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.
The copy is done well, it's very smooth. The study misses the mark a bit with the aesthetic of the artist. The copy is cartoonish, flirty and playful as well as ironic and a bit snarky. Your piece is very expressive and loving, these traits don't exemplify the genre you are attempting to mimic. Consider reading about the artist's intent to gain a better understanding of the genre.
Your mark-making technique is very, very similar to the master copy. I feel as though your piece seems separate from the copy because the subject matter is so different. Where the master copy focuses on an individual figure that takes up most of the composition and creates a sense of monumental energy, your piece has two figures that are proportionally smaller. Ultimately, they don't seem as "important" of a subject as the figure in the artist's piece.
I think you did a great job with your master copy. The smooth mark making is great. I would just work on style and composition in your master study. Try for more of a character, illustrated look, and also a larger composition as the master copy fills most of the page.
The lines on both or your pieces are very similar and the value on both are great as well. I really enjoy your master copy and the character behind it.
I liked the similarities of mark making between the two works. I also enjoyed that you were able to copy the style using models, considering the artist plays with proportions and distortion.
The "pinup girl" style of the artist combined with the slight distortions in the face and limbs make it difficult to copy. The expression is well done but more attention could be given to the figure itself. Your original as well has the intimate trademark of the artist however, clothed models may have more sexual appeal than completely naked ones. Their expressions also lack the flirtatiousness of the original piece.
I think that you definitely captured Currin's style in the master copy, but I didn't see the artistic style emulated in the study. The subject matter was very loving, but the mark making and features in the study were a little off. Still, great job!
I liked the master copy very much. The copy was good, but did need a little more work. Try grounding the picture with a little more background so they are not just floating in air. I also think clothing and more flirtatious expressions would really bring the piece together.
The subject matter in both are very different. It's difficult to compare the two as a set. I enjoyed the master copy very much. The form and proportions on both turned out well and contains effective use of shades.
It seems as though John Currin's work is huge one expression and conveyed feeling. Though you did produce a very well drawn and compelling study, i think you could have spent a little bit more time on the faces and expressions of the models and a little less on the attention to subtle changes in light. The shadows in the copy are somewhat linear, and the form is defined mostly by contour. The time you took on the intricacies of the arms could maybe have been used to give the models narrative facial expressions. I also think zooming in a little bit and making the models take up more of the page would have helped the style feel a bit more like Currin's. overall both are good drawings!
Hi Laken! There is a dialogue between these two, I think one of the major differences between the copy and the original is the use of shading. There is less shading and value difference in the master copy than in the original work. I didn't notice this before, but the faces on your original kinda fade out, I would like to see you "finish" that.
I love John Currin's work and your reproduction of his piece definitely does it justice. The emotion is there in both pieces. I think aesthetically the second pieces strays away from the copy. The style is different with a different use of values. Also, the subject matter is different and doesn't seem like something Currin would create.
I love your use of line and value in both pieces. Your master study is very well done, however it is hard for me to make a connection between both pieces. Your study is is raw and has an emotional aspect, while the copy is almost barbie like and generic.
Since John Currin usually disproportions his subjects stylistically, the models in the master study need to be a bit more distorted as well. More values can be used (the dark, darks of the value scale), and some more detail, for example, detail of clothes to create the vulgar style of Currin.
The copy is done really nice. Marks are soft with good use of value. The arm going behind the back seems a little thin. Doesn’t have the same feeling or mark making. Values could have been pushed more to recreate the original style.
The copy is done well, it's very smooth. The study misses the mark a bit with the aesthetic of the artist. The copy is cartoonish, flirty and playful as well as ironic and a bit snarky. Your piece is very expressive and loving, these traits don't exemplify the genre you are attempting to mimic. Consider reading about the artist's intent to gain a better understanding of the genre.
ReplyDeleteYour mark-making technique is very, very similar to the master copy. I feel as though your piece seems separate from the copy because the subject matter is so different. Where the master copy focuses on an individual figure that takes up most of the composition and creates a sense of monumental energy, your piece has two figures that are proportionally smaller. Ultimately, they don't seem as "important" of a subject as the figure in the artist's piece.
ReplyDeleteI think you did a great job with your master copy. The smooth mark making is great. I would just work on style and composition in your master study. Try for more of a character, illustrated look, and also a larger composition as the master copy fills most of the page.
ReplyDeleteThe lines on both or your pieces are very similar and the value on both are great as well. I really enjoy your master copy and the character behind it.
ReplyDeleteI liked the similarities of mark making between the two works. I also enjoyed that you were able to copy the style using models, considering the artist plays with proportions and distortion.
ReplyDeleteThe "pinup girl" style of the artist combined with the slight distortions in the face and limbs make it difficult to copy. The expression is well done but more attention could be given to the figure itself. Your original as well has the intimate trademark of the artist however, clothed models may have more sexual appeal than completely naked ones. Their expressions also lack the flirtatiousness of the original piece.
ReplyDeleteI think that you definitely captured Currin's style in the master copy, but I didn't see the artistic style emulated in the study. The subject matter was very loving, but the mark making and features in the study were a little off. Still, great job!
ReplyDeleteI liked the master copy very much. The copy was good, but did need a little more work. Try grounding the picture with a little more background so they are not just floating in air. I also think clothing and more flirtatious expressions would really bring the piece together.
ReplyDeleteThe subject matter in both are very different. It's difficult to compare the two as a set. I enjoyed the master copy very much. The form and proportions on both turned out well and contains effective use of shades.
ReplyDeleteIt seems as though John Currin's work is huge one expression and conveyed feeling. Though you did produce a very well drawn and compelling study, i think you could have spent a little bit more time on the faces and expressions of the models and a little less on the attention to subtle changes in light. The shadows in the copy are somewhat linear, and the form is defined mostly by contour. The time you took on the intricacies of the arms could maybe have been used to give the models narrative facial expressions. I also think zooming in a little bit and making the models take up more of the page would have helped the style feel a bit more like Currin's. overall both are good drawings!
ReplyDeleteHi Laken! There is a dialogue between these two, I think one of the major differences between the copy and the original is the use of shading. There is less shading and value difference in the master copy than in the original work. I didn't notice this before, but the faces on your original kinda fade out, I would like to see you "finish" that.
ReplyDeleteI love John Currin's work and your reproduction of his piece definitely does it justice. The emotion is there in both pieces. I think aesthetically the second pieces strays away from the copy. The style is different with a different use of values. Also, the subject matter is different and doesn't seem like something Currin would create.
ReplyDeleteI love your use of line and value in both pieces. Your master study is very well done, however it is hard for me to make a connection between both pieces. Your study is is raw and has an emotional aspect, while the copy is almost barbie like and generic.
ReplyDeleteSince John Currin usually disproportions his subjects stylistically, the models in the master study need to be a bit more distorted as well. More values can be used (the dark, darks of the value scale), and some more detail, for example, detail of clothes to create the vulgar style of Currin.
ReplyDeleteThe copy is done really nice. Marks are soft with good use of value. The arm going behind the back seems a little thin. Doesn’t have the same feeling or mark making. Values could have been pushed more to recreate the original style.
ReplyDelete