Uncomfortable

2015-09-14 23:13

Hmm.. Inspiration is... a bit of a farce, really. You hear about it a lot in relation to art, but it's just nonsense, all of it. Drawing is a skill like hammering a nail. You might not be great at it yet, but there is nothing stopping you from gettin' down and hammering away.

If you start to think about it in terms of this lofty concept that requires the perfect alignment of your soul and mind to spurt magic from your fingertips, then you might catch yourself thinking, "man I just don't have it in me to hammer that nail today." It's a normal thing, really - we've all been conditioned to feel that way about art. At the end of the day, what we're doing here is not art. We are not artists. We are artisans, and we are mastering a craft like any other.

Perhaps one day we'll use that craft to give voice to something loftier, a message that is truly inspired, but for now, all we're doing is hammering away. So when you feel uninspired or unmotivated, pick up your hammer and do it anyway. I will admit - it's easier to do that when someone's paying you :P

Anyway, onto your homework. I always feel a bit iffy about critiquing work that was started ages ago, because even time itself can have an impact on how you understand the world. Because of this, I do feel a steady improvement over the course of your work, but I'm still going to point out core problems that may or may not be of concern right now.

Really there's two main problems.

1. I notice here and there that your contour curves aren't doing too great a job of wrapping around cylindrical objects (stalks, stems, trunks). It's a problem we deal with in the organic forms with contour curves exercise in lesson 2, so you should go back to it and watch the video on the topic once again.

2. Next, I think you have a tendency to jump into complex shapes too early. Remember that everything we draw needs to start off simple. This goes twofold for flat objects that bend through 3D space, like leaves and petals. They just happen to demonstrate this concept better. Often leaves will have fraying or curling at the edges, but when we lay them in we need to ignore this. Focus on the direction/gesture of that leaf, and capture it with simple curves. Then use those curves as a scaffolding to break down your forms and add detail. The reason is that when you jump in with complex details first, the gesture/curvature of the leaf gets lost, and it ends up looking stiff. Try to tackle them like this.

Honestly, I'm not 100% satisfied - I think you're moving in the right direction, but I want to be sure that we have these things hammered out. I'd like to see three more pages of plants.

Uncomfortable

2015-09-21 17:33

Detail is pretty irrelevant at this phase. I'm really only focusing on your ability to lay in form, which is still lacking.

You're not alone in this, though. I'm noticing that just about everything I want to point out in your work is the same as a critique I wrote fairly recently. Instead of having me repeat it all, I'm just going to link you to it.

Once you've read over that critique (the overdrawing I did for that student is also relevant to you - focus on drawing that center line of each leaf/petal first), I want you to try another five pages.

Regardless of how you do, I will mark the lesson complete after that. I'm not generally pleased with leaving people at this lesson too long. It's an important lesson, but it's the sort that takes a little while to sink in, and people generally do better as they move forward.

Uncomfortable

2015-09-21 17:52

Very nice! At times you're a bit sketchy (which relates to thinking more on the page than attempting to previsualize and preplan) but your work is still very well done. Your forms are communicated solidly, and your balance of details is attractive.

I especially enjoyed your baobab tree. Feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2015-09-27 16:51

I can definitely see that this was challenging for you - many of these drawings are hit and miss, with the majority falling into the latter category. Page 9 was one of the better ones, but it has issues of its own.

I'll outline some of the problems below.

1. When facing an actual physical object, you're getting overwhelmed by all of the visual detail that's being thrown at you. This is normal. There's a lot going on, but you need to train yourself to recognize the major forms and lay those in. It's like laying in a scaffolding. That's what all of these lessons from here on in are about. Laying things in, and breaking down complexity. If you look at my demos again, you'll notice that I have no qualms with adding lines that aren't really there. All that matters is that each of the lines you draw MUST contribute something, either to the drawing or to your understanding of the forms themselves.

2. Your lines are timid, sketchy and loose. You're not visualizing - you're thinking right on the page. Remember the ghosting technique - remember the necessity of thinking and planning before every single mark. Consider what that mark contributes to your drawing. Do not sketch, draw with confidence. Mistakes will happen, that's a given, but you can't let that fear hold you back.

3. As I mentioned before, you're too caught up in details. For example, the edges of leaves - often they are wavy or tattered or spiky along their edges, but at first you need to ignore that. Capture the general form of the leaf - this usually means a simple curve. Follow this process. Relating back to the previous point, see how each curve is a simple, continuous curve all the way through. It's not one line made up of several sketchy marks, and doesn't show any sign of a lack of confidence. The use of that center line as your first step is also important, as it governs the flow of the entire leaf.

I'd like you to try this lesson once again. Be sure to reread the demos as well.

Uncomfortable

2015-09-28 16:33

The lack of notes on that one page is perfectly fine - unfortunately however, you are expected to have completed and submitted lessons 1 and 2 before you are able to receive a critique for this one. While you are free to use the lessons to teach yourself in whatever order you like, if you would like to take advantage of the critiques I offer, each lesson must be done in order, and you must wait for me to mark a given lesson as complete before moving onto the following one.

Uncomfortable

2015-09-29 19:36

Better. Good enough for me to mark the lesson as complete, but there is definitely still room to grow. The biggest thing that jumps out at me here is that you're not using contour lines particularly well, as though you're applying them just 'cause, rather than understanding their purpose.

Remember that these lines run along the surface of a form, to help describe how that form twists and turns through 3D space. you've got quite a few cylindrical forms in there where your contour lines don't wrap around the form at all. They're just loose, careless curves thrown on there that serve no purpose.

Keep an eye on that.

As you move into the next lesson, you'll find that contour lines become more important. Try to refrain from just throwing a bunch of contour lines onto a form and creating a sort of wireframe appearance. Instead, find places where those contour lines exist in the subject itself. Like in the insects, they've got a lot of natural segmentation. Before adding anything artificial, look for natural details that serve the purpose that artificial contour lines would otherwise.

Anyway, go ahead and move onto the next one.

Uncomfortable

2015-09-29 19:54

The confidence of your lines is good, though at the same time, I think you may be too loose and sketchy. What that ties back to is that you're thinking on the page, rather than spending enough time thinking and visualizing before you actually put a mark down. Try to consider whether a mark you put down will contribute to the drawing or your understanding of it (like drawing through forms or adding contour lines). If the mark you want to draw does not contribute in one of these two ways, it's probably not worth drawing. For example, a lot of the time you've got several lines attempting to perform the same task, where only a single line would do.

Also, consider putting a bit more thought into the center lines of your leaves specifically. Those center lines drive the gesture of the leaf, so if it is weak, the rest of the leaf will lack energy.

Anyway, generally your work does look good, your forms are solid and I think you've done a good job of breaking down forms. These are just things that I'd like to stress as you continue to move forward.

I'll mark this lesson as complete, so feel free to go onto the next one.

Uncomfortable

2015-09-30 19:01

Nicely done! Generally you did a good job. Your line quality is well-controlled, and your form constructions are generally pretty good. I did notice in some situations (top left of page 3) where you had a cylindrical tree trunk, your contour lines did not wrap around the form terribly convincingly. They seem to almost be there, but not quite.

My only significant concern though is your application of those contour lines. Try to refrain from just applying them all over the place, and spacing them out regularly like some kind of 3D wireframe mesh. First and foremost, look for details in your objects that function as natural contour lines (that is, details that convey the flow of that surface through 3D space). If you cannot find any at all, then you can add one or two artificial ones, but try not to space them out at even intervals, as that tends to look man-made.

I'm marking this lesson as complete, so feel free to move onto the next lesson. It should give you a great deal more practice with contour lines and the like, as insects tend to show a lot of great natural contours in their segmentation.

Uncomfortable

2015-10-05 20:08

Generally quite good. Your forms and constructions are pretty solid. The only thing I want you note, is that when you apply contour lines to something, first look for those that already naturally exist within your reference. These will be any lines that deform and distort with the surface of the object. If you cannot find any, then you may consider adding artificial ones - but try not to keep these evenly spaced, as that tends to look man-made.

Feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2015-10-05 20:37

From what I can see, you've done a good job of sorting through your hierarchy of information, isolating the important forms and focusing on those. You also seem to have put a fair bit of effort into your observation of the smaller textural details, so good work.

To be honest though, your photos are kind of low-res. Next time, try to upload images at least twice that size.

Feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2015-10-07 19:52

Generally you did pretty well, but there's one thing I want to jump on from the bottom half of page 6. Here you're demonstrating a somewhat detail-oriented approach to starting a drawing. Fundamentally, that's the opposite of the approach we're stressing in this lesson. Instead, we want to focus on the overall forms.

Take a look at how I approach drawing a leaf. Most leaves have little waves or fraying or jagged edges, but to start with I ignore that. I draw the center line, which governs the overall flow of the leaf, and I expand that out into a second dimension with simple curves defining the edges of the leaf - ignoring any waves or other details. Finally, working with those simple curves as a scaffolding, I add the wavey edges, fraying, or whatever else there is. This maintains the unified flow of the leaf itself. If you start from the small details, you tend to loose this general sense of a single object deforming through 3D space, and end up with a lot of little details that seem to loosely be stuck together.

