Smudging Graphite Question

[brownsac]

I realize there are no rules in art, however, I have read some instruction books on drawing, and have several times, come across the statement that graphite should not be smudged to achieve tone, because it is not as suited to this as say charcoal. But instead tone should be built up directly with the pencil, or with hatching and cross hatching.

However, I have seen great drawings done with graphite that incorporate smudging, and it can be a time saver as well. Smudging with charcoal is very easy because it produces a more even area of tone than with graphite. It seems very hard to control the values when smudging with graphite, which can make a drawing look muddy. Also, areas of a drawing that have received even light smudging, tend to stick out from the other un-smudged areas.

It seems to me building tone by smudging graphite should be rather simple, but in practice, it doesn't work so well, for me. And it has nothing to do with controlling edges, or smudging in excess, like a newb would; it's just one of those things that doesn't work for me as well as I'd like it to. Does anyone have any advice on the matter?

[brownsac]

I should also mention what I'd like to use smudging for.

I'd like to be able to lay down even areas of base value, and shadow shapes and general shapes, onto which I would start to render the drawing using the pencil itself. I like to draw general to specific. I start by modeling the form and shadow shapes, and save the features and hard edges for last. However, graphite, for me, doesn't seem to want to lay down well on top of an area of smudged graphite (which I would use for the large shadow shapes). It doesn't want to go down very evenly or predictably, it seems.

[SparrowHawk7]

Hi Brownsac,

I think it depends on the texture you are trying to draw. I would not recommend blending (smudging sounds more like a mistake to me) with human skin. When doing something like wood or a background, blending can be a useful technique to achieve the look you want. However, if there is any level of detail in an area, blending will eradicate it as the idea is to make a uniform tone.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-May-2010/61266-skin.jpg

In these examples it's pretty clear that the details would be eradicated by blending which would negatively impact the work. At the same time they show that a smooth value can be achieved simply by building layers without blending. Paper plays a very significant role here as well.

Blending does require a level of skill to do it justice. Here's one I did when I still thought blending was the best way to handle skin. It took just as long as the ones I did later without blending, but her face looks flat and without form. The paper was pretty much exhausted and refused to take more graphite. In comparison, the later drawings above have 15 and more layers yet do not look overworked.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Community/images/17-May-2010/61266-c_drawing.jpg

To see superb examples of blending, see http://www.jdhillberry.com/ although I believe his greatest strength lies in his still life.

But, as I started out saying, it all depends on what you are drawing and the level of detail you wish. The real secret to blending that I've discovered and heard from other artists who use the technique more than I is that you must put down a great deal of graphite before attempting to blend, and then the blending is done with one or two swipes at most before applying more graphite. CAO over at AP does superb work with blending but his work progresses no faster than those who do not blend. I haven't seen him over there for some time, however his work remains in the archives.

The more layers of graphite you have in place, the slower adding more becomes ... there's no way to get around the physics.

[brownsac]

Thanks for the informed answer, Sparrowhawk; I also feel that blending for skin tones makes them look very flat and boring, it seems there is some texture needed in skin to make it look believable. Perhaps laying down more graphite would help, or using softer graphite, which I don't like, since I generally don't smudge, for blending graphite.

I was startled by how incredible dirk dzimirsky's drawings are and he states that he blends his graphite with a stump, yet his skin textures look great. It must be in how careful he is with his blending and his expert knowledge at this point. He also states that he spends around 40 hours on many drawings, and he considers himself fast. I suppose perhaps smudging graphite only works well if you are going to carefully do it and take your time; maybe in the end, it actually is a longer approach.

[SparrowHawk7]

I suppose perhaps smudging graphite only works well if you are going to carefully do it and take your time; maybe in the end, it actually is a longer approach.
I don't know that you can make a good case for blending taking longer ... most of my drawings take between 60-80 hours but Armin Mersmann will take several hundred. We both blend here and there as necessity dictates, but the vast majority of the work is blended using only a pencil.

For what it's worth, I also use my pencils backwards from traditional thought. Most teach that you start with the softer/darker grades and gradually work towards the lighter/harder ones. Lately I've been starting with 6H for about 4-6 layers .. then 4H for another 4 or so layers .. then 2H for the next 2-4 layers. After that I'll use an F for light shadow, HB for medium shadow or 2B (or 4B) for darker shadows. Finally I'll finish with another 2-6 layers of 2H or 4H (depending on the underlying values) as blending/balancing layers. Either way, getting the details that one wants is where the time is spent. I consider soft and gentle value changes as part of those details.

[Continental]

I would experiment. Learn your own style. Some smudge graphite and others rely on shading with the pencil, both end up with stunning drawings. Neither one is wrong, just a different method to an end product. Don't feel like you need to imitate others. We are all created with different abilities and skills. Find your own unique style and run with it.

[luicre]

Thanks for the informed answer, Sparrowhawk; I also feel that blending for skin tones makes them look very flat and boring, it seems there is some texture needed in skin to make it look believable. Perhaps laying down more graphite would help, or using softer graphite, which I don't like, since I generally don't smudge, for blending graphite.

I was startled by how incredible dirk dzimirsky's drawings are and he states that he blends his graphite with a stump, yet his skin textures look great. It must be in how careful he is with his blending and his expert knowledge at this point. He also states that he spends around 40 hours on many drawings, and he considers himself fast. I suppose perhaps smudging graphite only works well if you are going to carefully do it and take your time; maybe in the end, it actually is a longer approach.


Oh, brownsac, Dirk`s technique is a mixtue, I guess. I have seen him using the blending stump for a layer of white pastel and then drawing a single hair over that "background", well is in the one and only thread where you can see Dirk shading.

My experience on blending or smudging is not good, I am less blending and more layering, actually. Like Ken has said. I call it Ken`s technique.

I think if you look at RobMcilwain `s threads, in some of them he has said that he lays down a slight layer of graphite and then he blends with a kleenex.

I also think that blending works really well on still life. Matti Kataja does that on his stil lifes.

Saludos

Luicre

[Gerri Mc]

[quote = Sparrowhawk] For what it's worth, I also use my pencils backwards from traditional thought. Most teach that you start with the softer/darker grades and gradually work towards the lighter/harder ones. Lately I've been starting with 6H for about 4-6 layers .. then 4H for another 4 or so layers .. then 2H for the next 2-4 layers. After that I'll use an F for light shadow, HB for medium shadow or 2B (or 4B) for darker shadows. Finally I'll finish with another 2-6 layers of 2H or 4H (depending on the underlying values) as blending/balancing layers. Either way, getting the details that one wants is where the time is spent. I consider soft and gentle value changes as part of those details.
I think this way is more logical i.e. start light and work towards the soft / dark. I do it that way most of the time now. I guess, like Luicre, we've learned from you Ken!:D

I agree that blending on skin is not a good idea. I learned that recently on my attempt at Michael's WDT featuring Kristen. The blending just made the skin look grubby.