- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- November 2018
- September 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- April 2017
- February 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
Monthly Archives: July 2012
Unfortunately the OCA study visit to the Yorkshire Sculpture Park was scheduled on a thoroughly wet and miserable day! Due to this, we spent time in the underground gallery looking at the Miró exhibition and at the Longside gallery looking at Anish Kapoor, but didn’t get chance to look at the sculptures in the grounds (or take any photographs). Gerald Deslandes guided us around the exhibitions and Jim Unsworth discussed the sculpting process and results.
Miró was a surrealist who concentrated on the allusiveness of nature. He found that the shapes found in one area of nature, seed pods for instance, can also be found in the human form, or other forms of nature. He had a connection with Gaudi in using organic forms and strong distinct areas of colour.
He worked in drawing, painting, collage and printing, but it was not until later in his life that he produced sculpture.
The sculptures are interesting, but I only like a small number of them. Gerald questioned whether Miró was actually a good sculptor and I agree. They seem to fall into a few categories, firstly the assembled pieces from found objects (subsequently cast in bronze), which don’t do much for me on the whole. Then the “blown up” smooth bronze sculptures which seem to work better in their model form than in the enlarged final form. Finally the more organic sculptures (not exhibited here) which look like children’s models. Maybe I don’t understand them enough, but none of them moved me and I could see a lot less in them than I could in his paintings.
Due to time constraints, I didn’t get chance to study many of the sculptures in great detail. One which did catch my attention though was a bronze cast wooden plank with shoes on it and something on top (I forget what now and unfortunately I didn’t note down its name and cannot find it on the internet). The sculpture as a whole didn’t grab me, but some of the detail did. Presumably at the wax stage of casting, the “plank” had been hollowed out from within one of the shoes, so on looking into the shoe you were looking into the whole sculpture. It was an unexpected discovery and I think that is the kind of sculpture which appeals to me, ones which have things to discover about them, questions unanswered, meaning unknown but open to the viewer imagination. That hole may have had meaning to Miró (or maybe the idea just tickled him as it did me), but I don’t feel I need to know what it was, only that I like it.
Anish Kapoor uses pigments to create brightly coloured sculptures or areas of very dark dense colour, and also highly polished reflective metal sculptures.
The pigment work references Indian culture in the way pigments are displayed in their markets. They also reference the female human body and the notions of opposites (solid/void), and also illusion and display (the shiny sphere appearing like fairground mirrors).
The sculptures I liked of his were “Adam” and “Void” for their interesting visual effects and the ability to get lost in their depth. “Adam” is a void in a large sandstone block which is coated in a dark blue/purple/black pigment. This absorbs all the light falling on it so you cannot tell if it is a void or not. Despite there being nothing to see, it was a sculpture you could stand and stare into, and for me it was reminiscent of the monolith in 2001 a space odyssey, having a similar sense of power and mystery.
As for the others, the bright colours in “White Sand, Red Millet, Many Flowers” & “Red in the Centre” were very bold statements, but I didn’t get the overall feeling they aimed to impart.
The reflective sculptures didn’t evoke any feelings for me and “Turning Water into Mirror, Blood into Sky” was a clever science trick, but the mechanics of the motor spinning the container and the annoying noise coming from it took away any message it was trying to convey.
An interesting general sculpture comment from Jim Unsworth:
When looking at art, you need to shift your perception from being a connoisseur, to looking at how it was created, how it makes you feel, and how those feelings have been portrayed in the medium.
I think I am starting to do this in terms of how it was created, but not in the feeling side of things yet.
A very interesting day out, and worth another visit (in the sunshine!) to spend longer examining some of the sculptures.
Exercise – Line drawing detail
Using a black fibre-tipped pen, I drew a leek.
I found it hard to resist the temptation to add tone and shadows to the image. The image is OK, but without tone and shadow it is not going to get much better!
Exercise – Getting tone and depth in detail
Conscious of my tutor feedback from assignment 1, I was particularly focusing on trying to vary the weight and intensity of my lines, use longer and more controlled lines, and ensure that I didn’t mix my tonal drawing with an outline drawing.
