Jehanne's Drawing Thread

Really? I think the coat makes it pretty obvious.

Originally Posted by Vulpes

Really? I think the coat makes it pretty obvious.

Well, I hope you're right.

You are a talented artist. Some of your sketches look like they are really 3D, like the egg! The faces for your people are very well done! The ones with vases, bottle, bowls or other containers look quite lifelike. Your art is truly beautiful.

Originally Posted by Pseud O Nym

You are a talented artist. Some of your sketches look like they are really 3D, like the egg! The faces for your people are very well done! The ones with vases, bottle, bowls or other containers look quite lifelike. Your art is truly beautiful.

Thank you very much.
(^_^)



I finished this last night. There are some less obvious references that I'll probably have to explain when I present it in class; it's a self-portrait. The assignment was to create a self-portrait in the spirit of the Byzantine Icon (not that it literally had to look like one, but that there are attributes that also tell somethings biographical through imagery).

[IMG*]http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff366/jehannedulis/self-portrait-feb2012.jpg[/IMG]

Wow! That is something! I don't see how you get your faces to look so real.

Originally Posted by Vulpes

When do I get to see the antelope?

[IMG*]http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff366/jehannedulis/still-life_antelope_postinternet.jpg[/IMG]

Hey, the head's cut off! What gives?

Originally Posted by Vulpes

Hey, the head's cut off! What gives?

It's a long story.

=_=

---------- Post added at 07:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:28 PM ----------

But: 'I told you so'

Was it a gerenuk?

Actually, the taxidermy animal isn't labelled and we aren't sure what it is. I am going to poke around wikipedia and see if I can figure it out. The neck wasn't really that long (as gerenuk); it's a really small animal.

Only reason I figured gerenuk is because if the head is gonna fall off an antelope, that's the one.

Perhaps it's a dik-dik?

Originally Posted by Vulpes

Only reason I figured gerenuk is because if the head is gonna fall off an antelope, that's the one.

Oh, shi--

Perhaps it's a dik-dik?

I think it's a dik-dik, because of it's size, coloring, shape of the head.

Saint John the Evangelist and the Angel


Well, well, I kind of don't know if I should keep posting sketches here. They might get boring to look at. And if you're on dA, you already get a chance to see them. But I'll keep plugging ahead for a little while.

So here's what I did today. I found a painting that I just adore. Oh, I love it so much so I sketched it. The art history book says that this artist (Alonso Cano) seemed to veer away from the Spanish Baroque of his contemporaries and had a much more Italian style. That's probably why I liked it so much.




[IMG*]http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff366/jehannedulis/stjohn_zu_2.jpg[/IMG]


And then I added color; and although I'm not happy with the way it turned out, I still think that practice with the modeling using color is good. So here's the aftermath:

[IMG*]http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff366/jehannedulis/stjohn_colored.jpg[/IMG]

Thomas Gainsborough's The Blue Boy was my favorite painting when I was a little girl. I still like it; here's my sketchbook page with a drawing.


[IMG*]http://i1232.photobucket.com/albums/ff366/jehannedulis/blueboy.jpg[/IMG]

Originally Posted by Jinny

Thomas Gainsborough's The Blue Boy was my favorite painting when I was a little girl.

Hmm. Interesting choice.

Originally Posted by Vulpes

Hmm. Interesting choice.

I think the first time I saw it at the Huntington was when I was 7 years old, maybe? And it was my favorite painting for a long time. I like the color palettes and mood of paintings from the Rococo.

Although the portraits tend to be very stiff in Gainsborough's work, they give off sort of a dreamlike quality... like, a memory? Permanence in a memory? Elegance and propriety? Anyway, I'm a big fan of Rococo and Neoclassical works. There aren't many painting styles I dislike, I guess.

Your rendition of The Blue Boy is great. Have you been drawing for years to become so adept at your art?

Originally Posted by Jinny

I think the first time I saw it at the Huntington was when I was 7 years old, maybe? And it was my favorite painting for a long time. I like the color palettes and mood of paintings from the Rococo.

Although the portraits tend to be very stiff in Gainsborough's work, they give off sort of a dreamlike quality... like, a memory? Permanence in a memory? Elegance and propriety? Anyway, I'm a big fan of Rococo and Neoclassical works. There aren't many painting styles I dislike, I guess.

If you think his portraits are stiff, you should see Reynolds, his main competitor at the time. xD Worlds apart. Gainsborough is far more gestural than him and would sit far away with loooong brushes to paint his subjects. Reynolds basically contracted out the clothing and pose painting to lesser painters while he did the most "important" part, the face.

Then again, Gainsborough really only did portraits to survive and earn money. His true passion was landscape. And when it came to portraits, if he had to do them, her preferred painting women.

Originally Posted by Pseud O Nym

Your rendition of The Blue Boy is great. Have you been drawing for years to become so adept at your art?

Thanks!


Umm, no, I wouldn't say I've been drawing for years. I liked to doodle and sketch, but I never made more than a handful of sketches a year (prior to 2010). When it comes down to it, I would say that I started drawing in summer 2010, and I studied on my own for about a year before taking a drawing class last fall.

I dug up some sketches I had scanned, to show as examples -- 'cause that's fun, although these are the better of the sketches because most of them are so painful to look at

^^;

30 December 2006


March 2009


July 2010

Originally Posted by Altamira

Reynolds basically contracted out the clothing and pose painting to lesser painters while he did the most "important" part, the face.

(>_<)

I didn't think about these painters contracting out parts of their paintings. Is that common?

Gainsborough was against it and did all of his own portraiture. But yes, it was common practice, at least in England at that time, for Reynolds and many of the other portrait "masters" to contract out parts of their paintings to "costume" painters, background painters, and so on. Those were whole separate professions and not viewed as "highly"--they also never got their names credited on the works.

People would then largely pay for the "style" the portrait artists became known for, Gainsborough as the more painterly, sensual, gestural one, and Reynolds as the more regal, stately, classical one. You know, the usual divide.