One of the problems with studying art and learning to draw is there are no internally consistent rules and terms that all artists have agreed to use. Contrast this with mathematics, physics, astronomy, and computer programming, the rules just don't randomly change.
According to one artist, music and dance have consistent rules and terms/phrases. This makes sense, as music is very mathematical.
Artists can't even agree on whether or not art has to say something, or whether it has meaning or not.
They can't agree on who art is or isn't for.
Artists can't agree on what tools to use, or how to use those tools.
One artist talks about the various ways gesture is explained. None of them show gesture the same way.
The problem of no consistent rules is very obvious when studying the Fundamentals of Art – Elements of Art, Principles of Art, and Compositional Types. Every list of these properties that I have seen has its own set of items that it includes or leaves out. No two lists include the same items.
So I've decided to collect these lists together and include items from my reading to make my own list.
Another place where the problem of no consistency is studying the Reilly Rhythms. Frank Reilly left behind no official notes, no books describing his way of drawing the Rhythms he used. Everything we have comes from his students' notes, particularly one Fred Fixler, who ran his own art school.
Fixler's students included:
Glen Orbik
Fred sold his school to Glen.
There are a few video clips of Glen showing the Reilly Rhythms from a program that are available on YouTube.
Chris Petrocci from YouTube (Draw Juice)
Jeff Watts
Jeff was also a student of Gleb Orbik
Runs Watts Atelier – YouTube Channel
Stan Prokopenko – YouTube Channel
Bradwynn Jones – YouTube Channel
Ted Gula
Has been on Proko YouTube videos
Mark Westermoe
Teaches at NMA
Every Reilly Rhythm picture I find has a different set of rhythms. So I have taken these various sources, plus the Loomis Head, my own observations, including studies of the muscles of the face, and generated my own version.
Another inconsistency is the proportions used to draw the face. Burne Hogarth describes the face as being 3 units high by 2 units wide. I've seen Loomis head videos in which they describe the head as being about 3 ½ units high x 2 ½ units wide. The difference being that the Loomis head uses a circle that contains the mouth, whereas the Hogarth method uses a circle that includes only down to the nose.
Hogarth's method adds another half-circle to account for the space between nose to chin. And the ears fit on the outside of the original circle.
Loomis' method has a circle that needs a slice cut off of either side, and the ear fits inside that original circle, where the circle was sliced off.
The final problem with studying art and learning to draw is that it distracts me from my writing, that's why I'm trying to blog, to force myself to do some writing, including about how art forces its practitioners into using their creativity and eliminates step-by-step processes of math.
In conclusion, there is Absolute Truth, and true art reflects the beauty of the truth of things that are so, just like mathematics, physics, astronomy, and computer programming,
Art should reflect its own internal truths.
"There is a certain sense in which art is its own justification. If art is good art, if it is true art, if it is beautiful art, then it is bearing witness to the Author of the good, the true, and the beautiful." Our "impetus for producing … art is a desire for excellence. That desire stems from the … supreme example of excellence in all that is good and true and beautiful." - R.C. Sproul's teaching series about Recovering the Beauty of The Arts, and blog posts on The Christian and Art (Part One, Part Two, and Part Three).
No comments:
Post a Comment