Anvar's Sketchbook till I get better
#1
Hey guys, my name is Anvar. Have been drawing for a while now, and been looking for an art community for at least as long. Happy to be here even though the forum is not in it's prime anymore, I would really hope we can revive it to its former glory. Thanks!



Here are some studies I made yesterday. I took master paintings and used their lighting scenario to inform my decisions. I find straight up copying a master painting does not give you much in terms of gaining knowledge, it simply does not challenge you enough, so to make it more challenging and engaging, I added a little twist in a form of adding my own figure into the composition. What do you guys think?


Attached Files Image(s)



Reply
#2
Hi.Sorry to inform you but the picture you provided is broke i suggest learning to post picture in here instead of relying on external website for the future.

As for using master work for light by personal take it that it not really about what someone did but understanding the different scenario it rather comparing master to inform your decision because you are in between A vand B because you can neither be A or B . You can't extract pattern of ''success'' or logic by isolating one artist there as to be a separation it that information that inform you about deliberate vs none deliberate decision making. For example why does the cast shadow fall opposite to the sun and why do successful artist understand that and utilize that concept to create realism. A rule come from accurate understand the interrelation of different concept via repetitive recontextualize of those rule under different scenario. By understanding the variable of the equation it no longer and abstract and naive observation but a increasingly inform understanding of the interelation of those different variable.


Yes you can compare an artist against itself but how will you know if he not misinforming you after all if you look at master before perspective was establish they did not properly understand the rule yet people would follow there misguided masterful work because it what was understood at that time. But it by comparing work from yesterday with work of to day artist that we can establish who is right and who is wrong.

As for recontextualizing someone else artwork that a step up from copying. But why not try to do that scene from a different perspective, change the time of the day, change the time period there is many way you can recontextualize a work without simply doing 1+1 but sometime doing the 1+1 is the clearest and safest way to experiment without giving yourself more than you can chew.

There even other concept such as caricature or doing the opposite of what you see that expand how you think. Going beyond copying and adding there concept such as subtracting ,multiplying, dividing, grouping, separating, fusing, reducing, shifting hue to name a few.

My Sketchbook

Perfection is unmeasurable therefor it impossible to reach it.
Reply
#3
(01-10-2025, 02:34 PM)darktiste Wrote: Hi.Sorry to inform you but the picture you provided is broke i suggest learning to post picture in here instead of relying on external website for the future.

As for using master work for light by personal take it that it not really about what someone did but understanding the different scenario it rather comparing master to inform your decision because you are in between A vand B because you can neither be A or B . You can't extract pattern of ''success'' or logic by isolating one artist there as to be a separation it that information that inform you about deliberate vs none deliberate decision making. For example why does the cast shadow fall opposite to the sun and why do successful artist understand that and utilize that concept to create realism. A rule come from accurate understand the interrelation of different concept via repetitive recontextualize of those rule under different scenario. By understanding the variable of the equation it no longer and abstract and naive observation but a increasingly inform understanding of the interelation of those different variable.


Yes you can compare an artist against itself but how will you know if he not misinforming you after all if you look at master before perspective was establish they did not properly understand the rule yet people would follow there misguided masterful work because it what was understood at that time. But it by comparing work from yesterday with work of to day artist that we can establish who is right and who is wrong.

As for recontextualizing someone else artwork that a step up from copying. But why not try to do that scene from a different perspective, change the time of the day, change the time period there is many way you can recontextualize a work without simply doing 1+1 but  something doing the 1+1 is the clearest and safest way to experiment without giving yourself more than you can chew.

There even other concept such as caricature or doing the opposite of what you see that expand how you think. Going beyond copying and adding there concept such as subtracting ,multiplying, dividing, grouping, separating, fusing, reducing, shifting hue to name a few.

Hey, darktiste, thank you for telling me about the broken images, they should work fine right now. 

As per your note on the usefulness of these exercises, in my opinion, isolating an area of study and working on it while other fundamental areas are not causing you trouble is a good way to learn. In this example of work that I posted, I have deliberately chose to practice my lighting and not focus on things like composition and, say, perspective. Other exercises help you with isolating other fundamentals. The best examples of that would be anatomical studies where you are focusing on the internal machine of a human being, and even figure drawing, a very close subject, does not really interfere with your exercise. 

On the point of misinformation I wanted to say that misinformation happens in most circumstances while learning art as art is not an exact science. I would call it interpretation rather than misinformation because we are dealing with how people perceive and feel and that always lies beyond the scope of objective truth. 

