Never Say Never

We have over 7 billion people in this world, and I have honestly never seen a true doppelganger. You know how people compare photos of two or more celebrities and call them “twinsies?” Maybe I’m guilty of confusing one for another in a movie in which only one appears, but looking at photos side by side, you can tell who is who. And let me underscore the fact that it’s a photo comparison and not videos in which you can compare body language, etc.

All this to say… When it’s not the girl, it’s not the girl. In this case, it is not Da Vinci’s Study for the Head of a Girl, c 1483.

I thought it was a simple drawing, so I wanted to aim for the true size, which was maybe fifteen percent bigger than how it is in the book. I want to say that the subtle change in size, as opposed to making it an even 100% bigger, threw me off, but I think it was in how complicated the drawing really is. It’s simple in that there are fewer lines, but it’s complicated in that each line does more work: a small change in a small line, especially those depicting the eyes, can make a big difference and their being “off” that much more noticeable.

Attempt #1

Step 1. I began with a grid.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

I divided a photo copy of the original into ten, horizontally, and then because it wasn’t easy to divide it vertically into ten, I cropped some from the top and bottom before dividing the middle into ten. I then made a similar grid on a slightly larger piece of paper.

I remembered to crop a proportionate amount off the top and bottom before dividing the middle into ten. Each division was now 1.69 cm, which was difficult to draw lines for… but I had to let this go because if I tried to crop more from the top and bottom, to make each division an even 1.5 cm, for example, I would have to adjust the divisions again in the original.

… and grids can only help you so much anyway.

I then did my best in pencil… but looking at it now, I can see the right eye (what the figure would call her left eye) is a bit off.

Step 2. Apply ink.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

I know. It’s bad. She either looks “haunted” or she’d just been in a brawl… and you might not notice but there’s a hole in the right eye.

I realized after applying ink how off it was and tried desperately to fix it. “Fortunately,” I could erase the ink, but only at a cost to the quality of the surface of such delicate paper. Well, it’s not that delicate, but I learned the hard way that I had to be careful with how many times I went over it with ink or pencil.

Attempt #2

Step 1. Make a carbon copy of my first attempt.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Step 2. Go by eye to clear up the lines.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

I didn’t go further than this, because it didn’t look like her and that blasted right eye… I was already boring a hole into the paper. So I put it away for the day… which then turned into more than a week.

Attempt #3

Step 1. Make a grid.

Step 2. Line up the carbon copy of the first attempt onto the grid. The carbon copy helped me save time on the hair and body, while the grid helped me redraw all the lines for the face.

Step 3. Apply ink.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

It’s better than my first two attempts. However, she doesn’t look quite as “sharp”… and I really can’t’ explain why. I further divided each square, around the eyes, into eight, vertically and horizontally, and I still couldn’t get it right. I finally relented and erased the grid lines, and then had to go by eye and redraw what the eraser had erased, which made no difference — I’d memorized how to draw her eyes a particular way, including whatever I was doing wrong.

Well. Like the title says, Never say never! I mean, I’ll try again… but not any time soon.

Materials

Lead pencil
Ballpoint pen, black
Laid paper, slightly grey-blue, 90 gsm (I purchased this online but I forget from where.)

Copy of Leonardo Da Vinci’s Study for the Head of a Girl, c 1483, from Leonardo da Vinci: The Complete Paintings and Drawings.

Study of a Mourning Woman (Part 2)

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

This is continued from Study of a Mourning Woman (Part 1). In that post, I made comparisons between my experiences with drawing Durer’s L’Annonciation and this drawing, by Michelangelo. I also made notes on why I think it’s a good picture, which in a word is its presence and which is achieved by creating the illusion of the flow of volume. I liked Durer’s L’Annonciation for how beautifully the lines flowed; likewise, I like this drawing for how beautifully the volume seems to flow. There is a lot going on in Durer’s picture (EG, the angel is in mid-flight), while this drawing is of a woman standing still; and yet, her sheer presence seems to be greater than the whole scene of Durer’s. I can’t add much more, except to continue with the process of finally finishing the drawing.

Step 3 (cont): Continue drawing in the lines, piece by piece.