Anyway, you did quite well so feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2015-10-10 03:05

I think you're very quickly getting overwhelmed with the amount of visual information in your reference images, and as such, are getting caught up in the details rather than focusing on the underlying construction of simple forms.

I'd like you to set the plants aside - I'm going to have you try these again in a bit, but for now, let's try another exercise. It's one I've been testing out with a few other people - it's called the maggot exercise.

Basically, you draw a bunch of maggoty, segmented organic forms. Focus on building up the construction, like this. Start off with an organic shape, give it some contour lines, then build up the rounded segmentation around that scaffolding. The point here is to focus on how these things exist as solid volumes in 3D space.

Uncomfortable

2015-10-12 16:54

Definitely a whole lot of hit-and-miss. One thing that jumps out at me the most is that you're spending a lot more time drawing, and a lot less time looking at your reference. A glance every now and then at your reference is simply not enough. The second you look away from your reference image, 90% of the information you gathered will disappear in an instant. The majority of what's left will exist in your mind as a simplification of what you saw - which in turn is also fairly useless. You might only have enough to carry over a very tiny bit of information - maybe a second or two's worth of drawing - before you'll have to look at the reference again.

The problem comes from when people think they've gathered more information than they have, specifically that simplified portion. We naturally simplify the information that we see, because it allows us to retain more of it. When it comes to drawing however, especially when we're delving into detail, we end up drawing what we think we saw, not what we actually saw. Our memories are faulty. Don't trust what you remember.

Instead, look at your reference constantly, and spend twice or thrice as much time looking at it as you do drawing.

Now, I find that in some cases your constructions are well done. Page 13 was really well done, and I'll explain why.

• Your leaves start off simple - just the centre line, then a simple pair of curves around it to define the flow of the leaf. Then you use that as a scaffolding to lay in more complex information, like how the edges of the leaves have a bit of wave to them. Like this.

• Your contour lines are pulled from specific details that appear naturally in the subject. Artificial contour lines are useful for sure, but it is far better to find actual details in the object you're drawing to serve the same purpose. That is, details that describe the curvature and distortion of the surface in 3D space.

• You did not overdo detail. You drew only what you observed, and didn't try to push beyond that. In other drawings, you seem to have gotten frustrated with textures you could not yet comprehend, and ended up just putting down a whole lot of ink in the hopes that something would happen.

When it comes to objects that have much more solid 3D form, like on page 8, focus on capturing that form. Don't get lost in detail, as detail is largely unimportant. Looking at that plant, each bulbous section seems to be a different organic form that intersects with another. Flesh it out. Use the intersections to start adding volume to your shape, and also consider adding a contour line here or there. Like this.

I'd like to see another five pages of plant drawings.

Uncomfortable

2015-10-12 16:58

I agree, the start was a little weak, but you did improve throughout the set. One thing I want to emphasize though is that when it comes to contour lines, first look for ones that already exist naturally within your subject matter. These aren't necessarily going to be oriented the way you'd naturally draw your contour lines, but the purpose they need to serve is that it needs to be some kind of detail that runs along the surface of the object, describing how it turns and warps through space.

If you absolutely can't find anything else that serves that purpose, you can start adding artificial contour lines, but try not to space them out too regularly. That tends to make things look man-made.

On another point, don't fret too much over lighting. Focus on what is necessary to describe the form. Usually I only really use shadows to separate my shapes and push things back when the drawing starts to get too busy. The issue with focusing on lighting is that people have a tendency to think that lighting is the primary way one should depict form. I'd much rather that people think about lighting once that form is already defined using line, shape and silhouette.

Generally you did decently. There is definitely room to improve (with continued practice), but I think you should be okay to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2015-10-21 19:59

Very nice work! Since you mentioned that the order got a little messed up, I can't really assume that one comes before another. That said, between the first image and the last, there is considerable improvement. The first few pages, though they show strong observational skills, they're kind of loose and very sketchy - a lot of thinking on the page, rather than holding yourself back, thinking, and then applying lines that have been planned and previsualized.

Later through the set, you improve in this area. The drawings themselves do stiffen up a bit, which is understandable since you're clearly more comfortable being sketchy.

One thing to remember is try to construct your curves with single flowing lines, from end to end. Breaking a curving line into two segments, which I see here and there, will disturb that flow. You don't do this too often, but it is something I wanted to mention.

You're doing great though - keep up the good work and feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2015-10-23 19:15

Not bad! I do have a few points I want to mention, and I do feel that you have plenty of room to grow, but I think these are satisfactory for this stage and will be marking this lesson as complete.

The first thing that jumps out at me is that you're not always applying the concept of starting out with overall shapes and breaking them down, specifically in the cases where you have leaves that have odd shapes - for example, page 4 of your homework, on the right. Remember to start off with the overall shape - in this case, that means enclosing the whole leaf with two curves. Start off with a center line to determine the flow of your leaf, then add the two enclosing curves, like this. Keep it simple and don't try to concern yourself with fine detail just yet. Once you've constructed this scaffolding, you can work within it to add some of the deviations in shape, cutting into what you've drawn so far.

Secondly, I noticed that when you draw in your detail, you seem to look at your reference, absorb as much information as you can, and then draw for a considerable period of time relying on what you remember of what you saw. Don't trust your ability to remember - it will almost always fail you. The moment you look away from your reference image, the vast majority of the information you absorbed will be forgotten, and much of what's left will be simplified by your mind to the point of being useless. What's left will only last a second or two, so you'll have to look back at the reference image almost immediately.

Lastly, when applying contour lines to help visually describe the surfaces you're drawing and how they move through 3D space, first look for natural features that accomplish this already. Anything that runs along the surface of the object will do. Then, if you cannot find any such details, you can add two or three artificial contour lines of your own, but don't spread these out evenly over the object. Doing so often results in something that looks a little too man-made.

Anyway, keep this in mind and keep up the good work. Feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2015-11-01 19:29

It's.. better, I guess. Not a whole lot better, but there are improvements.

The first few pages are more or less as bad as the previous set, so I'm not going to discuss them (because I'd give the same critique I gave last time). Over the set however, I do see things improving.

The mushroom is what I'm going to focus on for my critique. Here's an overdrawing and some notes. The most important thing is that you did not think about primitive 3D forms at all. That's the core of the dynamic sketching approach to drawing - everything is made up of simple 3D forms. All of these forms intersect with one another at specific points. That simple construction is all that matters - detail, little variations and texture are worthless if your basic forms are not there.

People have a great tendency to use hatching lines for shading. I think that habit is one of the biggest causes for peoples' difficulty in drawing other textures. All they can think about is hatching - and hatching works well for basic forms with no actual texture to them (like the boxes in lesson 1) but there's very little in the world that can really be described accurately with hatching lines. This is a demo I did a while back to tackle the issue of identifying textures in a reference image. Pay closer attention to what you're drawing.

Also, try to avoid crosshatching. I think when it's done successfully, it's done with tools that allow for a lot of variation in opacity - which our pens do not. It ends up looking really clunky and awful every time.

Your cactus on page 9 was actually done pretty well. Still a lot of hatching and not much attention paid to texture, but your form is pretty well done. It's a great example of form trumping everything else. If it feels like it occupies 3D space and has volume, then that's half the battle right there. Or more.

Now, I'm going to let you continue onto the next lesson largely because I personally don't like keeping people at this lesson for too long. The next one is far better for understanding the use of form and construction.

One last point - yes, yes you can stop scribbling. Getting your line weights under control is one thing, that takes time and practice. Scribbling is an active choice that you are making. You may not know what to do instead of scribbling, but you certainly have the choice to stop. So stop scribbling.

Uncomfortable

2015-11-01 20:04

I think you're shooting yourself in the foot by drawing so small on the page. Because of that decision, your lines have a tendency to be very stiff and rigid. Contour lines don't wrap around rounded forms too well because they have so little room to achieve that, and your details look clunky and overly heavy just because the tip of your pen is so large in relation to the overall drawings.

I feel that critiquing these wouldn't make much sense, because it's difficult to separate the problems with technique and understanding from the results of drawing too small.

As such, I'd like you to do another two pages. Don't try to cram a million things onto one page - focus on one subject per page, and try to maximize your use of the space you're given.

Uncomfortable

2015-11-01 20:57

You have not yet completed lesson 2 - I asked for one more page of organic forms with contour curves. You really shouldn't be moving ahead before I've marked a lesson as complete. Once you submit that revision for lesson 2 and I mark the lesson as complete, please point me to this homework submission.

Uncomfortable

2015-11-02 21:01

Pretty solid work. Your textures are well observed and rendered, and your forms flow nicely. I would definitely encourage you however to do two minor things - with the bottoms of stems, even though the plant continues on below the point to which you've drawn it, cap off the end as though it is the bottom of a cylinder. Doing so will help drive home the idea that this is a cylindrical object, and will reinforce the sense of form and volume.

Similarly, keep an eye on joints - for example in the top left corner of study 8, you've got a sort of cross-joint there. In your lay-in, treat it like two intersecting cylinders and be mindful of what the intersection point looks like. In this case, all I would add is a circle along the area where the vertical stem pops out of the horizontal one. This is more to reinforce your own understanding of those forms in the lay-in stage rather than improving the drawing itself.

Anyway, fantastic work. Keep it up and feel free to move onto the next lesson!