I am also not very convinced that masters of the past are in some way wrong about things even though they didn't have all the knowledge of the present. Of course, I would not learn about anatomy and perspective from artists of the Northern Renaissance, but I cannot say that what they were doing is in its entirety wrong. I, as a realist painter, have different goals than them, but I am no more right about things than they are. Again, we are dealing with art where intention and direction matter more than pure factual knowledge of things. 

Lastly, re-contextualizing matters but it matters more what your goal is for any given exercise. You do not want to change too much about a master's work because then the point of making a master study is no longer there. A master study, in my opinion, is a puzzle you are trying to solve by mimicking and analyzing what another artist did. There are paintings that contain answer to most of your questions, but asking that question and completely understanding the answer is the hard part. I do not consider copying hard anymore, at some point when you have been painting enough, repeating the same stroke and same colors on canvas is no longer a challenge, but what is definitely a challenge is the act of deciphering the information that is embedded into a masterful work of art.
Reply
#4
Realism to me is at the opposite end of intention because the artistic freedom or initial intention are mostly about the setting there is no room for breaking the rule it a 1 to 1 relation to what we experience.

All intention in that artistic path are driven by one thing achieving realism .To discard any rule of realism no longer define the work as realistic. No matter what intension or story you want to tell there is no cheating because the viewer live in that world. Let take caricature there is alot more room for intentional break in reality for example a elephant who use it ears to fly.

Right now what i see in this sketchbook so far is more impressionistic in nature more concern with brush work then a complete and flesh out result that mirror reality. I would expect some kind of ''finish study'' if you are going for realism meaning the closest 1 to 1 to relation you can to what the eye perceive. But i also understand that study are rarely that extensive even when realism is the goal as we often seeking an understanding of concept we need to put into practice what we learn and it often blur the line between the end goal and what we were doing at that time to get closer to were own artistic intention. There is master study and master copy and i think it also important that you establish that as your goal but anyways it hasty of to me presume you don't know what impressionism is since you are probably more knowledgeable than me when it come to art history specially since if you have a realistic background it often come with an art history introduction.

All i am saying is i hope to see a master copy to the best of your ability soon.

My Sketchbook

Perfection is unmeasurable therefor it impossible to reach it.
Reply
#5
Here are some studies I made from imagination. The focus here was the lighting and colors. Even though I am fairly satisfied with both of them, there is still a lot of work to be done. 

What works:
- I was very pleased that I could conjure a scene with a convincing light out of my head.
- Intensity and mood are very close to what I was imagining them to be. 

What needs more love (work):
- Palette is definitely quite literal, lacks some interest. It is better in the second scene with those violets and greens in the background, but that is not enough. 
- Harmonizing the color is an issue still, seems like colors jump and cohesion between them is not as strong. As an example, the red in the second picture is too red and really makes the image too literal. Not sure how to harmonize the colors yet, driving them through grey would not be optimal here, the colors have to be saturated (or do they?)
- Environment is still an afterthought, or at least, serves very little purpose, it is there to accentuate the figure, but I know it can do so much more. It can become a character of its own and then become one with the figure at some point, which would be ideal. 

Overall, I am pretty happy with how things are coming through, though I surely do need to mature my palette. Maybe looking at master work will help. Thanks!


Attached Files Image(s)



Reply
#6
Hi Anvar, these are some nice explorations. I feel like your lighting work could benefit from more control and usage of atmospheric perspective, especially in the backgrounds, but also within the figures themselves.There is a very distinct separation of layers going on at different depths, and some atmosphere would help things sit in volumetic space better. Your figures are lacking in volume in quite a few areas also and I also think part of that is probably due to going a little too flat and dark in your shadow areas and not paying attention to form plane changes. Some more ambient light might help. I also think while colour dodge or screen can quickly put in nice bounce light effects, the effect can be overused, and causes a very abrupt looking light dropoff, with hotspots. I would use it a bit more subtly and/or paint back into the effect to tone down the drop off a bit more

Reply
#7
(01-12-2025, 08:11 AM)Noone Wrote: Hi Anvar, these are some nice explorations. I feel like your lighting work could benefit from more control and usage of atmospheric perspective, especially in the backgrounds, but also within the figures themselves.There is a very distinct separation of layers going on at different depths, and some atmosphere would help things sit in volumetic space better. Your figures are lacking in volume in quite a few areas also and I also think part of that is probably due to going a little too flat and dark in your shadow areas and not paying attention to form plane changes. Some more ambient light might help. I also think while colour dodge or screen can quickly put in nice bounce light effects, the effect can be overused, and causes a very abrupt looking light dropoff, with hotspots. I would use it a bit more subtly and/or paint back into the effect to tone down the drop off a bit more

Hey, Noone, thanks so much for great advice! Yeah, I definitely see it more now how I use flat darks as a tool to pretty much hide form. I did not realize it before, but that's definitely what I am doing. Going to implement more form emphasis and definitely more atmospheric light. 

