Showing posts with label hierarchy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hierarchy. Show all posts

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Hierarchy bric-a-brac


John told me that I should articulate some of my thoughts on what I've been learning about hierarchy! So pardon some image reposting, here.

When I start out doing a construction/hierarchy study, I start by printing a couple of black and white copies of the image I want. Not only does it make the work portable (and easier on the eyes), but it allows me to doodle ALL OVER the original image! I don't really do this for reference, but to get acquainted with the image. You can't really see the marks too terribly well on the cheapo prints I get at the library, but it helps me understand the basic shapes to draw over my reference picture. I can tell what fits, I get a decent sense of proportion, and I can make notes about where relationships in the image are. Usually the biggest musts are the line of action, the cranium, the body shapes, etc.

With the basic shapes well understood, I take out a fresh print of the reference image and start my own drawing! Line of action, pears and spheres to start. After I feel like I've gotten the major shapes in (mitts for the hands, limbs, etc) I scan the image for the first time and compare it with the original. Does it all fit in? Only when the bare bones fit do I let myself move onto the next level of hierarchy, with things like the hair mass.

I am going to admit that my early drawings are very messy. I can understand what's going on in them, but I know I need to keep things cleaner. Be a better student than I am and make your drawings neat and orderly!

Anyawy, so, with everything larger in place, I start building the next level down-- larger details. In this drawing's case, the shape of the hair curls are a good example-- that strange tube-like shape that falls, connected around the main hair mass. Here is about where I start checking, rechecking, and correcting myself over and over again! There still aren't the smallest details, though. No things like individual hairs until VERY LAST!


I spend the most time here, like I said, because I check and correct, etc. The first drawing is obviously different from the rest because it's the messiest. I was more concerned with figuring out the hair shape, first, I guess. Do not let yourself get away with mushy drawings like that!

Anyway, when I started out doing the obsessive checking/rechecking stuff, I was scanning my drawing seriously dozens of times. I'm now down to about 5 for this stage, and I need it less with each new study. Not letting myself get away with errors, insisting that they are fixed before I move on, I think has allowed me to become more of an acute observer. With these four drawings above, you probably can't see much of a difference, but I can see where I am pushing and pulling the hair curl and other larger details.

I want to explain, here, though, that I don't just overlay my drawings when I check them. What I like to do is line the drawing and the ref up in photoshop, put keep my drawing, the top layer, on full opacity. I hit that little layer eye over and over again, checking to see the way the difference moves. It lets me see the mistakes better. This is why when I have drawings riddled with correction arrows, they are more "directional thrust" corrections than anything-- if moving from my drawing to the original makes a finger shrink, for example, I tend to draw a little arrow that "pulls" the finger outward, indicating that I need to take it further out. I don't know if that makes a lot of sense to write out, but thinking about it like a movement works better for me than just overlaying. Maybe I will make an animated gif some time of what I mean.

Well, anyway, after I feel satisfied with the basic structure of the drawing, putting the details in is just like draping a cloth over a table I just made. Everything fits pretty snugly over top. The once-complicated-looking curls of hair? They are just details that wrap neatly around that strange and complicated shape I took great pains to reconstruct! They just follow along the preexisting contours and if you haven't cheated, details are the EASIEST part, even if they look complicated.

After all the details are in, I go over my blue lines with a regular pencil. I correct any tiny errors I've just then noticed and I'm done!

TABLE:

Shapes like the abdomen, legs, arms, hands. No clothing, no hair. The hair right now is just a mass as far as we're concerned!

Then TABLE CLOTH:
Smaller details. Clothing (gloves, frills, sleeves with wrinkles), hair.

Tada!

Friday, January 16, 2009

Donald hierarchy, round 2

I misunderstood the assignment a bit. Here's my second go, with much more time invested. I made a new document to draw on rather than overlaying over the original drawing to resist looking at the image so directly. Dunno what I was thinking with that last one.



One; general layout. The centering line on the right one is a bit off; I paid for it later.


Some of these were also a bit iffy, though the on the left pole instead. I wasn't sure where to end them; some of them ended near the bellies, and some ended on the ankles. I should have been more consistent.




Significantly better than last time. No tracing whatsoever and it really made me look at the picture and explore its ins and outs a lot more.



Problem areas: I had some stretching and distortion around the feet (particularly the bottom nephew's right and Donald's right feet), hands (again, particularly on the bottom one). The eyes are also weird. The top nephews are all messed up because I placed/sized their head-circles wrong, so next time I'll double-check those more thoroughly before moving onto the next stage. Also Donald has way too big of a beak, but I think that's just because I wasn't paying enough attention.

Long story short: I need to take my time and pay more attention.

Thursday, January 15, 2009

Donald hierarchy

No, I didn't forget about this blog; my roommate with a scanner just went home for winter break. Been meaning to scan some of the stuff I've done, but it'll have to wait until after this weekend. The undergraduate show's submissions are apparently due this Tuesday, and I really need money, so I'm going to try to crank out some paintings.

Anyway, here's my attempt at an exercise on hierarchy John K just posted; it was fun! But I'm certain I got many things wrong. Oh, well-- I love these old covers, they're so direct and clear.

I'm a full-time student, but I work part-time at a bookstore. I mostly do cafe stuff but I also keep the comics section tidy; and wow, do I have to look at a lot of bad art on those covers.




I tried to do basic shapes of the layout here. The overall statement/shape isn't as clear as it is in that wonderful Bambi illustration he recently dissected, so I actually, sadly, probably had more trouble with this than with anything. I wasn't sure if I should include the little Injuns or not; I decided against it.




This is actually two here. The most important features are lighter. In retrospect I should have made the totem pole to the right more cohesive-looking. Got a little sloppy. I also am not sold on the little stereotypes; I should have zoomed in a bit more and tightened it a bit.





Less important green details! I dunno, more for fun than anything. It's nice to get in close with these drawings.

Attention, big-shot comic companies: give mercy to bookstore and comic book store employees everywhere and reconsider your aesthetics. Maybe someone would actually buy your stuff, then.