- This topic has 14 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
I don’t really mean to imply there is a war between the two factions of drawing and sketching, but I am intrigued to write a little about the two and hopefully hear some views from you peeps on wetcanvas.
I find, for the most part, that I am drawn towards sketches and unfinished work – why? There’s something about the draughtmanship and sense of motion in the lines; that spontaneity and impulse that often makes sketches more alive and vibrant than the stiffness of a carefully rendered drawing. I like the pencil strokes, and how they define form without the exact precision of perfect blending and most importantly sketches and incomplete work let the imagination fill in those areas that appear abstract or would ordinarily be meaningless. It’s that imagination element that I think is the most important aspect to a piece, setting off a two way interaction between art and viewer.
Again, I have to say that I do like realism and even photorealism if it adds something beyond the photograph, but sketches and unfinished work have great appeal, and perhaps should be framed and classified as completed artwork in their own right.Drawing isn’t restricted to pencil-like mediums of course, so I’m going to refer to a couple of different styled paintings. One is a very nicely painted piece of photorealism, the other a detailed but seemingly much looser cityscape (San Francisco) revealing all its brush marks (the image is quite large so you might need to zoom out to appreciate it more).
http://www.photorealism.uklinux.net/html/el-flamenco-main.html
http://www.marklague.com/San%20Francisco%20Nights.jpg
Of course, it’s all very subjective, and I’m not trying to make a specific and direct comparison of these two actual paintings, but they do illustrate the differences between a certain looseness, with evidence of the medium and strokes that went to produce it (the human touch) and lots of soft edges that engage the imagination and a photorealistic piece full of hard edges, no evidence of brush strokes and dark photographic shadows.
I’d be interested to hear your views. Do you have a slight (or strong) bias, and why?
Greetings Jay. I think we probably come from the same place.
I hope I didn’t imply people have to do one of the other, I’m sure photorealists produce lots of interesting loose sketchwork too.I hope the vision doesn’t cause you too many issues when you come to draw? From your artwork I certainly couldn’t tell.
Perhaps a sort of impressionism and soft focus works better with your eyesight?Poor vision is either an excuse or a challenge. I prefer the latter–it is my agressive nature–besides–gadgets, gadgets, gadgets–need I say more?
.
catmandolin.deviantart.com
I like the variety of doing both. It’s nice just to let loose and not worry about being so tight with your lines. On the other hand, there is also something to be said for some nice (controled) line drawings that lack the tedious building of values and such. The saying “less is more” comes to mind with both tight and loose sketching. Also makes you wonder, when does a sketch become a drawing and vise vera?? :D:)
Looking forward to reading all the responses
GREAT thread Gavin. Never really stopped and thought about the two Murray
———————–[Quote]*I am "drawn" to Art!!* ~artdude~[/Quote]
Hi guys,
My style -if i have one, that is- goes toward the loose sketches, or loose brushstrokes; That gives me an easy framework to build a piece upon…Although i am aware of the need to complement these works with the knowledge of a more ‘formal’ drawing to be more ‘complete’ as an artist…I, too, have many unfinished pieces (mostly digital), that for me they’re ‘finished’ as it is their last stage they will ever be at…and some others that will have to wait until i have some more knowledge of the whole techniques i am planning to apply on them.
There are some subjects that look or feel better as sketches than done in a photorealistic fashion; One of those that come to my mind right now is, Albert Einstein, i just love all the loose sketches (paintings) of him, contrary to those (of him) faithful to minute detail, that don’t appeal as much, to me…
As an artist, it’s nice being able to express in both ways, and enjoy ourselves in doing it…. -the better…
Both are valid art expressions, although for the non-artist or the neophyte the sketches could look like ‘unfinished’ work, whatsoever…
Good Topic !!
Regards
~ [FONT=Book Antiqua]Jet ~:cool: [/COLOR]
**-An idea whose time has come.[/COLOR] is stronger than all the armies in the world.- Victor Hugo [/COLOR]
-Don't just learn the tricks of the trade.> Learn the trade.-Jay – I’d say it’s a good excuse and a challenge.
Look at the determination of the foot and mouth painter’s and they knock up some impressive work despite something that could be a hinderance. I’m sure you’ve got the determination to achieve what you want to achieve. 