And very much on point with the layer effects as well. I am not a fan of different layer modes, but it does a lot of damage, and it does so quickly. It is a crutch nonetheless, and it has to be either completely eliminated or used very subtly, I agree. 

Thanks a lot for great feedback, you have a keen eye.
Reply
#8
Here is today's entry. Gotta say, I am having so much fun, it has not been like that for a while. The muse had been avoiding me for a while now, and she is finally here, making art a magical experience again. 

This one is from imagination. I am implementing some of the feedback that Noone provided me with, using that atmospheric light and avoiding dead dark areas where form flattens out. Still, it is a fairly dark piece to begin with, so I can't wait to finish this one so I can start on something in a much lighter key.
 
In any case, it has been very fun to paint this one, and a bit more challenging than the pictures in the previous post, mostly because of the top-down perspective and an unusual lighting setup. 

What works:
- Color palette is nice, I limited it by just choosing a very strict lighting scenario. This kind of "hellscape" lighting situation really allows one dominant color, and a second one, a very subdued supporting one. 
- Perspective in this one is convincing. Nothing really jumps out as incorrect, which is very good because I was eyeballing everything. This only means that my eye is good for perspective, and actually drawing the grid with vanishing points will definitely help, but not change much. 
- Paint application. Paint application, especially in the face area is quite satisfying to look at. It makes sense that faces are the most confidently painted and successful parts of my paintings since I have spent a lot of time painting them and recently completed a 100 faces challenge. Should do the same with figure and environments. 

What needs more love:
- Form, form, form. Form is key, and as of now, it is a rusty one. Should do more anatomical studies with different lighting scenarios and look up how master painters tackled it. 
- Anatomy is not the best, and is simplified for the reason of me not remembering how some muscles turn and what kind of form the create. 
- Character design. This is a minor one, but I could do better with designing a character. Right now the design is simple and uninventive. 

Thanks everyone!


Attached Files Image(s)


Reply
#9
Hi Anwar and welcome to the forum! I think I can concur on doing straight master copies. It can help, but it can also get pretty boring. I was recently doing some studies of people sitting for an image I wanted to do and felt my productivity wander. I was only when I used that image as a basis for an OC did the enjoyment start to spring back up. Informative and fun. To add onto Darktiste's comment as switching it up, by drawing the same thing and making (un)conscious choices helps to get things to stick and also a good creative flow if you're in a creative rut. Pretty much agree with the rest of your reply.

You have a very sound economy of brush strokes. I see you use a quite large brush. It's super amazing you can draw and capture the light so well just from your head. I'm extremely impressed with your latest imagination exploration. It's still dark, but less muted than the first images and the lighting is very strong, especially the highlights on the face. I also want to commend you on trying a top-down perspective as a more challenging composition. Really looking forward to seeing more of your work and perspective around here!
Reply
#10
Hello Anvar! Loving the atmosphere and color in these studies. You have a great eye for that sort of thing, it seems. Especially as these last few are without reference. I actually like the muted red of the coat of the solider in the first one. It ties it well with the kind of dun colored background, and generally it's a good subdued color scheme. It all depends on the intention, of course, and such things are so subjective. I like the purple ambient light in the demoness one.

I would agree with your own assessment that the missing ingredient is probably form right now, but it's somewhat acceptable to not have very developed form in a broad sketch. I wonder if it's not even form so much as edges. The brushes you use is kind of a matter of taste, but having basically all hard edges does subtract somewhat from impression of light, as light is always subtly gradated, and it makes it difficult to hone in and refine the colors. So that's not to say to use an airbrush instead, but maybe just look for places where you'd actually want to see a soft edge and that can lead to some really nice color effects.

Reply
#11
Flatness is to me the result of a large hard brush stroke with little to no blending.

You either have to lower the opacity of that brush so the brush stroke can lay on top of each other and create more gradient or you have to blend the color or use some soft brush to avoid edge creating ''plane'' aka flatness think of each hard brush stroke as a value if it doesn't change value in space according to the proper plane it sit on it create flatness as it wrongly indicate ''this the same point in space'' as somewhere else or that it receiving the same amount as point A when in fact this is point B be there should be a either change in value according to the material and light source. Every light created as a gradient even wall have gradient.

By choosing to have the brush stroke visible you go away from realism by choosing to blend you will have to spend considerably more time on each piece to properly develop the right amount of gradient to achieve the proper rate of the gradient that indicate plane change.

But i think for that you still have to develop the patience and appreciation of form change.