Uncomfortable

2015-11-01 21:21

Some of these are certainly better than others, but there's definitely room for improvement. That said, rather than keep you at this lesson, I'm going to mark it as complete regardless. I don't like keeping people at this lesson longer than is necessary, because the next one does a far better job of introducing students to the idea of breaking down objects into rudimentary 3D forms.

I will point out a few things that stood out to me, however:

• Here and there I'm seeing some slightly chicken-scratchy lines. Always pause and think before you put down a mark, and ghost through it. Focus on putting down singular flowing lines rather than several marks where one will do.

• Study the textures present in your reference image more carefully. Hatching lines are almost never present in the way that beginners tend to put them down. There's usually significantly more interesting bits of detail present with its own hierarchy, grouping and organization. Spend more time studying your reference image and less time drawing. If you're not sure what to put down, don't put down anything. It's often better than the alternative, which is just putting down hatching lines or scribbling. Never, ever scribble, and never rely on randomness. This demo on identifying different kinds of texture from a reference image may help a little.

Uncomfortable

2015-11-03 20:36

People tend to be more critical of themselves than they should be. You're doing just fine. I especially like the stuff going on on the bottom of page 7 - your lines have a nice range of weights, and they flow nicely. The forms themselves sit convincingly in 3D space, and your constructions feel cohesive.

I get the impression that your initial lay-ins are a little loose, and that you tighten them up later in the process. I don't want you to stress turning away from what's natural because that may be to an extent what works best for you right now, but it wouldn't hurt to remind yourself to think through each stroke a little bit before you put it down. Consider its purpose in the drawing, where it should start, where it should end, how it should curve, and ghost through it a bit.

Anyway, you're doing great. Feel free to move onto the next lesson. And remember, your decision to submit your homework should not depend on whether or not you think it's perfect. Perfect work is useless when it comes to finding ways to improve. Complete the requested homework, and submit it regardless of how you feel. All that matters is that you put your full effort and ability into it.

Uncomfortable

2015-11-04 21:01

Holy fucking christ. I just dug up your lesson 2 homework. Where the hell did this come from? You've improvement is massive! I get that it's been 10-11 months, but still - you have to have taken a class or something.

Anyway, luckily I still do have some tips. One thing that I'm catching is that you've got a lot of general looseness to your drawings. You tend to tighten them up as you go further into detail, but your lay-ins tend to be somewhat sketchy. Sketchiness is usually a sign of thinking on the page, which is something we all do to an extent, but often times there is a lot of benefit from training yourself to stop, think and visualize first. This is the demo I generally use to explain this point. Hold yourself back a little, and utilize the ghosting method from lesson 1. Since you did lessons 1/2 ages ago, you should definitely read through those lessons again - I've added a lot of extra stuff that is worth noting.

The other thing I wanted to mention falls on the same point - you do have some nice textures going on, but just as often you fall back to some pretty plain hatching lines that can at times get a little sloppy and rushed. Just keep that in mind - avoid sloppiness in any and all areas of your drawing. Also take a look at this demo on identifying different kinds of non-hatching textures in your reference photos. It's pretty rare that you'd find hatching lines in nature.

That's nitpicking of course - you did great. Your drawings are fantastic. I just always make a point of steering people in the track of dynamic sketching, which is all about planning things out and thinking through every mark you draw.

Feel free to move onto the next lesson!

Uncomfortable

2015-11-07 17:21

You've done fairly well. There are two things that I'd like you to keep in mind as you move forward, however.

• Think, then draw. Try not to be loose, even with your lay-ins. Think about the simple shapes and forms, and try not to be approximate. If in the end you end up having to make adjustments because you weren't 100% accurate, that's totally fine - but you should still be aiming to be deliberate. Don't just right into drawing, instead think it through step by step. Like this.

• When adding detail and texture, remember that hatching lines are basically shorthand for "I don't really know what goes here but I don't want to leave it blank." It's rare that you'll find a texture that is best represented by a bunch of hatching lines - instead, spend more time studying your reference and try to identify the patterns and rhythms of marks and shapes that give the given surface its particular tactile illusion. Check out this demo on identifying different kinds of textures within a reference image.

Anyway, I'll mark this lesson as complete so feel free to move onto the next one.

Uncomfortable

2015-11-12 20:47

Comparing your work to that of others expecting it to be similar is just silly. While there is a lot of benefit in looking at their work in the context of the critiques I've given them, just comparing your work to theirs makes no sense at all. You don't know what has led them to that point. All you can do is guess.

As for your work, I've seen plenty of homework submissions fairly similar to it. That isn't to say you're doing it right - you're missing a few key concepts (which is good, because that means there's concrete things we can correct) - but many people who've been working through these lessons have been just like you.

So, what are you doing wrong? There's a few things:

Most importantly, you're not doing a whole lot of simplifying. I mean, I can see based on your notes and a few other things that in your mind you're trying to break things down into simpler forms, but that really isn't enough. That's the goal, and you're expecting yourself to perform at that level already.

Your approach to drawing leaves is a good example of this - your first step is correct - you draw a center line that determines the flow of that leaf through space. Your next step, however, is jumping too far ahead - you try and draw the surrounding leaf, with all of its waviness and its little tattered edges and whatever other minor details may exist.

What you should be doing is this. Center line first, then a simple, specific approximation of the shape of the leaf itself ignoring any of those extra details. Is the leaf wavy? Don't care. Is it fraying or torn or jagged at its edges? Unimportant.

Once you have this scaffolding, you can start adding details onto it. The scaffolding helps you retain the proper flow of a flat form (think of the arrows in lesson 2) through 3D space. If you're worrying about how the edges get wavy or jagged or whatever at the same time as you're trying to get it to flow through 3D space, you've got movement in so many dimensions that it becomes overwhelming and confusing. Take it one step at a time.

Remember that everything you're drawing should start off as some sort of simple 3D primitive. Leaves are a bit more complicated but simple forms like half-spheres should be constructed as such. Don't go skipping steps, and draw through the forms whenever you need to. Like this.

Lastly, draw BIGGER. These things are tiny! You have no freedom to move, and I seriously doubt that you're drawing from your shoulder.

All of this aside, I'd say the biggest thing to keep in mind is that right now, you're looking at a 2D image, and you're trying to carry it over. What you should be doing is looking at a 2D image, understanding how it represents tangible, 3D objects with weight and solidity. Then, once you understand it, you can draw it up once again.

Take another stab at this lesson.

Uncomfortable

2015-11-14 19:02

The first thing that jumps out at me is that you seem to be drawing kind of small, cramming a lot of them onto the same page. On the flipside of that, you do seem to have pretty good pressure control, since your lines don't tend to come out all too cramped and stiff despite the size. Still, I'd definitely encourage you to draw larger on the page.

When you draw objects or parts of objects that have clear 3D form to them, it is important for you to actually see them as 3D forms. This means, even if your drawing is cut off, cap off the end of that form, as you would cap off the end of a cylinder (with an ellipse). Don't just leave a gap, as that immediately gives the impression of a flatter form.

Another thing I want to stress is that you should try and use much less hatching - this is for two reasons. First of all, hatching functions as mini contour lines, so when they end up just being straight lines, it gives the impression that the form it's drawn on is flat with no volume. Secondly, it's very rare that you'd fine a texture in nature that is made up of hatching lines. Generally it serves as a short-hand for "I don't know what goes here but I really want to fill it in anyway". Know that you can leave areas outside of the focal point devoid of detail, focusing entirely on their form construction and the illusion of volume. Then in the focal point itself, you really need to buckle down and LOOK at your reference image, studying the patterns and rhythms of details that give it a particular surface texture.

When you deal with leaf-forms, you've done fairly well. I think they do suffer just a bit from the drawings themselves being too small, but I think the understanding of how to get a flat form to flow through 3D space is developing.

I'm going to mark this lesson as complete, largely because I think the next lesson (insects) does a far better job with the construction of solid 3D intersecting forms, with lots of natural contour lines and plenty of opportunities to study varied interesting surface textures.

Uncomfortable

2015-11-15 19:23

I think you've done pretty well. There's certainly room to grow, but we're just getting started. I think your approach to simplifying and seeing the underlying shapes and forms is coming along nicely. There are a few things I'd like to point out that you can keep in mind as you move forward, but I'll definitely be marking this lesson as complete.

• Cross-hatching, when used in place of proper texture is usually a short-hand for "I have no idea what goes here but I don't want to leave it blank". It's pretty rare that you'd actually see a real texture in nature that looks like that. So, instead it shows the viewer that you simply didn't look closely enough at what rhythms and patterns actually existed in your original reference that gave it that particular look. Keep in mind that you don't HAVE to fill in every space. But when you do put down ink, make sure it is the result of study, observation, planning and forethought. Here's a demo about identifying textural details and patterns that may help.

• I'm a bit puzzled by the stem of your carduus crispus. At this point, you're experimenting with what works and what doesn't, so it's perfectly normal to have some things go well, and others less so. But let's look at what it is about this stem that may not have been the best choice. What stands out most to me is the fact that the erratic spikes don't seem to take too much consideration for the underlying cylinder. The rhythm is fairly random, and randomness really isn't something we find that much of in nature. Things may seem random, but our subconscious can tell that they're actually quite organized. Look at your detail view of that stem - now that is quite exceptional, both in construction (the cylindrical base) and in detail and texture. The spikes feel like they follow some kind of organizational structure, even though we can't quite figure out what it is. They come off of their own little clumps of mass, and they all obey the underlying form. Back to the larger drawing, that erratic spikey shape really just comes off as flat and cartoonish.