Note on using “guidelines”

When I say “guidelines,” I am referring to where the illusion of the flow of volume can be seen, which I made a carbon copy of in Step 1. Sometimes there’re hard lines accompanying these illusory lines. Often, however, the illusion of the “lines” you see are created by many minor lines stopping just where the illusory line would intersect. Sometimes the ends of these lines stay straight, so the abrupt end of the black of these lines depict the edge between light and shadow; EG, the lighted areas of the figure’s left sleeve. Often, the ends seem to curve around some bend in the fabric, so that many lines ending or changing one’s flow in such a way depict a space or surface of the fabric which is curving away from view or changing course in some way. EG, the fabric underneath the arm.

There was no use in trying to make a carbon copy of all the fine lines, because I often couldn’t see all of them through the tracing paper. It was also confusing to go by, because I could see many lines but some were darker than others and seemed to connect to lines which they didn’t connect to, etc. It feels like cheating anyway, and so, I relented and had to eyeball the minor lines. Near the end of a day’s work, I would feel lazy and do some guesswork or very close to making things up. This is when I knew I should call it a day. Fortunately, the mistakes I made in these moments of laziness (or exhaustion) could be edited later on.

Editing.

I used two different erasers. The first, I believe, was a white, hi-polymer eraser, and it could lighten the darker areas of ink. When this ran out, I began using a pink, paper-mate, which could erase the ink entirely, if I really went at it and the ink hadn’t been absorbed too deeply.

I wouldn’t recommend the pink, paper-mate, because it can tear apart the surface of the paper more easily than the white, hi-polymer. OTOH, I was desperate. I had clocked in so many hours already, and I wanted to like the end result.

With the new eraser, I was able to clean up the face and the knee and random places of her clothing. When you focus on the lines too closely, you can lose a sense for the quality of the depiction of the flow of volume. I did a lot of work in pencil before applying ink, but near the end, I skipping the use of a pencil. Sometimes, this was a mistake, because when you make a mistake in the flow of volume, you make a mistake which involved many minor lines. Fortunately, these mistakes were usually not where the ends of these lines end abruptly, but instead curve and continue on in another direction, so that what the eraser could not erase could be hidden by newer lines. It’s a bit of a blur where the fabric falls underneath the arm.

Visual Rhythm

I had said, in my last post, that I couldn’t enjoy this drawing piece-meal. I’ve changed my mind, and it’s because I can appreciate his use of visual rhythm. EG, where the knee protrudes from underneath the clothing, the lines seem to follow suit, and bend just where the knee bends. We see how the lines follow the shape underneath while maintaining some rhythm as lines.

There’s something hypnotic about repetitive motions/sounds/visual elements. Just listen to the rhythm of music or poetry or look at random fencing that lines a yard or public garden. You feel like there’s something there that can take care of itself so you stop listening or looking so carefully and allow yourself to get carried away.

When you see it in this drawing, it’s the repetition of one nice flowing line after another, so even when you look at it closely, at one line, you can enjoy how nicely that whole space seems to flow.

Step 5: Add “sepia”

I wanted to make the whole drawing the same color as the original. I didn’t have a writing tool which could make the fine lines in that color, so I used a black ball point pen. I then thought I could go over the ball point pen with a gel pen in “sepia” where the lines were thicker. It looked weird.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

It looked a little psychedelic, as though the shadows (which were supposed to recede from view) now popped into view. I didn’t panic, though, because maybe if I gave it a wash of tea, the lighter lines would change to the color of the tea.

Step 6: Give it a wash.

Well, they didn’t. The tea didn’t do much at all, so after daubing the drawing dry, I immediately applied a wash of coffee. The color was really nice, but it didn’t make the black ink brown; instead, it enhanced the black and the psychedelic look of the drawing.

Study of a Woman in Mourning 2 (14)

The next morning, I could only hope I could edit of of what I’d done, and to my delight,  the pink, paper-mate eraser could erase the black lines underneath the brown. The brown lines didn’t budge, but at least they didn’t look so heavy, so the line-work became more subtle again. I did some more editing and trimmed the edges (because I’d applied two coats of coffee wash after the initial coat of tea wash in the span of 15-20 minutes and it was ruining the paper; IE, the wash had seeped underneath the surface and made parts of it blotchy).

