04-02-2022, 08:25 AM
These are good questions. The things you've picked out are indeed not really logically correct in the naturalistic sense. Like in second example, why isn't his calf in shadow? It should be if it were realistic, but in this style of art there is a lot of liberty taken with that kind of consistency for a few reasons. The lines and blocks of shadow themselves are compositional devices that, you know can be manipulated for artistic reasons. In other words, the shading is for decoration, much more than in a technical render like you mind find in Scott Robertson's work. Also some of these odd things are done to emphasize the form within the limits of just black and white. The camel for instance, the lighting honestly makes no sense, but it does really emphasize the form of it, and gives a certain effect visually, which it wouldn't have if it was realistic. So I think it's a give and take. The artist gives up access to certain effects that you find in naturalistic drawing, but gains others.