It depends on the subject, but I would guess at least 20 minutes to a half hour for a small (quarter sheet or less) painting.

Depends on the subject but I usually do sketch and painting in my watercolours class. Same as Horsa I suppose 15 minutes average.

Doug

for my watercolours I don’t need a detailed sketch. I just mark the rough shapes, sometimes shadows etc.
However, if I plan a watercolour with f.e a more difficult perspective I sketch it in my sketchbook until I am content.
BUT: you can bet all your money that that one is going to be a horrible watercolour
Thats why I don’t do ambitious sketches for watercolours

When I first started WC 2 years ago, it could take several hours using the grid system etc. At first for a long time I was very detail oriented etc. For the last six months after a few workshops under my belt and I really am liking more artists that do a looser feel rather than just caputuring exactly what I see in a photo etc. I’m much looser and I edit a lot OUT of the things I see in front of me. Just last weekend while pleine airing it, I decided the bench/foliage etc. on the cliff over looking the ocean didn’t need the arbor I could actually see in reality in the scene I was painting. I knew it would work better without it right from the start, so it didn’t get drawn in. Ask yourself, what you are going to make the focus, focal point or area that you most want the viewer of the painting to see. Get rid of the extra stuff that is just too much and distracts from what you’ve chosen. That immediately puts me in a much looser drawing cutting down time. So, I’m a lot looser and much quicker. Even more so if I’m plein air painting. I’ve really tried to take the approach of less is more. When I was so detailed the edges were hard and not soft looking, I was overwhelmed with learning the media and all that goes with it.
Now that I’m just focusing on drawing shapes and getting values more on target, I take the approach of “I can always tighten it up later if I want to” or not….
Of course for buildings and stuff you’ve got the get the perspective right or you glaringly see, this isn’t working, later.
The more you draw the better it will get and the faster you get to actually putting paint to paper. Hang in there!
This is just my 2 cents mind you.
Nicole

The trick is to get the painting going WITHOUT[/B] a drawing at all – this is impressionism at its best. Sure, do a lot of sketching and drawing on a pad before hand, work out shadows, colours, scales and the like. But draw with the brush as you paint. Otherwise, a detailed drawing makes you ” stay within the lines ” and nixes freedom to create and innovate as you move along. Watch some of the good shildren ( ages 7 to 10 ) as they paint and I’ll bet you not one of them draws first —- they simply begin. Sometimes kids will fill in a colouring book in which the drawing is already printed and look at the dullness of that outcome. uggh![/COLOR]

Most of thre artists I admire simply paint right off the bat or will occasionally draw if teaching a class simply to explain and make what they are doing clearer to students.

Frankly, one line of the actual watercolour paper is one line too many.

However, I will concede that ships, rigging, and other stuff do require an under drawing since reality is being striven for. But for ture impressionism – just brush right in.



UNK

It really depends on the subject.

If I’m doing a Botanical Portrait it might take an hour or two, in addition to the sketches that I make to determine perspective and accurate portrayal of structure.

On the other hand, if I paint one of my dogs I might just go straight for the paints with no under drawing and let the painting grow. A portrait of someone else’s dog would need several drawings and an underdrawing.

I find though, the more I draw from life the quicker and more accurate I have become.

:thumbsup: Agreed Wilf, I just can’t do what you do, I suppose sketching is my strong point.

Doug