I scanned the last picture and, noticing that part of the clothing underneath the arm didn’t flow very well, did some more editing.

The final version is the scan above.

For fun, I also saved a copy of a version that I tweaked using a photo editor.

Study of a Woman in Mourning 2 (14) sepia

Hard to find ink that is a true sepia color and not merely brown and harder still to find writing tools in color as fine as the ball point pen I was using. If I did have such a writing tool, my drawing could’ve looked like the image above.

Note on time

It’s been two weeks and two days since my last post, and I can say that I took a small break (life), but even so, I spent three to five hours at a time between photos, and there are 12 photos between the first photo and the one taken after I finished applying the ink. So this itty, bitty drawing (about the size of a sheet of paper) took me 36-60 hours, not including the time I took to give it a wash and do more editing, as well as the time between photo 7 and photo 8 when I lost the use of the camera for two to three days of work.

There was a lot of thinking and staring at the original, and trying to figure out just what I was looking at and how the lines work to create the illusion of the flow of volume. I want to say here, that while editing, I focused on how the flow of volume supports the illusion of some presence of a figure, but I only focused on the flow of volume. I think having the right proportions lends itself to the presence of the figure, for which I used a carbon copy.

Finally, you could say the last bit of work occurs when the picture is actually viewed, when the viewer sees the illusion.

Materials

Lead pencil
Ball point pen, black
Gel pen, sepia
Tea (wash)
Coffee (wash)

Copy of Michelangelo’s Study of a Mourning Woman from Michelangelo — The Drawings of a Genius 

Study of a Mourning Woman (Part 1)

Michelangelo vs Durer

What makes this a great drawing isn’t in how delicate the lines are. Unlike Durer, you don’t see how pretty a single line flows to and from another. You see bigger “moves,” like the posture of the body and the contrast of the lighter areas with the darker areas, depicting a source coming from the left.

Overall, the figure has a great presence, despite its small size, achieved by Michelangelo’s greatest move(s) — depicting the flow or illusion of the flow of the drapery, which is three dimensional. He does this with many fine lines following the contour of the volume. What’s tricky (but so wonderfully successful) is depicting a given contour line as it coincides with the perspective/angle at which you are viewing that area of the figure.

Durer does this too, but his “moves” aren’t so unified. IE, the overall goal of this drawing was to express volume, whereas Durer filled his drawing of L’Annonciation with individual, pretty lines and objects, so I found myself enjoying Durer in pieces; while drawing Michelangelo, I found myself not enjoying individual areas but sought motivation by checking on how the drawing was coming along and hoping the end result would look as good as the original.

Having said this, I have to admit I liked the body language of the head and hand. If I were to crop only this area of the picture, it would be great to look at in itself.

Flow of Volume

It’s tricky because it’s an illusion. You don’t convey it with a single line, but all the minor lines that follow inner contour lines and which depict areas in light and shadow.

I used guidelines (as did Michelangelo — you can see them in the original) which convey the flow of the volume — the way the fabric falls and moves.

This — the volume — is what’s pretty about the drawing, and the lines that help convey this are what make me say, “Nice moves!” This is not a simple matter of making sure the lines all fit into the space given. You have to make sure these major lines drape the shape of the figure underneath. You have to make sure it does not hide the body language conveyed by the pose the figure assumes. You could say, in the original, it even enhances the body language.

Unfortunately, I have not finished drawing a copy of my own. I made two attempts. The first I worked on and off during July.

I began with a carbon copy, which yielded a blur of lines, so I made another carbon copy, which was less detailed and which I used more like guidelines. Initially, I was focusing a little too hard on getting the lines right and not on why I liked the picture to begin with, and without the latter, I got lazy and was eventually shading more than hashing. I didn’t like the progress I was making and, after a couple of weeks, lost interest.

At the beginning of this month, I began a second attempt, which so far, I’m more or less happy with.

Step 1: I made a carbon copy, but I only used the second trace (the “guidelines”) from my first attempt.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Step 2: I started with something I knew I liked about the drawing, which was the head. Even though it’s not very accurate in my first attempt, I liked how it turned out, so I knew the idea in itself was good (to me, personally).

