Sculpting from drawing
June 8th, 2006Today I worked for many hours on a clay model of my two-year old son’s head. I worked from some dozens of life-drawings that I have been making over many weeks. Each drawing is from a different viewpoint, which is what I need for the sculpture. And yet it was difficult to get the likeness. Finally when he came home from daycare, I followed him around the apartment as he played with a toy tractor. With the clay model in my hands, I made rapid and decisive progress on the sculpture — even though he did not remain still for more than a moment. In half an hour I accomplished more than in the eight hours working from the drawings.
This experience has challenged my idea of what I am doing as an artist when I draw. Some time ago a sculptor said to me that painters and sculptors draw in different ways. He did not elaborate — perhaps he could not — but the concept has intrigued me ever since. Today I begin to sense the need for a different manner of drawing for sculpture. As a painter, I try to draw to capture light and shade, and through this, the illusion of form. What I realized is that the illusion of form is precisely that, an illusion, and the actual information conveyed is less than what we might imagine. Next time I draw I will try to focus on conveying the information of form more explicitly, rather than the illusion of form through the effects of light.
June 8th, 2006 at 10:00 pm
I find this a fascinating way to paint
you spoke about trying to draw volume differently i think it is not possible. Light enables objects to be seen your drawing. what your are attempting is cerebral not visual am I right?
Braque
June 8th, 2006 at 10:01 pm
anonymous oops (amber)
June 9th, 2006 at 2:03 pm
I have usually studied how to record light in a drawing. What I have in mind now is attempting to interpret form with a lighting that is less literal, more interpreted, to emphasize the forms, even those which the given lighting does not emphasize. If you look in this essay at two drawings attributed to Michelangelo, one of a study for ‘Day’, the other a Study for the drapery of the ‘Erythraean Sibyl’, you might see with (I think) I am talking about. In the study for ‘Day’, which is believed to be a study of a live model for a sculpture, there is a strong sense of local relief in the muscles, but there is rather little sense of a strong light source. Thus, the body forms are emphasized (which is what the sculptor needs), but the illusion of light is not so strongly developed. In comparison, in the drapery study, there is a much stronger sense of light flowing across the surfaces. This drapery is not intended for a sculpture, but for a painting in the Sistine Chapel. The idea is that these are drawings for entirely different purposes, and I’m suggesting that they are made with a different way of seeing.
June 9th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
Karl…Your scientific background is evident in the way you study the complexities of the art you create. On the other hand moving toward more interpretive and less literal forms feels like the most logical step as an artist.
June 9th, 2006 at 11:11 pm
i understand what you mean about light source but things become two dimentional without light and things are only lines
I think you painting from sculpture is very clever i have done this a few times did not enjoy it much things felt too rigid for me My drawing was silent
June 10th, 2006 at 3:34 am
Working with sculpture is a matter of bringing a whole new factor into the artwork. Think of adding a new pigment to your palette, how this can be confusing, even if the pigment is a wonderful color. With sculpture the problem is even bigger. There is the challenge of learning the new medium in three dimensions, and the challenge of bringing this into the two dimensional work. To underestimate the challenges, especially the second one, is to invite frustration — this is what I try to remind myself.
The most useful approach for me has been to draw the sculpture, making something that seems almost like a life drawing, and then to put the sculpture away and make a new drawing based on a combination of the first drawing and my imagination. In this way the sculpture is useful, but does not dominate. I understand what you mean when you say that working directly from sculpture felt rigid, and that your drawing was silent. I have sometimes had the same feeling. It seems that a second drawing, with the sculpture put away, is the place to find the artistic vision, while still retaining that of the sculpture which is good.
I have not yet painted directly from sculptures beyond some small experiments, for these reasons. The sculpture is the new element that I am only now trying to integrate into my work. But despite the difficulty, I am in love with making these three dimensional forms.
July 21st, 2006 at 12:45 pm
the bit about drawing differently was something I didnt understand when I first attended sculpture classes but towards the end of the year it was clearer :D
I was in art college as a non-collegiate student and so was lucky enough to manage to do both painting and sculpture – sadly a regular student is allowed one or the other.
I took it hoping that it would help me in my drawing and painting with form and it did. What I didnt realise was that I’d enjoy it as much. To be honest, I didnt like mucking about in huge tubs of clay but the assignment of making a bust was really super. I have an image of it here as also the opportunity to work with stone.
In their 3rd year the students learn to make the whole figure life size. We moved and so I guess I’ll have to wait a while longer for that.
Sorry for getting carried away. I really enjoyed the post and your site.