01-01-2024, 11:58 AM
Welcome, Pensword!
I think Glenn Vilppu says something along the lines of, the things he teaches are tools, not rules. I like that line of thinking. Because for almost any 'rule' you can think of in art, someone is still out there making awesome stuff without that rule, or even directly breaking the rule. It can feel reassuring to to treat some things as rules, at least for a while, because we human beings don't like uncertainty. It's nice to have some certainty, even if it is partially an illusion.
A lot of people start off with gesture. A ton of books and instruction out there are saying to do that. This form of gesture practice seems to me about mileage more than anything, and that's not entirely wrong either.
My opinion is that someone new to drawing won't know what gesture is for or how to tell whether a gesture drawing is successful, and it might be better to take the opposite approach. Strict copying, then once it becomes clear that dynamic shapes and flow, the feeling of life is missing, trying to approach gesture again.
I'm not a teacher. I'm just another artist with an opinion. But I wish I had started out with a proportional divider, like Stefan Baumann describes here:
The purpose of this tool is to teach seeing accurately, which is the most vital skill.
After that I would focus on construction drawing, breaking things into simpler 3D shapes, perspective drawing.
Then rendering the forms with light and shadow.
Then once you realize that everything you are drawing is stiff and lifeless looking, too mathematically structural, gesture is there. Trying to get the flow and life. (Though of course, when you do learn gesture, you will probably start a drawing/painting with gesture, then put structure on top of it, etc.)
Anyway, none of this is to say that you're wrong for doing gesture, but it will be a while before you truly understand the purpose of it and the problem it's trying to solve. For now keep going, and as long as you're drawing you'll improve.
I think Glenn Vilppu says something along the lines of, the things he teaches are tools, not rules. I like that line of thinking. Because for almost any 'rule' you can think of in art, someone is still out there making awesome stuff without that rule, or even directly breaking the rule. It can feel reassuring to to treat some things as rules, at least for a while, because we human beings don't like uncertainty. It's nice to have some certainty, even if it is partially an illusion.
A lot of people start off with gesture. A ton of books and instruction out there are saying to do that. This form of gesture practice seems to me about mileage more than anything, and that's not entirely wrong either.
My opinion is that someone new to drawing won't know what gesture is for or how to tell whether a gesture drawing is successful, and it might be better to take the opposite approach. Strict copying, then once it becomes clear that dynamic shapes and flow, the feeling of life is missing, trying to approach gesture again.
I'm not a teacher. I'm just another artist with an opinion. But I wish I had started out with a proportional divider, like Stefan Baumann describes here:
The purpose of this tool is to teach seeing accurately, which is the most vital skill.
After that I would focus on construction drawing, breaking things into simpler 3D shapes, perspective drawing.
Then rendering the forms with light and shadow.
Then once you realize that everything you are drawing is stiff and lifeless looking, too mathematically structural, gesture is there. Trying to get the flow and life. (Though of course, when you do learn gesture, you will probably start a drawing/painting with gesture, then put structure on top of it, etc.)
Anyway, none of this is to say that you're wrong for doing gesture, but it will be a while before you truly understand the purpose of it and the problem it's trying to solve. For now keep going, and as long as you're drawing you'll improve.