Tracing and transferring images

[David Dowbyhuz]

Of course, you're right, Jacqueline. The "ends" must stand alone, and be judged on their merit. My only contention with "should be's", or worse still "must be's" is that there are ALWAYS many ways to get from here to there. The means are never meant to, and cannot, "justify" the ends, if the ends stink on ice.

[Steven Sweeney]

Jacqueline, it sounds as though you've rubbed elbows with a few folks who perhaps were jealous of your interest in and talent for drawing well, but they had their agendas and you have your own work to do. Part of their work, perhaps even unknown to them, might well have been to provide the sort of provocation that would make you all the more diligent in perfecting your skills, a sort of irritant around which the pearl of your own talent would develop. Now you are privileged to have acquired a good deal of facility in the drawing arts and you're poised to take advantage of the swelling of interest in well-crafted realistic representational work. I'm unable to attribute this paraphrase, but I recently read someone's advice to the effect that "Some of the Divine Masters who come into your life are going to be real SOB's."

As to this matter of the ends justifying the means, my current perspective is that while I am of course always delighted to have a piece turn out well, and I'm not embarrassed to have others share in my delight, the truth is that I'm usually a little disappointed when a piece is finished, when the "ends" have arrived, because it's in the "means" that I have all my fun. That's where I get to play, to solve problems, to work out ideas, to watch an image come alive from underneath my brush. And while I have said earlier that, yes, sometimes I just have to -- or for whatever reasons simply choose to -- use various mechanical aids in the process, I find that to the extent I do so, some of the fun that is really the only reason I paint is diminished. The integrity of the final piece may not be compromised, but my enjoyment of the process, and what I learn from that process, is, and so I try to keep to a minimum my reliance on implements or procedures that displace part of the creative fun. I'm hedonistic, I guess -- I do what's necessary to maximize my pleasure in this beauty-filled vocation.

Steven

[Jacqueline Dunster]

Jacqueline, it sounds as though you've rubbed elbows with a few folks who perhaps were jealous of your interest in and talent for drawing well, but they had their agendas and you have your own work to do. Part of their work, perhaps even unknown to them, might well have been to provide the sort of provocation that would make you all the more diligent in perfecting your skills, a sort of irritant around which the pearl of your own talent would develop.

What a lovely way you have of putting that!

Yes, in part, they made me stronger in my resolve. But there wasn't much risk that I'd waver in that. I was (and am) quite fixed upon honing my drawing and painting skills. I was just appalled by their apathy. It wasn't just the tracing, it was the unwillingness to pick up a pencil or brush for any project that wasn't required. If they weren't being paid for it, or required to do it for a class, they just didn't do it. I thought that was quite a joyless way to approach art. Yes, indeed. Quite a few bad experiences I've had!

"Some of the Divine Masters who come into your life are going to be real SOB's."

Ain't that the truth.

As to this matter of the ends justifying the means, my current perspective is that while I am of course always delighted to have a piece turn out well, and I'm not embarrassed to have others share in my delight, the truth is that I'm usually a little disappointed when a piece is finished, when the "ends" have arrived, because it's in the "means" that I have all my fun.

Exactly!!!

And while I have said earlier that, yes, sometimes I just have to -- or for whatever reasons simply choose to -- use various mechanical aids in the process, I find that to the extent I do so, some of the fun that is really the only reason I paint is diminished.

That's the way I see it as well. If it is necessary to use some mechanical means, it is, but that doesn't mean that drawing and painting is some sort of punishment. It isn't a "chore" that needs to be gotten through as soon as possible. It's a delight.

I obviously have been soured by encountering people who did not have this feeling of "delight". Their attitude towards drawing and tracing was just one manifestation of that.

I'm hedonistic, I guess -- I do what's necessary to maximize my pleasure in this beauty-filled vocation.

What a beautiful, poetic way of putting it! Unfortunately, I guess none of us can compell someone else to see the joy in the process. If they don't feel that joy, they don't, I guess.

The thing that primarily prompted me to start this thread was a reader review on Amazon.com. The attitude was kind of like "don't waste your time with this book - it's full of all that boring drawing stuff". Such a discouraging attitude. I really have a problem with that. I disagree (strongly) with people who are actively trying to discourage other artists from developing further art skills. As if it's such a miserable drudgery, that it should be done away with as soon as something "easier" comes along (like tracing).

The thing is, some "shortcuts" and "aids" just can't be used all the time (IMO). I don't know how a person can never learn how to draw a thing, and still think that it "doesn't matter", "doesn't make any difference". Well, I shouldn't say that absolutely. In some art styles, for some kinds of paintings, it probably doesn't matter. But the reason that artists have been drawing for ages is that it is still an important and vital skill. It is not unecessary or outdated. It's not a "waste of time". And that's the attitude I almost got from that Amazon book review. Such things just get me worked up sometimes, I guess!

David: sure, there are many ways to get to the same place. Each artist has different backgrounds, different "angles". The work must be good, that's the bottom line.

[Mike McCarty]

Jacqueline, I think there are two tracks going here. One is the relationship that a painter has with his/her art. This can be very complex and personal. The other is the relationship a finished painting has with its intended audience. This, albeit varied from person to person, to me is less complicated.