Anyway, overall you've done quite well, so feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2015-12-01 23:25

Not bad. I'd say the second half of your set shows some improvement over the fist, with a better sense of form and stronger focal points.

One thing that I do want to draw your attention to is this page. You sometimes still draw your forms as complex 2D shapes, rather than simple 3D forms. Always break down shapes and forms into their simplest components, and consider how those forms intersect. You should also be doing this when the object gets cut off on the top of the page.

I also noticed that in general, you seem to be very focused on being as clean as you can. While this is not a bad thing, it does hurt your drawings when it keeps you from drawing through your forms. This early on, you still don't have a full understanding of 3D space, so if you purposely avoid drawing through forms in order to understand how they occupy the space in your scene, your forms will flatten out. Never fear putting ink down, as long as that ink serves a purpose. Also, don't worry too much about making some lines faint. Those are the sort of things we do when we're trying to make a drawing pretty and presentable - none of which is our concern here. We are studying 3D form, that is all.

Lastly, while I noticed some rather nice weight control in your hatching, as you move forward through the lessons, I do want you to try and rely less on hatching in general, especially in lieu of texture and detail. Lots of people have the tendency of just adding hatching lines and calling that texture - it's not, no texture in nature really looks like that.

Anyway, I think you'll benefit a lot from moving ahead to the next lesson. Insects are a great subject for learning how everything is constructed from basic 3D forms, and there's also a lot of great opportunities to study interesting textures.

Uncomfortable

2015-12-02 23:41

You start off a bit weak and uncertain, but you do eventually start to find your rhythm. I'll mark this lesson as complete but here's a few things to keep in mind:

• Draw through your ellipses for all of my lessons.

• On the first page, to the right, you've got some wavy leaves - those should start off straight and smooth to establish the general flow of the leaf, THEN you can add the waves around the framework of the smooth and straightforward leaf construction. Start off simple, then add complexity. Like this (though this example doesn't pertain exactly to waves, it's the same idea for fraying edges).

• Page 3 stands out - the edges are really chicken-scratchy. I'm sure you understand that it is not the appropriate way to draw. I do want to add that your veins on the leaves are not the result of close and careful observation, they're more just random little lines you threw in. When adding texture, take the time to really observe and study your subject, and identify its rhythms and details. Avoid looseness and scribbling.

I think you will have a lot to gain from the next lesson, as far as constructing forms does, so feel free to move on.

Uncomfortable

2015-12-06 04:32

Hey, unfortunately I'm taking a break through the month of December. Free critiques will resume on January 1st, so you'll have to resubmit the work then - until then, the critiques are restricted to the patreon supporters (if you are one, make sure you've sent me your reddit username via patreon's messaging system). For now, you can definitely still gain quite a bit by looking at the critiques I've given others - it helps to see if you've made similar mistakes.

You can check out this announcement on the hiatus for more information.

Uncomfortable

2015-12-18 13:32

Hey, unfortunately I'm taking a break through the month of December. Free critiques will resume on January 1st, so you'll have to resubmit the work then - until then, the critiques are restricted to the patreon supporters (if you are one, make sure you've sent me your reddit username via patreon's messaging system). For now, you can definitely still gain quite a bit by looking at the critiques I've given others - it helps to see if you've made similar mistakes.

You can check out this announcement on the hiatus for more information.

Uncomfortable

2015-12-22 19:06

To start, I'm going to say that I will be marking this lesson as complete. You started off really, really poorly (mostly relating to the fact that your drawings were extremely sketchy and that you were not taking the time to pull back and think through your decisions before putting marks down on the page - check out this more detailed critique), and for the most part things didn't come together until the very last two pages.

Those last two pages are significantly stronger than the rest, although I do still have some concerns about the fact that much of your focus seems to be on the detail phase, rather than the lay-in portion of the process. Your lay-in is where you establish all of your forms, creating a solid construction. You could stop at that point and you'd still have a decent drawing, even without any additional details. If you focus instead on the details, however, you end up with a lot of little bits with no overall construction binding them all together in 3D space.

That said, I don't think this lesson is the one where we should fight this battle and conquer these issues. The next one where we deal with insects and arachnids is much more effective because that subject matter really lends itself to the idea of constructing objects from the simplest of forms. Furthermore, their natural contour lines give us plenty of opportunities to add details that help describe the curvature of forms without having to add in our own artificial contours.

So, read over the notes I linked you to in the first paragraph of this critique, and keep those in mind as you move onto the next lesson. Your next set of homework should bring to light any underlying issues that remain as far as form and construction go, and we can fix them then.

Uncomfortable

2015-12-31 18:37

Excellent work - I especially love the cacti on page 8. You've done an excellent job of laying in your forms, then pushing your focal point to its limit. Page 10 is also quite well done.

The biggest thing that stands out to me in your work is that the lines you add to your leaves - the contour-ish ones coming off the center line - they tend to be spaced out very regularly. Remember that when dealing with organic and natural objects, you'll generally find details like that spaced out irregularly instead. Regular spacing usually implies man-made construction.

Anyway, aside from that, excellent work. Feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-02 17:55

When you start out, your forms are loose and your textures quite quite scribbly. I'm happy to say that through the set you improve considerably and get a much better handle on constructing more solid, believable drawings. I especially love the way you approach the leaves on the last two pages.

Your texturing could still stand to be somewhat less scribbly, though. As you move forward, try to draw less and think more. Often when people are overwhelmed by a texture they're trying to capture, they'll resort to just putting down ink in the hopes that it'll solve their problem. The wiser thing to do is to step back, and spend more time studying and analyzing your reference image, trying to identify the visual elements that are present and focusing on how they are arranged and grouped. The result will be a texture that appears considerably more deliberate and less rough/sketchy.

Anyway, you're coming along quite well so feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-02 20:36

Early on you apply way, way, way too many contour lines - remember that you should first be looking for natural details that accomplish the same purpose of contour lines, in that they describe how the surface warps through 3D space. We only apply artificial contour lines when they are necessary, and when we do, it's important that you avoid applying them at regular intervals, as this implies a man-made object rather than a natural one.

You certainly reduce your usage of contour lines later on, though I do notice the ones you add tend to be really stiff, especially on stems. Remember that you're not drawing on a flat surface - you're carving these lines along rounded, curving ones. As such, you should think hard before you draw a contour line, as it can easily flatten out an image if done incorrectly.

Your later drawings are generally good, though I think your texturing is still less informed by close and careful study followed by consideration of what information is really necessary to capture the idea you are trying to visually communicate. You're not just copying a photography 1-to-1. You are making decisions on what should be shown, and what should not. If you capture every little bit of detail, not only will it take extremely long, but the result will be very noisy, distracting and full of contrast. I talk about these issues here: Too Much Visiual Noise

Also, when people tend to try to capture every little detail, they have a tendency to get scratchy and scribbly, which you certainly are doing. Every mark you draw should be driven by clear planning and intent.

I do like the way you approach drawing your leaves and petals, starting off with very simple shapes and then carving into them to establish more complex edges. I especially like the leaves on the hibiscus on the last page.

I'll mark this lesson as complete. There's a lot to keep in mind as you move forward, so be sure to apply these ideas to the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-03 19:15

Your forms are coming along decently. I can see that you're following along the methodology of starting out with simple shapes and forms, and then breaking them down in successive stages.

As far as detailing goes, you have a tendency to be very scribbly. A good example of this is on page 4. At times you also do this in your lay-in phases, in general it comes from being somewhat overwhelmed by your subject matter, and giving into the urge to think on the page.

By thinking on the page, I'm referring to drawing before you have a clear goal in mind as to what this next mark should be. It is very important that you think through what you're doing before executing a line and putting any more ink on the page. When faced with this sense of being overwhelmed, there are two possible reactions.

1. You dive in and draw, hoping that something will arise - this usually results in scribbling or using a lot of very simple hatching (which is generally a shorthand for 'i don't know what goes here but i don't want to leave it blank').

2. You pull back, you put your pen down, and you think. You spend more time studying your reference image, first identifying the visual elements that are present in the textures you're trying to transfer into your drawing, then focusing on how those elements are arranged. Are they spread out evenly over the surface, do they exist in groups or clusters, do they clump together to create larger compound shapes (like a bunch of dots fusing to create large swathes of solid black).

The latter what you want to go after. To help with this, you may want to read the dissection section from lesson 2, which I have recently rewritten.

I'm still going to mark this lesson as complete - this is a skill that develops over time and with practice, so there's no sense in holding you back for it. You will face the same challenges in the next lesson, so feel free to move ahead.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-06 23:18

Pretty nice work. Your forms are fairly well done, though I do encourage you to work towards tightening things up - being less loose, thinking through your decisions more before you put the pen to the page. That said, I understand the difficulties of drawing while standing, and I don't doubt for a second that it contributed to some of these issues. I remember having to do the same thing when I was doing these lessons myself - we went on fieldtrips to an arboretum and to a zoo for the animals unit. It's a whole other skill of its own, to be able to draw while hooking your sketchbook in your other arm.

