[edit]
Once you’re there, you can click on the links on the left to see more drawings.
[/edit]
Is it too morbid? Do you think that people would understand that art is just art, and you can’t read anything into someone’s personality based on it? When I created these drawings, I really didn’t care what people would think. I figured, it’s just what I was inspired to draw at the time. I get inspired by whatever random images pop in my head, and something about them screams out “DRAW ME!!!” It suddenly feels like a commitment: I have to draw that one. No thoughts about what others might think or what kind of image I’m creating for myself figure into this decision.
I think I’m going for shock value with the darker ones.
But lately, I’ve been double guessing myself. Sometimes I wonder whether I should pull that website down, or at least screen out which drawings I think look “happy” and which don’t. I’m becoming more self-conscious, I guess. Maybe it’s because I’m becoming less morbid myself.
Should I feel self-conscious or should I just have the attitude: hey, that’s art!
Some of it isn’t good, but it isn’t too morbid for me. I prefer happy clouds, but your stuff didn’t creep me out and some of it was pretty interesting.
Art can’t be too morbid. Death is one thing that all humanity shares regardless of opinions or religion or politics. It’s universal.
I do like this guy though for the happy trees:
I think that people merely have issues with images like that because they superimpose themselves in those situations. It seems natural; I kind of like doing it.
If you are up for drawing people, do me! But in an ever-so-you style. I would like to see what you could do with a subject thrown into your artistic eye.
No matter what an artist says the art in one form or another shows who the artist is, its not a bad thing. You said your becoming less morbid or perhaps you are a bright happy person, to me this art is expressing your interest in the darker side of you or perhaps of others. Don’t worry if it offends anyone, because picking out questionable works will only inhibit others from searching within themselves as you did.
I haven’t gave a supportive one. So here goes. Actually It may not be supportative, more like critical evaluation? Your art shows a start, it shows you’ve progressed past symbollism in features for the most part. It shows you have imagination, which is a great thing to have. Don’t let anything restrict that, because restriction is the enemy. Restrict after you’ve expressed. It’s the same way with writing.
I however will say you could use more pencil consistency. The setup of this piece you’ve shown is almost too perfect. Two men evenly distributed at both sides, at same heights. The middle figure takes too much attention and she doesn’t deserve it with all the other horrible things going on around her. If you are going to use this method, maybe make her way peaceful, and make everything else horribly morbid. Because in this piece there isn’t enough of that variation, it’s too blended. It wants to be dramatic, but it’s not and winds up being dull. That’s the biggest problem I think in drawing landscapes and people, they almost always need to be colored.
I find, or have found so far, that drawing can be more difficult when it comes to creating a sound aesthetic piece, especially making one dramatic without color usage. I haven’t been able to use graphite, or any kinds of lead in such a way. But some who have…
Look up the anthony waichulis studio, I’m sure there’s more. He and his students specialize in some charcoal trompe l’oeil. I’ve talked with a student of his before and he’s told me you need to learn to use a pencil so well draw certain shades without sight, only sound.
The artwork in question, I could only view one. Lady on mushrooms. Distance is ok. Mushrooms I like the way they are not rigid. But the 3 main characters …just a suggestion. Try, even if you want to keep with the dark theme, let them flow. Try using charcoal and experiment with it. Still leaves the shadows and let’s a viewer keep looking at the whole picture.
If you see something in a canvas, paper or any other medium then that is what it is speaking to you.
All your comments (both criticisms and compliments) are very well taken. I get the general impression that the (constructive) criticisms are being offered by professional artists (or those who know the tricks of the trade). For example:
I’ve never heard of “distance” - at least, not as a technical artistic term (although I gather what it means). This helps me feel confident since these tricks and techniques are learnt through the profession (through schooling or apprenticeship or whatever) and I’m sure if I studied up on this a bit, I’d be able to apply them (the motivation to do so is another matter).
If you guys are indeed “professionals” (in whatever sense that term means something relevant), what do you think are the major “principles” by which my artwork can be improved?
LOL I have never been one to follow by those that teach. So their terms and definitions are in their studies and not in life or art as far as I am concerned.
I went out with the head art professor at a college, was suppose to be one of the best in the south. Ppppffffffttttt. He found out fast I was not Liza Dolittle.
You see, your art is you. It is what is what you see. I was lucky enough to have one of them most wonderful women tutor me. We painted for years. One of the things she spoke of was art is creativity. If you see something then do it. Doesnt matter if it is right for anyone else or not.
Flow-- Look at life around you. See how the lines are not really lines in life. More shadows and shades? Things are close or in/at a distance. Each part of a drawing or painting should be able to be seperated and you can find another painting or picture within that.
Dont try for photo quality art. Like I was told if one wanted to see a photo, they would look at one. People want to see your impression of what you see.