My Sketchbook

Perfection is unmeasurable therefor it impossible to reach it.
Reply
#12
Hey everyone! Got this one done just now, at 2 am, so the post will be short. 

This one is from imagination again, but I am supplementing some of the harder areas with a reference. That way I get a more accurate depiction and get to receive and use new knowledge right away. 

More on this image later. Have to go to bed. 

Thanks everyone!


Attached Files Image(s)


Reply
#13
(01-13-2025, 06:00 AM)Dominicque Wrote: Hi Anwar and welcome to the forum! I think I can concur on doing straight master copies. It can help, but it can also get pretty boring. I was recently doing some studies of people sitting for an image I wanted to do and felt my productivity wander. I was only when I used that image as a basis for an OC did the enjoyment start to spring back up. Informative and fun. To add onto Darktiste's comment as switching it up, by drawing the same thing and making (un)conscious choices helps to get things to stick and also a good creative flow if you're in a creative rut.  Pretty much agree with the rest of your reply.

You have a very sound economy of brush strokes. I see you use a quite large brush. It's super amazing you can draw and capture the light so well just from your head. I'm extremely impressed with your latest imagination exploration. It's still dark, but less muted than the first images and the lighting is very strong, especially the highlights on the face. I also want to commend you on trying a top-down perspective as a more challenging composition. Really looking forward to seeing more of your work and perspective around here!
Hello Dominicque and thank you for your warm welcome. 

I totally agree that master copies become really boring when done just by themselves alone. The difference between imaginative exploration exercises and pure studies is vast. The enjoyment I get from painting a scene I have in mind is something that can't be matched with any exercise. And as a lot of things in art, your productivity heavily relies on your enjoyment. I will expand my roster to include more of these exercises that require drawing something from imagination. 

Thank you for all the feedback, it is very nice to hear, especially from a person who has been very consistent with their sketchbook thread.
Reply
#14
(01-13-2025, 09:21 AM)JosephCow Wrote: Hello Anvar! Loving the atmosphere and color in these studies. You have a great eye for that sort of thing, it seems. Especially as these last few are without reference. I actually like the muted red of the coat of the solider in the first one. It ties it well with the kind of dun colored background, and generally it's a good subdued color scheme. It all depends on the intention, of course, and such things are so subjective. I like the purple ambient light in the demoness one.

I would agree with your own assessment that the missing ingredient is probably form right now, but it's somewhat acceptable to not have very developed form in a broad sketch. I wonder if it's not even form so much as edges. The brushes you use is kind of a matter of taste, but having basically all hard edges does subtract somewhat from impression of light, as light is always subtly gradated, and it makes it difficult to hone in and refine the colors. So that's not to say to use an airbrush instead, but maybe just look for places where you'd actually want to see a soft edge and that can lead to some really nice color effects.
Hello Joseph, thank you for your reply. 

I read this comment while I was making the latest sketch, and it really helped me implement softer brushes into the picture. Now, as of right now, I am not using my airbrush to its fullest power, it is mostly some edges outside the figure that get the airbrush treatment, but I will use it more in my further work. It is a very good observation because I basically just use one brush, and a very basic one at that. It is a product of the past, and it is time to expand my selection to at least 3. 

Thank you. Great stuff in your sketchbook, by the way.
Reply
#15
New post. Making an illustration with more than one figure is always very interesting. The relationship between the figures adds a lot to the emotional side of a painting. In this one I spent most of my time polishing the first figure so the second one is very sketchy, probably put in only 20 minutes on that one. Still very fun, maybe I will finish it later. I am enjoying myself thoroughly.


Attached Files Image(s)


Reply
#16
Oooh that last one looks awesome, well done! Honestly loving how the gold armor looks.

And yeah you definitely DON'T need to use airbrush at all, but yeah expanding to 3 different edged ones sounds like a good plan.

Reply
#17
(01-15-2025, 05:21 AM)JosephCow Wrote: Oooh that last one looks awesome, well done! Honestly loving how the gold armor looks.

And yeah you definitely DON'T need to use airbrush at all, but yeah expanding to 3 different edged ones sounds like a good plan.

Thank you! After using some of that airbrush, it really is a good brush that I missed out on. It is especially good when I am painting occlusion shadows
Reply
#18
New one. Definitely want to finish this one, spent most of my time on the horse so the dude got neglected a bit. I am liking it so far. What do you guys think? What improvements can I make further?


Attached Files Image(s)


Reply
#19
That honestly looks so good. dayum

Reply
#20
(01-16-2025, 07:12 AM)JosephCow Wrote: That honestly looks so good. dayum

Thanks! That means a lot
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 66 Guest(s)