I made sure I was focusing on why I liked this part of the drawing — I could see a human face peeking through, and, accordingly, I made sure I got a clear sense of the feelings expressed from that face. I also tried to stick more closely to the lines used in the original and to not resort to shading (as opposed to hashing), because that can look sloppy and express less authority over the lines drawn.

Step 3: I went over the lines in other parts, making sure I knew what I was looking at and was conveying ideas with confidence and from a clear sense of what I mean to convey in my version.

And the final stage I reached is below.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Once I finish the drawing in black, I’m planning to erase as much of the ink as I can,  wash the surface in tea and then darken certain lines in sepia. I’m hoping that once I erase the black ink, the paper will be more free to absorb a different color. Probably not, but in my head it’s a cool idea. We’ll see.

Materials

Strathmore Water Color Paper Series 300
Ball point pen, black
Lead pencil, black

Copy of Study of a Mourning Woman from Michelangelo: The Drawings of a Genius

L’Annonciation

Ooh, this was a doozy of a drawing. I was half way done before I realized I didn’t like what I was doing, so I started again.

I’m learning that I developed a heavy hand from line drawings I’ve done in the past. My hand wants to correct mistakes by going over the mistaken line until it’s so thick it’s brought closer to a better line. It’s a bad habit, which has as much to do with confidence than it does with having enough experience (in one’s mind and in one’s hand) to draw the right line, which — hey — are two things copying line drawings can help you develop.

L’Annonciation (1526), by Albrect Durer, is particularly unforgiving. You can’t get away with thicker lines, because he has such a delicate hand. With every thin line you redraw as a thick line, the picture changes a little, until you have a different style of drawing; and it’s Durer delicate style that makes his drawings so beautiful.

First Attempt:

I started by doing all the easy things, namely the top half and the lines that give perspective.

I did this so that I could build up some confidence for myself. At first glance, this picture looked fairly straight-forward to me, but after taking so many hours on the easy stuff, I realized I’d been hiding from my own feelings of intimidation… There’s so much going on here.

The carbon copy I made was a mess of blurry lines (again). I tried redoing parts of it, section by section, but I wasn’t asking myself what made this a great picture… and when I made the face of the angel kind of gloopy, I had to start over.

Second attempt:

My first attempt helped me slow down and appreciate the details that looked “charming” to me. I would regret ruining these elements, because while these details are a part of a larger story, each can stand on their own as well and look just as charming. (I’m referring to the face of the angel and the face of the girl, the drapery of the clothes ((a) the sleeves of the angel, (b) the sleeve of the girl, (c) the leg of the angel stepping forward, (d) the mid-section of the angel and (e) how the robe follows the posture of the angel), the posture of the angel, the hand of the angel, the lantern hanging from the ceiling, the pitcher and the candlestick on the mantle.)

I used the carbon copy to simply tell me where the details go, and then I worked on one section at a time. For each, I did a new carbon copy, so that what was going on in that section was fresh in my mind and I wasn’t blindly going over lines I’d forgotten. It gets tricky sometimes knowing what the lines are trying to show you when there are so many of them.

Going section by section has its drawbacks. I sometimes didn’t have the tracing paper in line with the rest of the drawing so it’s not a very accurate copy. There are folds missing at the bottom of the angel’s robe and at the shoulder or shoulders of the angel and I started making stuff up while filling in the wings.

I also made the unfortunate mistake of using a ruler when applying the ink to the lines in the top half of the drawing, which made me comfortable enough to move the pen slowly across. I used a very fine gel pen (super fine) but I think I’d applied too much pencil, so the ink had trouble adhering to the paper’s surface. Oftentimes, the ink wouldn’t come out and I would go back and forth until it would issue forth little globs, which dot all the lines in that section. I should’ve known to not use a pencil or a ruler after my first attempt, but, ironically, I didn’t want to risk ruining the picture after successfully drawing the girl and the angel.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

I was so tired by the time I’d gotten to the “lesser” elements, that I said, “Hell with the pencil!” … and it was so much easier… and it didn’t feel impulsive. My hands had gotten used to drawing relatively straight lines, and the lines that weren’t straight were so light I could simply make correct lines right over them and simply move on. I see random lines in Durer’s drawing as well. I think he was unafraid of making mistakes and simply drew over the occasional bad line, or he made it apart of the drawing, like making a “happy mistake.”