I don't mean this comment for you Jacqualine but just as a general observation. It seems that "suffering" has played a big part for the artist. The more suffering that went into the art the better it must be. My God, you mean he laid on his back and painted the ceiling? And it took how long? How could anyone find fault when there was so much suffering?

I wish us all wonderful suffering.

[Mike McCarty]

Just a follow up thought. I think the issue of tracing, projecting, photography and all other related mechanical helpery is related to our belief that there should be a struggle (my ref. to suffering.) To painstakingly draw is to struggle, to trace or to photograph is not to struggle. It's not fair that I should struggle and you not. But the point that I would make is that, as unfair as it may be, it's all wrapped up in the finished product.

Could you, if faced with two hypothetically same paintings, give a tenth of one percent more credit to the one which was rendered without any mechaninal means? Maybe you could but in fact historical beginnings don't usually travel with the art.

Can you imagine in the upcoming art competitions in Phil. and N.Y. having a form to fill out which asks the entrant certain questions about the genesis of each piece submitted? Now that would be interesting. Then you would see a real serious discussion on this topic.

And may I say for the record that I have not traced as an adult. Nor have I ... well, yes I have done that but I would never, no wait I've done that too. Oh well I don't trace.

[David Dowbyhuz]

To painstakingly draw is to struggle, to trace or to photograph is not to struggle. It's not fair that I should struggle and you not.

I think you hit a nail on it's collective head, Mike. You've made me smile!

All you struggler's feel free to squirm.

(I've never traced either, ever since I discovered what Wonder Woman really looks like without her clothes. )

[Jacqueline Dunster]

Oh, I'm sure there's an element of "you're not suffering enough!" in my feelings, but it's also much more than that.

I think it's a terrible disservice to tell a "newbie" artist that drawing is unnecessary. Because they may find out later that it is - that they would have, and should have, learned how to do it.

It's sort of like asking a little kid if they want piano lessons. They may say no at the time, thinking that it sounds "boring" and "stuffy". But when they are older, they'll envy others who have that ability, and will regret not learning when they were younger. (Of course, nothing's stopping them from learning it at any time, but it's always better to start sooner rather than later.) So, when I read a book review where someone says "Don't learn that boring drawing stuff!" I get upset. I think, don't tell people that. Choose that for yourself, if you wish, but don't ever discourage other people from learning.

Another thing - I've seen a lot of "traced" work, and usually I can see something "missing". Also not to be forgotten is the fact that when a person knows how to draw, they can draw from life, or perhaps even draw things from imagination. So, learning how to draw isn't about "suffering", it's also enhancing what an artist is able to do. I've seen the works of people who can only trace, and I've seen the works of artists who can draw freehand (and can enhance and alter their artwork) and I find that very often, the person who can draw has a wider range of "looks" and subjects they can draw. This is not hard-and-fast, of course, and I will repeat that if the finished work is good, it's good, tracing or no.

But thinking from the viewpoint of someone offering advice to an artist who is starting out, I'd never tell them to not bother to learn how to draw. I'd never tell them that "there is a simpler way", and preach the virtues of tracing. That is limiting. After all, a person who draws can also trace, or grid, or draw standing on their head. A person who can only trace can only...trace. I think people should be aware of the consquences of choosing tracing instead of learning how to draw. But if they choose to do trace anyway - hey - that's their business.

I hope this makes sense!

[Mike McCarty]

"But thinking from the viewpoint of someone offering advice to an artist who is starting out, I'd never tell them to not bother to learn how to draw. I'd never tell them that "there is a simpler way"

I would never give such advice. This is silly advise and should be tossed without regard. I think drawing is a wonderful skill. I practice it almost everyday. I would do nothing but encourage anyone to work hard and become skilled at drawing. For me personally, tracing is crossing the line (sorry) but my argument is this: be true to yourself, and arrive at completion with a happy heart and with as good a work as you can muster. People will judge the outcome not the process.

Have a nice weekend, Mike

[David Dowbyhuz]

Let me offer some concilliatory words too, Jacqueline. Mike and I were having a little fun, but it wasn't meant to be at your expense. I can tell you're sincere, and we came across a little less-than. Sorry.

The fundamentals of our art (yours, mine, all of us) are simply that ... fundamental. Skipping steps to become mock-proficient at a "trick" (tracing) does both you and the subject a disservice. I will always be on the side of those who advocate eliminating short-cuts until you learn your craft. If you can't create without tracing or grids you've diminished your efforts. For some, this is a legitimate limitation, and shouldn't be a badge of shame. Enjoy what you do at costs!

All the best,
Dave

I know exectly what you mean. I've always felt the same way you do. I never trace, to me its a sin. It's always been freehand drawing for me. I'am only 26 but have been drawing all my life. And I do think alot of artists do rely on tracing and grids. And computers make it easier for people to just pop things out of the printer and think they're artists. I am self taught and believe in drawing the old-fashioned way, no tracing, grids or computers. Just plain old freehand. And knowing that I made a portrait with my skill from a blank sheet of paper makes it all worth it. The real artists know who they are.