Students learn basic anatomy and will begin to develop an understanding of the way a figure inhabits space; thus able to successfully reproduce this space in two dimensions. The goal of the course is to learn academic, realistic representation of the figure: Emphasis will be on accurately rendering the figure on the page in proper proportion. Students work up to developing a personal style within the confines of academic figurative art.
Your study is done well, it resembles the original to a great degree. Perhaps you mimicry of the style and the exact positioning of the figure could have changed a bit. While the exercise is to copy the original, the study is to incorporate the artist's style into your own work.
Your study seems to follow the study so well that they almost go together to create a narrative. There is no doubt that you were successful in using the artist's mark-making techniques.
Your pieces represent a cohesive study. I loved everything from the staining of your paper to the use of angles and negative space. The light of the sun should cast shadows in one direction (leaf pile) in your original piece.
I really liked both of them, as you captured the artists style and mark making, but I think changing the composition on your study would have helped make it your own.
I really love these. They're like illustrations, as if the two are telling a story. I cant imagine one of these drawings without the other. In that sense, i don't know if there's anything you could do to make the two relate more. You did a great job of capturing the flow that Mel Kadel has in her drawings, and i think the only thing that would help that is if you extended the floor/horizon line in these to tough the other end of the page. All in all, though, i think these are fantastic!
I think that these two pieces seem indistinguishable in style. I had no idea which was the original and which was the master copy. Although there is a real illustrative element to the images, there is still a weightiness to the characters and the elements of the picture making them believable within the illustrative context.
You did a great job of replicating the artist's style in both works. I love what you did with the study. It could work with the copy as a contrast between reality and imagination.
These really work great as a pair, as if they came from the same studio. The values and the way the subject is positioned is identical to the Mel Kadel’s work. For a second I thought the master copy was the master study, and the master study was the master copy. This is extremely successful in matching the mark making as well. The weight of the body is also present in both pieces.
Nice job of rendering copy. Master Study looks like it could have been by the same artist. You can see movement in original. Mark making is nice and consistent.
Your study is done well, it resembles the original to a great degree. Perhaps you mimicry of the style and the exact positioning of the figure could have changed a bit. While the exercise is to copy the original, the study is to incorporate the artist's style into your own work.
ReplyDeleteYour study seems to follow the study so well that they almost go together to create a narrative. There is no doubt that you were successful in using the artist's mark-making techniques.
ReplyDeleteThe use of sharpie was very successful on both of these pieces and I enjoy how the character behind it.
ReplyDeleteYou were able to capture your artists' style brilliantly. It was hard to decipher which was yours and which was the copy.
ReplyDeleteYour pieces represent a cohesive study. I loved everything from the staining of your paper to the use of angles and negative space. The light of the sun should cast shadows in one direction (leaf pile) in your original piece.
ReplyDeleteI really liked both of them, as you captured the artists style and mark making, but I think changing the composition on your study would have helped make it your own.
ReplyDeleteI loved these! They both looked like they came from the same studio. Nicely done.
ReplyDeleteI honest couldn't tell which was the original and the copy. You've captured the artists style perfectly flawlessly.
ReplyDeletecongrats on a job well done I feel as though I cant even tell the difference between the master copy and yours. the versions look beautiful!
ReplyDeleteI really love these. They're like illustrations, as if the two are telling a story. I cant imagine one of these drawings without the other. In that sense, i don't know if there's anything you could do to make the two relate more. You did a great job of capturing the flow that Mel Kadel has in her drawings, and i think the only thing that would help that is if you extended the floor/horizon line in these to tough the other end of the page. All in all, though, i think these are fantastic!
ReplyDeleteI think that these two pieces seem indistinguishable in style. I had no idea which was the original and which was the master copy. Although there is a real illustrative element to the images, there is still a weightiness to the characters and the elements of the picture making them believable within the illustrative context.
ReplyDeleteYou did a great job of replicating the artist's style in both works. I love what you did with the study. It could work with the copy as a contrast between reality and imagination.
ReplyDeleteYou captured your artists style very well. I love the concept of both drawings. Good use of negative space line work and value.
ReplyDeleteThese really work great as a pair, as if they came from the same studio. The values and the way the subject is positioned is identical to the Mel Kadel’s work. For a second I thought the master copy was the master study, and the master study was the master copy. This is extremely successful in matching the mark making as well. The weight of the body is also present in both pieces.
ReplyDeleteNice job of rendering copy. Master Study looks like it could have been by the same artist. You can see movement in original. Mark making is nice and consistent.
ReplyDelete