Stoy – I’m much like yourself; I like the looser work, but it takes a real conscious effort to ignore the detail, it’s also a personal problem of mine.
I really enjoy the work of artist Richard Schmid – he combines the looseness of alla prima painting with a very skilled technique and completes most of his paintings in a day or a few hours. Check this one out:
http://www.westwindfineart.com/RichardSchmid/images/suzanne.jpg
or this http://www.westwindfineart.com/RichardSchmid/images/robinand.jpg
I think his work is beautiful!!
You’re right – when drawing in public, you are discplined into working quickly.Jehosphephat – if only I had the money to afford a Jehosphephat original.
Murray – Being a pen man, lines and dots are obviously essential to your work, and the pen also acts as a great sketching tool. I think sketches and drawings are primarily differentiated by the time put into them, and on a personal level, the time spent putting down the lines and shading contrasted to how you would normally render something if it was to be a finished drawing.
Jet – Is that you in the tinyhead? Looks like a Max Cavelera if I’ve spelt that correctly (Sepultura).
I can relate to unfinished work. I started oil painting last December, and I’ve done about two dozen paintings, only two of which are really finished, and if wasn’t for the fact that one of them was framed and up on someone’s wall, I would take it down and rework it again!
I suppose the good thing about oils and digital works, is they’re easy to rework at any time.Hiya Gavin! I hope you don’t mind me using your first name, but your moniker is so long to type and I always misspell it my first try! lol
This is a topic I’ve struggled with since I started to do art.
To be honest, I’m not a big fan of photorealism. I am more very respectful of the craftmanship and technique. It just doesn’t illicit much of an emotional response from me. As I’m getting back into drawing, I’m using photo references and attempting to hone my precision just to get my hand/eye/mind back in sync. Also, in terms of portraiture, it can be a profitable skill, and photorealism and realism in general is the most accessible form of art for the public.
However, I consider my real art more like the sketch I posted in the summer sketch thread. Once I’m back on the ball with the skills, I’ll be concentrating more on what I want to express on a more symbolic and intuitive level. Being precise with pencil strokes can really stifle that path, so it would be good to know that it might be encouraged in this forum.
I say I struggle with it because realism is what gets me, in gerenal, praise and admiration, whereas my true artistic expression is not so generally appealling.I’ve found hitting my mid-30s and not caring as much in general about what ‘others’ think of me, I’m less inclined to try and “please” with realistic art, and more wanting to push the boundaries of my imagination.
I hope no photorealist artist takes offense to my comments!
I think some naturally have the type of eye and mind that sees things so “perfectly”, and therefore, that is their true art.Check the big bling-bling of the signature above me, below me, or in other threads. I ain't got none.
And I don't like girls "that way" so please stop trying to get my attention, ladies.I won't be writing another short story,or new site, so if you're looking for another persona for the D&S, try old American Seventies Shows....like "Good Times" "Dukes of Harzard, "BJ and the Bear"..go'on..be creative.
Which is which. I have never been sure of the differene between the two. Below are two works I’ve done and I really wouldn’t have a clue if they are both sketches or both drawings or one of each. So which is which? What makes one a drawing and one a skech if they are one and the other?
Hi Leslie. I’m afraid you will have to address me as “Mr. Zarathustra Nietzschean Coeleb”, and I expect it to be written in full – Jay knows of my pedanticism (I believe I’ve just invented this word)…. Gavin’s cool too.
It’s always important to draw what is important to you, even if you find it to be at odds with expectations of others. Working on a symbolic level is a great way to go. It’s also interesting to note that some of the impressionist painters like John Sargeant, whose work has a loose appearance compared to the Renaissance masters, laboured over each stroke trying to get it down perfectly – “loose” appearing work isn’t necessarily as free as it may appear in some cases.Amaze – Whether it’s a sketch or drawing is largely down to your style. I’ve seen work considered “sketches” by detail-intensive artists that would be considered drawings to anybody else, but in comparison to their usual work it might be called sketchy. You could always escape the problem by calling work “studies”.
- The topic ‘Sketching vs. Drawing (Loose Vs. Tight)’ is closed to new replies.