Either way, it's coming along well. One thing that I do want to draw your attention to though is sometimes you have a tendency to scribble a little when adding texture. Try to avoid scribbling in general. A single well thought out mark, though it may take more time and focus, is always significantly better than a scribbly mess.

Anyway, feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-06 23:39

You're heading in the right direction, but one thing I'm noticing is that your drawings feel rather stiff and flat. I believe this comes very much from focusing on drawing your plants with flat shapes (circles, rectangles, etc.) and less on consciously drawing solid forms.

This can at times be tough because we're dealing with flat forms, but these flat forms bend and warp within 3D space. The arrow-ribbon exercise in lesson 2 is a good example of this. One approach I like to use to remind myself that I'm working on 3D space is to start off with a simple line that depicts the movement of the form. I then build my flat forms around it.

I depict that in the first row of this demo - I start with the center line of the leaf, and then build the edges around it. Then I break down those edges down in another pass, gradually adding more complexity, but being careful not to jump too complex too quickly. When you do that, you end up without enough framework or structure to support that complexity.

I'm also noticing you doing that a little - that is, jumping too complex too quickly. Always build up visual information slowly, piece by piece. Here's an example of what I mean: http://i.imgur.com/dZilgH1.png

Lastly, remember to draw through all of the ellipses you draw for my lessons.

I'm still going to mark this lesson as complete - you did a decent job, and I believe the next lesson's subject matter (insects) does a far better job of letting you play with drawing solid forms, especially with all of their natural contour lines. Still, keep what I've mentioned here in mind as you move ahead.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-14 21:03

Not bad. There is one thing that jumps out at me though that we should be able to correct fairly easily. It's about your leaves/petals, or really any other sort of flat form.

The way we construct these is the same as how we approach any other 3D form - we start with the simplest possible scaffolding, and we increase in complexity over successive passes. In your drawings, I see you jumping into wavy-edged leaves very early, on your first pass with no underlying scaffolding to support that kind of construction. Instead, this is the approach you should be using: http://i.imgur.com/9E8wD83.png. Start off with a center line to designate how the form flows through 3D space, then establish the general surface area by adding the side edges with simple curves. You can then add fraying, waves, or whatever else within the framework of the information you've already laid down.

The benefit is that you first establish how that form flows through space, then you add the complexity. If you try to tackle them simultaneously, you're more than likely going to lose a believable sense of how the form bends and twists.

Another point to keep in mind is that you're probably going a little too crazy with the contour lines. These things are not simply intended to be thrown all over the place - they're tools to help convey the idea that your forms have volume. Using a couple here and there will help convey the message, creating a wireframe is overkill. Furthermore, you should first identify any natural details that serve the same purpose - pretty much any detail that runs along the surface of an object does the job. Only if you cannot find one, should you add your own. Even then, know that keeping them evenly spaced out usually makes the object seem man-made rather than natural.

Anyway, other than that your work's coming along nicely. Decent experimenting with texture and rendering (though I notice some scribbling in areas where you got lazy, so try to avoid that). I do think there's plenty of room to grow in all of these areas, but the next lesson should give you a much better opportunity to do so. Feel free to move onto the next one.

Also, you should probably go back to lesson 2 and read the dissection section again - I've updated it recently, and it may contain some extra information that could help in the texturing department.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-16 18:49

Nice work! Your forms are generally very well done, and I like the experimentation you're doing with your textures. I have just two points to mention to you, but I'm marking this lesson as complete so feel free to move onto the next one.

First off, when constructing your forms - in this case, specifically leaves and petals - build up your complexity, and never jump into a level of complexity that has no underlying scaffolding supporting it. What I mean by that is, if you have a leaf that has a wavy or frayed edge - those waves or jagged edges are an additional level of complexity on top of just a simple, smooth edge. You should start off with a smooth edge first, and then add the additional detail on top of the scaffolding the simpler form gives you.

Try to use this kind of approach when constructing leaves: http://i.imgur.com/9E8wD83.png. Start off with a center line to establish the flow of the flat form through 3D space. Then enclose the space with two simple curved edges. Then add the more complex detail on top of that. This way you're breaking everything up into simpler phases. It's common for people to get caught up in the complex detail, and ending up drawing a leaf that does not bend and twist through 3D space believably.

The second point is just about using too much hatching when adding texture. Hatching isn't actually a texture you see often in nature, rather it's a short hand in drawing for "I don't know what goes here, but I don't want to leave it blank." Instead, try to pay closer attention to the textures and visual elements present in the texture of that section. If you spend more time studying your reference, you'll find not only details, but how those details are arranged and balanced against one another to give the illusion of a given surface quality.

Anyway, like I said, very nice work. I'll mark this lesson as complete.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-20 22:21

So you do show some improvement over the set, but there are a number of things that I've noticed while looking over your homework.

The most important thing is that you are observing too little, and drawing too much. That isn't to say you're not observing - I can see that you're studying your subject and making lots of notes, but the problem is that the human brain has been developed to very quickly distill the information it gathers and simplify it to its core. Because of this, when you look away from your reference image, 90% of the information you absorbed is thrown out, and your brain focuses on that last 10% which it uses to summarize what it saw. Much of the subtle touches, the nuance and the unique aspects of what you studied are forgotten, and you're left with a generic approximation of what was seen. The bigger problem is that we do not realize this is happening - so we go on drawing, and the result is often something overly simplified and cartoony.

What you need to do is get used to looking, looking, looking, then taking a moment or two to carry over a bit of information, then immediately looking back to your reference. It doesn't matter if you think you can remember more - your memory is not to be trusted. Always look back at your reference and refresh your mind.

Secondly, I noticed that you have a habit of seriously overusing contour lines. This is more common at the beginning of your homework, but it does show me that you don't necessarily understand their purpose. These lines are intended to describe how a surface deforms and twists and turns through 3D space, giving us clues as to the volume contained within a given form. Two or three of these lines will do the job just as well as a hundred. A hundred on the other hand will cover your form in a mess, leaving little room for further development.

This brings me to another issue - based on the fact that you covered your forms in contour lines early on, and didn't use them nearly as much later on, I'm guessing that you're not fully grasping the relationship between the lay-in and the final drawing, either.

A lay-in is the first step. It is not merely an exercise, but it is the beginnings of what will lead directly to the final drawing. You're establishing the solid forms and construction of your subject, and with successive passes, you go from a simple construction to a more complex breakdown of forms. You do not merely practice the lay-in on one hand, and then attempt to jump into the most complex level of a different drawing.

To further explain that concept, we're going to talk about how to go about constructing leaves. You've got a lot of leaves there with some complex action going on - for example, leaves that are rather wavy, like on the bottom right of page six. The problem with these waves is that in drawing them immediately, it becomes very easy to lose track of the general flow of how the leaf flows through 3D space, because you're getting caught up in the waves.

Instead of tackling all of these challenges at once, we break them down into multiple passes, as shown here: http://i.imgur.com/9E8wD83.png. In this example, rather than wavy edges, we're dealing with frayed, jagged edges - but it's the same idea. The first step is to show the general flow of this flat form as it moves through 3D space with a simple curve for its center line. Next, you enclose the general shape of this leaf with two simple curves, one on each side. Once that's established, we use it as a framework or a scaffolding to build in the frayed edges, or waves, or whatever applies to your situation. Since we already have the scaffolding for the form set up, it's much simpler to add the extra deformation and detail.

Lastly, when applying contour lines, the first thing you should do is look for details in your reference that already play the same role - basically any lines that already flow continuously over the surface of the form and describe how it warps through 3D space. If you can't find any, then you can add a few artificial ones, but remember that keeping them spaced out regularly tends to imply man-made object, so it's usually best to break that kind of monotony up.

I'd like you to take another stab at this lesson.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-21 23:12

Generally pretty good work, but I have a few points where you can improve.

• You definitely tend to apply contour lines all over the place. Slow down and think a little. I'm giving you a bunch of tools, but you've got to consider where they're best used, and how often to use them. A contour line does a great job of describing how a surface deforms through 3D space by running along that surface. Now, one, two or maybe three would get the job done - applying more than that however is overkill. Furthermore, if you space them out evenly that reads as distinctly man-made rather than natural. Lastly, details that serve the purpose of running along a surface to describe how it warps through space often already exist in an object. Focus on trying to find them first, and take advantage of them. If you can't, then you can resort to using artificial ones.

• Most people will use hatching lines as their first option for applying texture - it's important to note that there's often a whole lot more going on, and that hatching textures aren't actually found that frequently in nature. Try paying closer attention to your reference, trying to identify the various visual elements and patterns that exist, how they're spread out over a given surface, and how the light plays against them to create shapes of both light and shadow. If you feel the urge to apply hatching, stop yourself and think, "am I doing this because I see that kind of texturing because it's what I see in my reference, or am I just trying to fill in an area I'm not comfortable leaving blank?"

