him. Ilaria I know has posted one of his paintings and the Tate has several on their site.

Peter, but we want to be known as artists, didn't you know. We are in the 21st century, the age of tech. Where have you been?

I remember when I would have tried anything in order to receive pear recognition. But, now that I have gone the rout of painful training what bliss. Even though I have the training but it is just the start. The fun is just beginning.

It is strange to see, but understandable, that many "artists" of today think that they will save cash by cutting corners on professional training. Sure, we have self taught "artists" but many of the same dare not, for fear of exposure, do life sittings.

Someone has asked the question "when does one become a pro" answer (not word for word) "when you have painted 1000 portraits." To this I would add -from life-.

I remember when I first came on this forum. It was just about the time when I was faced with a commission which I was to execute from a photo a bad one at that. Boy, I was stumped! I had no idea what to do.

I was so used to working from life that this, bad photo, for a surprise portrait, was a BIG challenge for me. I had no idea how to use Photo Shop in order to manipulate photos to arrive at a good image to work from.

Time has passed, lessons learn't. Today, I happily get out to coffee shops, parks and where ever I find people sitting still and I draw. What bliss. One learns about shadows, bad lighting, tonal separation, speed and accuracy, and the list is endless. One gets recognition as well.

Many will wish to see what you are doing but don't be scared, if they like what they see give them your card.

Hey, Peter, I don't mean trace from Photoshop. I mean put a photo of the painting next to the photo reference and look back and forth to find out what is wrong. Good eye training!

Photoshop can be a useful tool.

This sums up one of the most exhilarating aspects of the painting process for me:

That's another way of describing the ongoing process of pushing edges back and forth as you lay down layers of different colors against each other. Freehand drawing keeps your eye sharp and your arm relaxed. I wouldn't bypass it for anything. There are inevitably mistakes, but if you take them in stride rather than get anxious about them, then the resolving of them will be an exciting (and, okay, sometimes frustrating) challenge.

That is fine for me as long as it does not go the step further and superimpose images etc but why bother when you can have the image on your monitor at sight size and compare directly? The bottom line though is that as long as it is our own eyes doing the job there is no violation of integrity.

Alex
 

I wholeheartedly agree and frustration is a good thing anyway in a ying yang dualism.

Golfers also buy anything that is promised to improve their scores and sometimes it works but they don

"but statues were always obliging"
 

Here is one I had fun with a few days ago. Gave out a few visit cards as well.

It was done on a A5 120g Canson pad. Someone asked me why I was drawing it so small. Not sure if they wanted to see a bigger version of the same drawing? I explained that it was drawn in proportion to the paper size in order to create illusion of distance.

I had lots of fun with this one. I think I will go out today and draw. Such a nice day outside. It would be a shame not to enjoy it. What a blessing He is so good to me.

Here is one
 

of those Parisian statues.

Nice atmosphere in that drawing Mischa.

No statue find a plaster
 

this is a still life using a plaster bust I made of my best friend at art school.

but people are best
 

a previous girlfriend

I think the best way to learn and improve your skill level is to work through the frustrations of it all and not settle until you are satisfied. This thread really strikes home with me this month. I spent a couple of months working on this bust for a client when all I had to work from was one ancient photo from 1860 of this woman. I thought it would be easy getting it to look like her from the one angle

Bravo
 

Bravo Heidi. I think the before and after shots show that the rigour and honesty led to a far superior piece. I am painting my youngest daughter at the moment and had to move not one but both arms yesterday as I realised they were simply in the wrong place and I was so pleased I had seen this. Why I had not seen it before is a mystery all of us experience but once we find a way to 'notice' the mistake there is only one thing to do and correct it no matter how finished the part was.

I am gobsmacked that you can work from photos yet produce such wonderful results. I found making busts difficult enough with the person in front of me and with a large pair of calipers to take measurements with so how you do it with only one or two photo references with not even a full range of round the head shots is beyond me and I take my hat off to you.

Heidi, I totally agree with this:

[QUOTE=Heidi Maiers]I think the best way to learn and improve your skill level is to work through the frustrations of it all and not settle until you are satisfied. . . . It

Thanks you two! Yes, most of it is just my best guess judging from that one photo of what the rest of her might look like. That, and very good descriptions from relatives, which helped a lot. At minimum, she at least had to look convincingly human, and the rework helped there.

The smarter thing to do would have been to find a friend with similar bone structure and had her model for me. I had been studying faces like crazy all month in all of the meetings i have to attend during the week - looking for planes and junctures that are common to all faces, but slightly different on each. Recommend that everyone does that - it's a real eye opener (just don't let people catch you staring at them!)

LOL - Guilty! After doing a difficult portrait with poor references, I caught myself staring at certain types of mouths to get a better idea of facial construction.
Must have been very disconcerting for the poor store cashiers...