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.
I enjoy the study, it has a nice character and illustrative style to it. I think you're going for more hyper-realistic though. And that's fine too. I suggest practicing drawing fabric, from real life of course.
Your master copy was uber successful. This level of realism is not something that everyone can manage, and I think that if you had more time to complete your study, I think it would have been just as realistic.
I think your master copy was very successful. I think your choice of materials was great. I would have liked to have seen the same material choices in your master study. I love the light highlights in your master copy, and I feel like they're missing from your master study.
Your master copy was incredible. The use of ink and charcoal made lines even darker and crisper. There is a lack of dark and crisp lines in your original piece; adding ink to it may have made your work more cohesive.
Your master copy was very successful. I liked your choice of lines and mark-making tools, but I think these should have also been used in your master study. Still, I really liked the lights and darks in your study.
your work is very detailed, I feel as though you do such a good job on details the only thing I think could use improvement is on the choice of pen on the master copy could have been carried out on the master copy verion you did.
On a metaphysical level, there is an amazing level of connection and interaction between these two pieces. While the majority of painters in Vermeer's time, especially the Dutch, were focused displaying wealth and the upper class, Vermeer instead generally focused on the middle class. Though the figure in your copy may be of the upper class and the figure in your study reads as middle class, the study is almost like a time-travel duplication of the copy. Its as if your took the copy and hit fast forward for 350 years and what you got was the study. There are so many more interesting connections, but i'm at the risk of writing an essay so i'll stop there.
I think its okay that the copy is more realistic and the study is more impressionist. There is enough of a connection in ideology between the pieces that it doesn't matter that the two don't look exactly alike; they both look like the same artist could have created them. I don't know if you meant to go that deep, but it really works for me, great job!
I think that these two images definitely look like they could be a part of the same series separated by time. The attention to detail is incredible, the only thing that really stood out to me as a difference visually, was the greater range of values, mostly a darker black and whiter white, on the master copy.
Both pieces look amazing. The technical aspects such as proportion and value in each piece is on point. There is a small disparity as the copy is much more crisp and seemingly more real but they still work together as a series. The study is much more expressive which I believe is more effective than the copy.
Your ability to draw so technically constantly amazes me. The copy seems a little more realistic that the study however they still work well as a series. I love your use of value line and composition. I would suggest using the same media in both images.
These both use a great range of the value scale from one to nine. The master copy is very much more detailed and defined in mark making compared to the master study, which is soft and illustrative.
I enjoy the study, it has a nice character and illustrative style to it. I think you're going for more hyper-realistic though. And that's fine too. I suggest practicing drawing fabric, from real life of course.
ReplyDeleteYour master copy was uber successful. This level of realism is not something that everyone can manage, and I think that if you had more time to complete your study, I think it would have been just as realistic.
ReplyDeleteI think your master copy was very successful. I think your choice of materials was great. I would have liked to have seen the same material choices in your master study. I love the light highlights in your master copy, and I feel like they're missing from your master study.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoy how much like paint the master copy looks. The detail and use of different medias really make this piece successful.
ReplyDeleteI thoroughly enjoyed your study, specifically your re creation. The detail is amazing!
ReplyDeleteYour master copy was incredible. The use of ink and charcoal made lines even darker and crisper. There is a lack of dark and crisp lines in your original piece; adding ink to it may have made your work more cohesive.
ReplyDeleteYour master copy was very successful. I liked your choice of lines and mark-making tools, but I think these should have also been used in your master study. Still, I really liked the lights and darks in your study.
ReplyDeleteVery nice job. I think both pieces were very well done.
ReplyDeleteyour work is very detailed, I feel as though you do such a good job on details the only thing I think could use improvement is on the choice of pen on the master copy could have been carried out on the master copy verion you did.
ReplyDeleteOn a metaphysical level, there is an amazing level of connection and interaction between these two pieces. While the majority of painters in Vermeer's time, especially the Dutch, were focused displaying wealth and the upper class, Vermeer instead generally focused on the middle class. Though the figure in your copy may be of the upper class and the figure in your study reads as middle class, the study is almost like a time-travel duplication of the copy. Its as if your took the copy and hit fast forward for 350 years and what you got was the study. There are so many more interesting connections, but i'm at the risk of writing an essay so i'll stop there.
ReplyDeleteI think its okay that the copy is more realistic and the study is more impressionist. There is enough of a connection in ideology between the pieces that it doesn't matter that the two don't look exactly alike; they both look like the same artist could have created them. I don't know if you meant to go that deep, but it really works for me, great job!
I think that these two images definitely look like they could be a part of the same series separated by time. The attention to detail is incredible, the only thing that really stood out to me as a difference visually, was the greater range of values, mostly a darker black and whiter white, on the master copy.
ReplyDeleteBoth pieces look amazing. The technical aspects such as proportion and value in each piece is on point. There is a small disparity as the copy is much more crisp and seemingly more real but they still work together as a series. The study is much more expressive which I believe is more effective than the copy.
ReplyDeleteYour ability to draw so technically constantly amazes me. The copy seems a little more realistic that the study however they still work well as a series. I love your use of value line and composition. I would suggest using the same media in both images.
ReplyDeleteThese both use a great range of the value scale from one to nine. The master copy is very much more detailed and defined in mark making compared to the master study, which is soft and illustrative.
ReplyDeleteRendition is spot on, almost perfect.
ReplyDeleteMaster Study
The mark making is softer then copy. Not as sharp. Original is beautiful and soft.