• Lastly, Some of your leaf constructions are fundamentally okay, but I did notice that when you deal with leaves that have extra complexity along their edges (like wavy edges), you jump into that complexity without building up any underlying layers of scaffolding to support that construction. Instead, you should be tackling these things in successive passes, like so: http://i.imgur.com/9E8wD83.png. First we start with a flowing center line, then we build the basic shape of the leaf using very simple curves. At this point, the basic flow of that flat object through 3D space is established, and we can start adding more complex information (in the case of this example, fraying/torn details) along the edges. If you dive into waves right off the bat, you undermine the overall flow of that leaf through 3D space, resulting in a leaf that feels more 2D rather than 3D.

Aside from that, you've done quite well. Feel free to move onto the next lesson, just keep these points in mind as you do so.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-24 17:43

I'm not sure why, but the imgur link you included for your homework submission leads to a dead end. You may have pasted the link wrong, or deleted the album.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-26 00:06

I'd say the biggest thing you're missing is the idea of constructing your object from simple forms. When most people start on these lessons, they're used to the idea of looking at a reference image, and drawing what they see. Instead of that, we look at our reference image, understand how it's made up of simple forms, and then reconstruct those forms in our drawing. Then we go over it with multiple passes, gradually building up the level of complexity.

Here's a demo based on one of your drawings. You're not quite starting out with simple forms, and you're also not building up complexity in multiple passes.

It's really important to go from simple to complex, and the leaves here make a good example. If you're caught up with all of the complex detail in the individual parts of the leaf, you're going to end up drawing a leaf whose overall form does not flow convincingly through 3D space. Because of this, we try to break our forms down and deal with each challenge individually.

First we establish our basic geometric forms (like the flower pot, which is just a cylinder - make sure you're applying the appropriate construction of the form, using your minor axis as taught in the 250 cylinder challenge page). Then we figure out the path our leaf should follow by drawing its center line - remember that this is a line, like the ribbons/arrows from lesson 2, that flows through 3D space. It is not simply flowing across your 2D page.

Then, you build simple leaf forms with basic curving lines to enclose the space your leaf will take up. Remember that this is not some approximate sketch. In the next step, you're using that enclosed shape as the strict bounds of your leaf's more complex detail - the ends of the leaf touch these edges and it all fits together very snugly.

Lastly, you mentioned struggling with petals and leaves, so I threw this together for you: http://i.imgur.com/oI6ncdQ.png. I noticed that you're somewhat afraid of letting your leaves and petals bend back over themselves. Remember that, like a ribbon, these are just flat shapes that exist in three dimensions. They can twist and turn through space very easily.

Anyway, focus on the idea of constructing from simple forms and building up in successive passes. I'd like to see four more pages of plants.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-24 19:49

People are used to drawing strictly what they see, because that's what we're generally told to do in drawing classes. Observe, observe, observe, break away from symbol drawing, etc. And that is definitely great, and you've got that nailed. You're drawing exactly what you see.

Our approach, however, is not a matter of drawing exactly what you see. We do not see a detail, and then carry it over into our drawing.

If the method mentioned above were as follows:

1. See

2. Draw what you see

The method we're using would instead be

1. See

2. Understand what we see by breaking it down into its simplest geometric or organic forms (tubes, balls, sausages, ribbons, etc - all things we covered in the past two lessons)

3. Reconstruct the object in our drawing by capturing these simple forms, ignoring all complex detail

4. Making several successive passes over our drawing, adding only as much complexity as the underlying structure from the previous pass will support.

Our approach is very much 'constructive' - you start simple and gradually get more complex. Based on your homework, I can see that you are not focusing on basic forms, but rather are still focused on carrying over detail from your photo reference without understanding how it sits in 3D space, or what underlying structure supports it.

Now, your drawings are very good, but they don't leave you with a whole lot of freedom if you were to stray from your reference, or if you were given a few photos of the same object, and asked to use them to create a drawing from an entirely different angle than those in the photos.

Sometimes, you do apply a constructive approach, or the beginnings of one, when dealing with things like leaves and petals, but I find that you're still treating the previous passes more like a loose approximative sketch, rather than actual structure to which you should be adhering.

Take a look at these notes.

I'd like you to do four more pages of plants, and I don't want you to go into any texture. Focus entirely on building up your various construction passes.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-27 20:50

In a lot of ways, you're demonstrating good observation skills and are moving in the right direction. There are some elements of this approach that you are missing however. You're not alone on this, and I plan on writing an article dedicated to this concept some time soon and directing everyone to read it before they get into the dynamic sketching stuff.

What we're used to being told in drawing classes is that we are to look at our subject - really look, and study it - and draw what we see. They lecture us on the concepts of symbol-drawing, and how our brains naturally simplify everything we see, so our memories of an object don't actually represent it in reality, and so on. And all of this is extremely important - but it's missing an important step that our approach here incorporates.

Instead of focusing on seeing, then drawing, we instead include additional steps:

1. Look at your reference

2. Look beyond all of the extraneous detail and visual information there to its very core, and identify the major forms that make up its construction. Some of these may be basic geometric forms (balls, tubes, boxes, pyramids, cones), and some may be organic masses, while others may be flat shapes that turn in 3D space, like the ribbon/arrows we looked at in lesson 2.

3. Again, ignoring all of that extra detail, we reconstruct these basic forms in our drawing. This is the base level of our drawing, everything else will hinge on this. This is not a loose approximative sketch, it is a construction - think of the scaffolding of a building.

4. In successive passes, we break this down into smaller forms, adding only as much detail as the previous pass can support. You can't jump from a line to an extremely detailed and complex leaf with wavy edges, there has to be an inbetween step, otherwise you'll be dealing with far too many spatial problems at once.

So, you are running into the problem that you are skipping constructive steps - you start off with a few loose shapes and then jump right into detail. Instead, I want you to focus on objects and how they sit in 3D space (flat shapes aren't going to give you that kind of information) and go step by step, building up slowly.

Here's a demo I did for someone recently who had similar issues. Notice how I build out simple leaf forms, completely ignoring the more complex shapes that the leafs actually take, and focusing instead of how the whole body flows through space. This is because the entire object has a particular flow, and if you jump into complex detail you'll be worrying about both the general flow of the form, and the flow of the sub-forms. It's always better to deal with one problem at a time, and breaking our forms down into successive passes will allow us to do this.

I think your observations are great as far as detail and texture go, but I definitely would like to see two more pages focusing on construction before I mark this lesson as complete.

Uncomfortable

2016-01-30 23:04

I'd say you have a good eye for detail, a decent sense of form, and a hell of a lot of patience - something that will help you a lot as you continue to move forwards.

I do have one important thing to impart, however - it's something I've been including in a lot of critiques lately, and it's definitely something that's not covered as well as it could be in the lessons so I plan to summarize it in an article about the core of the dynamic sketching approach.

When you draw, though you're definitely applying a great deal of the understanding of form from the previous exercises (contour lines to depict volume, and so on). Your process is still quite similar to the traditional approach to drawing you see in art schools - you look, you observe, you really see what's going on, and then you draw it.

Our approach is a little different, and I think it is something you're slowly discovering on your own, but I will emphasize it.

If the other approach is see, then draw, our approach is:

1. See

2. Look beyond all of the light and detail and see the simple forms that lie beneath it all, the most basic 3D construction.

3. Rebuild those basic forms in the first pass of our drawing

4. In successive passes, build up complexity. Each pass relies on the structure from the pass before it, and we are limited to adding only detail that can be supported by information already there. Very much like constructing a building - you cannot add a window if the wall isn't there yet, and you can't build the wall without the foundation, and so on.

This is a demo I did when explaining the concepts to another student. The process applies to everything - both solid 3D forms like a flowerpot, as well as flat forms that move and twist through 3D space like leaves and petals.

Now, I think you're coming along great, so I am going to mark this lesson as complete - I do think you should think on what I've just said, and look at the demo in great detail, and try to apply that concept of drawing in successive passes to everything to approach.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-01 21:45

To put it plainly, I think you're still missing something. First, I want to explain the difference between shape and form. They're pretty much the same thing, except that shape is a 2D term, and form is its 3D equivalent.

Our base construction is not one of shape - I'm sure you used that word meaning form, but looking at your work you do seem to be thinking much more in 2D than in 3D. Our base construction is one of form, focusing entirely on how the different elements relate to one another in 3D space.

For example, these cacti don't show any use of 3D space at all. You would probably start off seeing those as a somewhat organic cylinder, but I don't see any of that in your approach. Furthermore, when you draw leaves, if you start off with your center line, you don't seem to be thinking of that center line as flowing through 3D space. Based on what I see in your work, you're still thinking of it as a line moving across a flat page.

I wrote an article last night about constructional drawing, the same concept I explained in my last critique. Read it and look at the demos included with it. Then try another 2 pages of plant drawings - I don't want you to put ANY extra detail. All I want to see are your constructions. You definitely still get too preoccupied with texture and detail long before ever establishing a solid construction.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-03 00:01

Pretty good development of form. I'll be marking this lesson as complete, but I do have some things to point out.

• You're overusing contour lines - remember that these are visual elements that simply describe how a surface warps through 3D space. You rarely need very many, and how you use them can be as detrimental as it is helpful to a piece. Creating a 3D wireframe of your object is going to hinder your ability to convey other details. First, look for details in your object that already accomplish the task that contour lines perform - segmentation, seams, even some textural information can play the role. Try to make your contour lines line up with these. If there isn't anything that really does the trick, you can add two or three of your own, but remember that spacing them out evenly will look very man-made and unnatural.