As with my still life of man-made objects in assignment 1, I did this drawing over a period of time and it shows. The style of the branch to the left and right of the section of bark is different as it was done on different days. I need to watch out for this in future drawings and either do all of the same type of textured areas at the same time, or observe what I have done previously more closely before starting again.
I think the right hand side of the branch works well, but the shadow on the left hand side is too abrupt and the lines too regular. I think the dark shadow mostly works, although I was too hard with my hatching initially on the right hand side of the shadow and changed to a lighter hatching after that, which shows. The boundary between the shadow areas is also too abrupt. Unfortunately I sprayed the image with fixative before I noticed some of these faults!
I think the key lessons are to keep looking more and more in depth at the object you are drawing, and also to step back from the drawing occasionally to see how it fits together.
Exercise – Stipples and Dots
I chose a fossil to draw, sketched it roughly in pencil, and then set about getting the detail using a drawing pen.
As you can see, I only got part way through this image. It was very time consuming and I realised that I had got the initial rough sketch wrong, and the next ring in was going to be bigger than the one before, it which obviously wasn’t right, so I quit whilst I was ahead (ish)!
I think the use of stippling gives an interesting effect, but it is difficult to get the tone and shadows to look right. I think the transition between the shadow on the fossil is too abrupt in my image. I also need to ensure any initial sketch is accurate before starting out with the pen as it is too late then to correct significant mistakes.
Find drawings by two artists who work in contrasting ways: from tight, rigorous work to a more sketchy, expressive style.
1471 to 1528
Albrecht Dürer came from a German family of artists. His father was a goldsmith in Nuremberg and he initially trained under him before deciding that he wanted to be a painter. He was then indentured to the painter Michael Wolgemut. After this apprenticeship, he travelled throughout Germany and to the Netherlands to learn about the art of these areas, eventually establishing himself in Basle. He returned to Nuremburg in 1494 to marry Agnes Frey and settled back there permanently the following year after spending some time travelling in Italy.
He was a drawer, painter, printmaker and writer. His work is incredibly detailed and precise and stands the test of time, which is no doubt why he is often considered the greatest of all German artists.
I have picked out 4 images which fit with the theme of this section which are shown below:
A drawing of an apostle’s hands in prayer, carried out as preparatory work for an altarpiece commission.
A woodcut of a Rhinoceros, based on a sketch and description.
Schmidt-Rottluff was also a German painter and printmaker, however he was supporter of Expressionism and has a very different style to Dürer. Following his friend Erich Heckel into architecture school in Dresden, they used this as a front to study painting. With Enrich they founded Die Brücke, a group of artists painting vital art which renounced the traditions of the time. The group eventually broke up in 1914 as the members moved away from each other in both location and style.
His work uses freely drawn lines to represent the images in a very simplified form.
I have selected 4 images which are shown below:
Oxford Art Online: http://www.oxfordartonline.com
Bridgeman Education: http://www.bridgemaneducation.com
Check and Log
Which drawing media did you find most effective to use, for what effects?
- I find the drawing pen effective for detailed work, but find it difficult to show light texture as it is a solid black. The pencil is much more effective for gradations of tone and the different hardness’s allow for a wide range of different marks and tonal values to be captured.
What sort of marks work well to create tone, pattern and texture? Make notes beside some sample marks.
- Hatching works well to create tone, whereas this is hard to achieve with stippling. Pattern and texture can be achieved with stippling or hatching, depending on the effects required.
Did you enjoy capturing details or are you more at home creating big broad brush sketches?
- I am far more at home with detailed drawing, although I do want to explore the broad brush approach more in my work.
Look at the composition of the drawings you have done in this project. Make some sketches and notes about how you could improve your composition.
- This is tricky as all the drawings in this project are of single objects, so they don’t offer much in the way of alternative composition. I did move them all around at the time to try to capture their best angle. The only one I feel could benefit from being rearranged is the leek which is a bit boring being just side on. Not having a leek to hand now, I have not done any sketches on how it could be improved, but an angled view from the base up may be more effective, although without adding tone and shadows to this, it might look a bit odd?