• When it comes to conveying texture, I think you're struggling with waxy/smooth textures because for the most part you're used to just using short lines (ie: hatching, or similar approaches) and not much else. I don't ever see you grouping these marks into larger areas of black space, or anything of that sort. Take a look at this demo I've done on an insect - not one of the textures uses cross hatching. Actually, the leg there uses lines, but not in the same manner - instead they run along the length of the surface, and merge together into larger clumps and groups. This effect can give the impression of something that is smoother and waxier - specifically it's the contrast generated by crosshatching that works against the impression of smoothness. Run along the length of a surface, and don't create lots of contrast. Lastly, crosshatching isn't texture you see very often in nature - more often it's a shorthand artists use when they don't feel like really taking a look at the kinds of details and textures that are present in their subject. Look closer, there's a world of things going on there that you could be taking advantage of.

• Use a fineliner/felt tip pen! Ballpoint is not allowed past lesson 2.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-04 00:41

Phew, I spent more time on this than I meant to. So, your biggest problem is that you certainly look at your reference, but you look, you look, you look, then when you look away, you spend a lot of time drawing before you look back. The second you look away, you start relying on memory, and the reliability of your memory plummets with every milisecond. Your brain is busy at work simplifying everything so it doesn't burst trying to process every little detail you witnessed. Unfortunately, the result is that most of what you draw from memory - really anything beyond the first second or two, is really really simplified.

Now, I did most of my critique on the very last mushroom you did, because I think it lended itself to a lot of major problems and also looked kind of fun to draw. There is actually a lot of good in your homework, primarily when it comes to form construction. For example, I really like page 16. You've done a pretty good job of giving the rounded hat-form on the top of that construction, although you could have done with a little extra thickness along the back edge of the underside.

I do believe you're a little stiff though - this probably comes from drawing way too small. Remember that the notes/extra doodles are an afterthought. The main drawing is the focus of the page, and should occupy as much space as you can give it. If you're working in a small notebook, get something bigger (at least 8.5x11, though I can't tell the scale of yours). Working small means giving yourself far less room to think through spatial problems, and also means that the tip of your pen is going to be very thick relative to the size of the drawing.

This may be related to the stiffness/drawing size, but I do think you're also still kind of timid when it comes to putting a mark down on the page. Feel free to put anything down, as long as you've thought it through and properly ghosted through the drawing motion beforehand. Draw from your shoulder, not your wrist. I definitely see some weakness in your cylindrical forms - you have a tendency to draw contour ellipses that don't align to the cylinder's minor axis (admittedly you never actually draw one so that's definitely a factor), you're not drawing through those ellipses (again, small drawings so you don't have a whole lot of room for it), and those are cases where you might be better off using contour curves instead of full ellipses.

Now, here's the critique of that last image: http://i.imgur.com/TyUaFfs.jpg. You've got a break down of your major mistakes (all stems from not observing the reference image enough), my observations about your reference image (main points to focus on, you can compare them to your drawing and see many are missing), a demo on how I'd draw that particular mushroom and some extra stuff like applying texture to the curvature of a cylinder.

I'd also like you to read the Constructional Drawing that I posted recently if you haven't already.

Once you've had the chance to digest all of this stuff I'm throwing at you, try another two pages of plant drawings.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-04 03:16

I really like the forms on the left side of page 14, in that mushroom there. The detailing/texturing is too focused on crosshatching (which isn't really that common in natural textures) and short crosshatching tends to look really rough and harsh look to it that makes me itch, but the forms feel very nice. It's got volume and mass to it. The sausage shape underneath the cluster of mushrooms to its right is very nice too. The mushrooms on top less so, especially because the caps give the impression of being paper-thin, because the underside has no thickness to it, and my brain tells me that the cap of a mushroom generally does have more thickness to it than that, so I automatically start thinking something's wrong. I just did a critique of someone who had a similar issue, so I'll show you the same image to carry the point: http://i.imgur.com/64vkA0y.png.

I'd say your weakest point in general though are your leaves. These can certainly be tricky to wrap your head around, because they are flat (which immediately makes one think of 2D), but they're flat forms that exist in 3D space - not unlike the ribbon-arrows from lesson 2. They bend and twist and can swim through the world, moving closer or further relative to the viewer. Swimming's a good term for it, I think. People get caught up in drawing them as lines that move across a 2D page, rather than through the 3D space you're depicting.

Early in your drawings, you jump into complexity way too quickly, drawing wavy-edged leaves without ever establishing how that leaf flows through 3D space in simpler terms (with simple edges). That's a concept I discuss on my recent article on constructional drawing. You do seem to try applying it much later, but not all that well.

Setting aside understanding how the leaves move through 3D space instead of across a 2D page, you do approach the first couple steps of establishing the 'simple' leaf reasonably well. When you draw the more complex smaller leaves inside however, what I'm seeing is a single continuous line zigzagging back and forth, carving out this multitude of teeny bits. By using a single continuous line, you're completely ignoring the flow of how this for moves through 3D space. Without directing each line independently, you're once again drawing on a flat page, not in 3D space.

Here's what I mean: http://i.imgur.com/iuoRdA4.png.

Lastly, and least importantly, remember that when you're drawing texture, to continue working at training yourself to spend more time observing your reference image, and shorten the periods of time you spend drawing, between glances at your reference. Memory is unreliable, so you've gotta keep looking back at your reference image after a couple seconds. It absolutely takes a lot of practice, but it's also important to consider what is and isn't important detail to include in your drawing.

I'd like to see you do two more pages of leafy plants.

...

...

...

Aaaaaand.... I pretty much stopped writing this critique about two hours ago, and ended up writing up this page on drawing texture because I felt that you needed some more explanation on how to approach texture on those leaves, and it's something a lot of people have been asking about. Somehow I only had six critiques to do today but ended up spending the entire evening doing them. Wait, shit - I still have four left. AAAH.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-05 17:50

Gel pens certainly all equally unforgiving, but their downside is that they don't have the same flexibility in regards to line weight. Press lightly with a felt tip pen, get a thin line. Press harder, get a thick line. Things are considerably more uniform with a gel pen because the tip doesn't have much give. So, you're going to miss out on training your pressure control with that kind of tool.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-08 20:33

As far as construction goes, you're doing pretty well. I would give the article on constructional drawing though, especially in regards to how I deal with leaves - starting off with a simple shape, and then using that shape as a strict scaffolding on which to build up more complex information, like the waves you might see in a leaf's edge.

The bigger issue with your work is actually on texturing. This isn't abnormal, and isn't the focus of the lesson either, so it's not as big a deal as you might think.

When dealing with texture, you seem to have one tool in your belt right now - hatching lines. Unfortunately, it's not a very good tool, as this kind of approach doesn't give us much variation in actual texture, and also lends itself to generating a lot of noise and contrast within a drawing that you might not necessarily want.

Instead of using hatching, which actually doesn't appear in nature all that often, set your pen down and really look at your reference images. If you look closely (and have a high resolution image), you will notice repeating elements that exist on the surface of the object. You'll notice how these repeating elements create patterns with their shadows - these shadow patterns are what we perceive as texture, and aren't just limited to line, but can also become various shapes, and can combine together to create large swathes of pure black.

I posted these notes on texture last week, you should definitely check them out. It touches much more on the application of texture, but you should also be training your observational skills, in being able to identify the little patterns that exist.

I'll mark this lesson as complete, so feel free to move onto the next one, keeping what I've mentioned here in mind.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-10 20:37

As you said, some went better than others. I see a lot of experimentation here, and that's definitely great for learning. You're figuring out how you feel comfortable approaching this material, and how you can go about prioritizing different concepts.

I do think early on you focus much more on texture/detail than structure and construction, which is perfectly normal, though misguided. You very much have a tendency to overuse contour lines, and often fail to draw through ellipses. Don't use contour lines as a reflex, and certainly don't use so many of them that you start building a 3D wireframe of your object. Think about what purpose they are intended to serve - they describe how a surface bends and turns through 3D space, because a contour line is really just a detail that runs along the curvature of that surface. Your first thought should be, do details like this exist already in my object, and can I leverage them to that purpose? If there aren't any, adding two or three artificial ones should be fine, but make sure you think about how you're spacing them out. Doing so evenly often implies that something is man-made, so with plants that's not what you're after.

Next, the majority of your texturing is done by using hatching and crosshatching. These represent two specific kinds of textures that one might see in the world - specifically textures you almost NEVER see in nature. Instead, people tend to use it as a generic texture when they don't actually look closely at their subject matter and try to identify what textures exist there. When I see hatching, I see laziness. You should take a look at the material I've recently posted on this subject

Now, texture and detail is not a significant priority for us right now. As far as construction goes, you definitely do go all over the place, but I want to mention that this page is very well done as far as form goes. You've progressed through multiple passes, establishing the simplest aspects of form, and gradually breaking down into more granular levels of detail and complexity, never putting down detail that cannot be supported by the structure from the previous pass. This is how drawing should be approached. Texturing here is still sloppy and lazy, but that is a secondary concern.

I do believe that you have shown growth and development through your experimentation, and I hope the above critique has outlined some of the more incorrect paths you went down, and highlighted those that should be pursued. I'm pleased with your progress, and will mark this lesson as complete. Feel free to move onto the next one.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-13 22:27

You've got a lot of great stuff going on here, I especially love the left side of the first page, the aloe vera, and other pieces as well. In some areas though your constructions fell a little flat - which is fine, not everything works out, but I did want to bring your attention to how we can use contour lines to flesh out our volumes on some of the more substantial 3D masses. I focused on your Lophophora Williamsii, and did a quick demo of my own. Remember that the first goal is to convince yourself that you're drawing a 3D form, and contour lines can often help with that. A lot of people tend to go overboard with them, but a few here and there can work wonders to convince you of what you're drawing. Once you feel like you're drawing a form within 3D space and not just a shape across a flat page, all of the details you add subsequently will follow that trend as well.

As you continue to move forward, make sure you've read the article on constructional drawing and the new notes on interpreting and conveying texture. Feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-16 21:23

You're right - your form is reasonably done as you progress through the lesson, but your texturing definitely falls short. Thankfully it's not the focus of the lesson, but I do want to point out that when it comes to identifying textures beyond just using simple hatching lines, there aren't really any signs of attempts being made. We'll get into that later.

One issue form-wise that I'm catching is that you're jumping into complicated shapes and forms a little early in the drawing process, and tend to be looser and sketchier than you should be.

This is the approach I push for looking at leaves. I've seen some cases in your homework where you've jumped straight into complex, wavy edge detail on a leaf. Instead, you should be going from simple to complex. Start off with a simple center line, then build a simple leaf shape around it. By this point, your focus has been how that leaf flows through 3D space, pinning down the illusion that it is not simply a series of marks going across a flat page. Once this is established, you can then use that as a solid scaffolding for the remainder of your detail - in my example, I add frayed edges, spikes, or whatever else. These follow the flow of the form established in previous steps - at any given point, I'm only adding what can be supported by the visual and spatial information of the previous pass.

This page raises another issue. The main masses of that cactus are flat, but still rounded around the edges - but your contour lines do not give that impression at all. They've been drawn quite lazily, and do not properly wrap back around the form as we discussed in the previous lesson. If anything, these kinds of construction details are more important than detail and texture, because they establish the basis on which everything else rests. You want those forms to feel 3D, to feel as though they have volume and mass.

This page and this one are among your better drawings. The first thing that jumps out at me is that the flower pot/vase feel way more solid. Admittedly with the vase, I would have thrown another ellipse in the middle where its form pinches in, but it still came together quite well. The plants themselves generally don't dive into too much complexity too early (though you've got a wavy leaf in there that should have started out more simply). Still, the focus is very much on how those forms are constructed in 3D space.

Make sure you read the article I posted a couple weeks back on constructional drawing.

Now, as far as texture goes, you're just filling areas in with crosshatching and hatching. You're not actually showing any sign of looking carefully at your reference images and identifying the textures that exist there. While crosshatching does capture a specific texture, that is not a texture found in any of your plants, so it comes out looking very weird.

The first step to capturing texture is observation - looking at the visual elements that exist in your reference. At this point, we forget about organizing the detail - we just focus on seeing what is there, seeing the patterns and the overwhelming amount of detail.

Many students will stick at that phase for some time, but eventually they will then start to recognize that the details they see are in fact shadows cast by little forms - shadows that do not simply manifest as line or dots, but that can combine with one another to form larger shapes of solid black. At that point, the textures we identify are used to transition between solid black and solid white, and strategic placement of these 'transition' areas allows us a greater degree of control over our focal points and rest areas.

These notes on texture talk about this matter, but that is not something you're ready to implement just yet. What you're demonstrating here is that you have yet to really look at the texture and see what's going on. Make sure you're using high resolution photos if you're not working form life, as lower resolution photo reference won't give you much insight into texture.

Now, I am going to mark this lesson as complete, largely because I was pleased by those two pages. As you move forward, remember that form and construction is your top priority - I do not want you to sketch anything loosely, or scribble at all. Think through every mark you want to put down and consider all of your forms as though they exist in 3D space. They're not just marks across a flat page.

The following lesson will continue to deal with these kinds of issues, so you'll have plenty of opportunities to play with it further.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-16 21:26

Looks like you haven't completed the prerequisites for this lesson (lessons 1 and 2), so you won't be receiving a critique. If you have completed them under a different account, send me a message from it. Otherwise go back to the first lesson and start there.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-21 01:39

I see some good and I see some bad. I see a considerable amount of improvement when it comes to how you deal with texture/detail - I especially like how you've handled page 7. You've captured the texture very nicely without overwhelming the viewer with noise/contrast. Very well done.

Page 4 is an example of things you should avoid. Most notably, how you've handled the branching out from the stem. You're drawing it as a single continuous, complex, flat 2D shape. You should be drawing several 3D forms that are joined together. Here's a more visual explanation: http://i.imgur.com/TVRkVAx.png.

This does make me think that you have not yet read the article on constructional drawing that was linked in bold and red at the beginning of this lesson. My assumption is that this is not at all your fault - you probably started the lesson a while back, this was a fairly recent addition. But definitely be sure to read it now. There's also some helpful demos there that you should look over.

I'm going to mark this lesson as complete, primarily because of how much I like page 7, and also because the idea of constructing with form is further explored in the next few lessons - perhaps more effectively than with this subject matter.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-21 18:25

Very nice work. The extent to which you push your details and texture is quite interesting. You manage to capture a whole breadth of information without sacrificing the integrity of your focal points or overwhelming the viewer with information.

Across your work, I see both drawings that do a good job of demonstrating the principles of constructive drawing, as well as some that don't. In general you do a great job of applying contour lines, but I want you to always remember that everything must start off from simple forms, gradually building up complexity in successive passes. Never jump into overly complicated shapes/forms right off the bat, make sure there's always some kind of underlying structure to support it. One example of doing it wrong is the leaf on the bottom right of this page. The leaf's outline is quite complex, and since you didn't build up to that stage from simpler shapes and forms, it came out feeling rather flat.

This article on constructional drawing goes into the concepts quite a bit, and includes a lot of additional demos on how to apply it.

As I mentioned, you generally do approach it in a fashion similar to what I'm after, but the instances when you draw more strictly from observation than from construction are things I'd like to highlight.

Anyway, you've generally done a great job. Make sure you read that article, and feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-26 23:34

You've got some nice drawings in here, and I can see that you're getting accustomed to the idea of construction, and you're doing a pretty good job of it. One suggestion I have in that area is to always be mindful of points where two forms connect - for example, the cactus-ish forms on the left side of your first page. You've got a cylinder as the base, and each form connects to it. It helps considerably to get a sense of those plant forms by drawing the connection point with, in this case, an ellipse, or even a curve. Leaving it open as you have leaves the form without being capped-off, which can start to give the impression that it is actually just a flat drawing.

Secondly, as far as ellipses go - you're not drawing through them at all, so they're often coming out bumpy or uneven. You should not be trying to draw these slowly-and-carefully, because that's going to make your lines wobble. Whenever you have an ellipse or a circle, draw through it and get a confident pace. Instead of drawing slowly, you'll compensate for the inevitable lack of accuracy that comes from drawing faster by applying the ghosting method.

I think page 10 is an excellent use of texture within your focal point. The only thing here I want to mention is that outside of your focal point, you seem to have made a sort of half-assed attempt at marking out the veins. Remember that what's most important are your general form constructions. Once that's established outside of your focal point, you'll find it's not actually necessary to flesh those out further. Regardless, never half-ass any part of a drawing - that is, don't carelessly mark down a few lines without keeping an eye on what those lines represent, and trying to represent them as effectively as you can. A detail can be captured in high definition, or in low definition, but an effort is always made to arrange those details in a way that captures some aspect of the original detail. With those veins, I can see that you had the idea of a leaf's veins in your head, and you loosely drew that idea - but did not actually reflect upon what the veins in your reference image looked like.

Frankly, in that situation I wouldn't have drawn the extra veins at all. Outside the focal circle I'd have just focused on establishing solid forms and capturing the sense of those leaves flowing through space.

Anyways, those are some things to keep in mind. You're doing a good job, so keep it up and feel free to move onto the next lesson.

Uncomfortable

2016-02-27 01:14

Hrrm...

I followed your advice as paying more attention to the forms and construction and drawing through my ellipses

You're missing boatloads of the things I've mentioned on the topics of form and construction. I decided to compile all of your homework and just draw over all of it, building up a list of things you need to keep in mind. Give it a good look through.

Yes, you are heavily symbol-drawing when it comes to your details, but we'll deal with that later. Right now we need to sort out your forms. I want you to try this homework again, from top to bottom, but do not apply ANY detail. All I want to see are form constructions, and I want to see you drawing bigger, drawing through your forms, drawing through all of your ellipses, and focusing on moving from simple to complex. 90% of the time with your leaves you are jumping straight into complex shapes that have no underlying supports. You're tackling a multitude of challenges simultaneously, instead of breaking them up and dealing with them one at a time as I described in the constructional drawing article. I definitely think that at least part of it is the fact that you're focusing on detail well before ever reaching that stage. Focus only on the step you're on, do not look ahead.