In Conclusion:

There is a whole genre of visual art that depicts The Annunciation, so what makes this one stand out, if it does? I think it’s the overwhelming amount of details, and in the details there is nice “line flow.” You know when a sports commentator says “nice move” when watching an ice-skater twirl or be graceful in some way? That’s my reaction to so much of the line-work in this drawing. Every section has great lines, or you could simply say Durer had great style.

Materials

Strathmore Drawing Paper Series 300
Ball point pen, black
Lead pencil, black

Copy of L’Annonciation (1526) from Dessins et Peintures des Maitres Anciens, Premiere Serie, Troisieme Volume

Portrait de femme, buste

I’d discovered Albrecht Durer in an old book, Dessins et Peintures des Maitres Anciens,while browsing a used bookstore in Tucson. With the exception of the first few pages, it’s comprised entirely of lithograph prints and each page is printed on only one side. They’re almost daring you to take the book apart and decorate your walls with its contents… but of course, I’m not tempted. I’m satisfied with simply leaving a book open on a given print for a few days, so that when I walk past it, I can be in the presence of something quite wonderful a few moments at a time.

I immediately fell in love with the “Lievre” or “Young Hare,” along with a number of other prints. So now, while on a mission to learn from as many great works as I can, I thought of this book. Initially, I was feeling ambitious, because I assumed it wouldn’t be that difficult, but then, looking at the lithographs I coveted, which were the ones more intricately designed, I could see that maybe I should begin with a test run, and so here it is.

Portrait de femme, buste

Step 1: I made a carbon copy. I traced the image onto tracing paper with a pencil and then went over it with a pen before erasing the pencil. I then applied graphite to the other side. Replacing the pencil of the initial trace with pen is an extra step, but it’s less messy as well.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Step 2: I rubbed the side with the graphite onto some drawing paper.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

As you can see, the lines are kind of blurry, so I “smoothed” them over with a pencil, keeping in mind the flow of the lines, as well as how the eyes made the girl look kind of pretty or — I’m trying to think of something more specific — kind… maybe?

Step 3: I applied ink.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

I think I did a decent job smoothing over the eyes in pencil, so I waited until I applied ink before taking the next picture. Sadly, I applied ink a little too heavily, so the eyes look gloopy. I couldn’t believe it. I waited a day or so before starting again.

Steps 1 and 2 and some of 3: I made a carbon copy, applied the graphite to drawing paper and revised the image with a pencil, and began to apply ink.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Graphite can be very messy and was distorting my view of the lines, so I quickly smoothed over and applied ink to the lines of the bodice before doing the same to the lines of the head.

Step 3: I finnished applying ink and then added highlights, using a white pastel pencil, to give more volume.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

There’s a prettiness to the subject, which is what I liked about the lithograph, which I couldn’t quite capture in my own copy. I drew and erased the eyes over and over again, before I gave up and applied the ink. I credit sheer muscle memory for getting the lines more or less “correct” with very little fuss, which made for more delicate lines. And yet, there’s still something missing. They are supposed to be “kind” eyes, and I made her frown a little in both my copies.

In Conclusion:

I thought making a copy of a lithograph print would be straightforward. If shadow and volume are all expressed using lines, then such a simple drawing should be simple to copy, line for line. But there is a problem, in producing portraits in general, as a person’s face often expresses complex emotions.

The more complex the emotion, the more intriguing it is — it makes me wonder what the subject is thinking.

I’m not sure which is more difficult: capturing the complexity of facial expression with more detail or less — with the subtle gradations of color, using watercolor or oils, or with a dash of a line using ink.  Making a copy of a seemingly simple drawing helps me appreciate the latter.

Materials

Strathmore Drawing Paper Series 300
Ball point pen, black
Lead pencil, black
Pastel pencil, white

Copy of L’Annonciation (1526) from Dessins et Peintures des Maitres Anciens, Premiere Serie, Troisieme Volume

More Da Vinci

Here’s Da Vinci’s Anatomical Study of a Bear’s Foot, circa 1490, which I copied from Frank Zollner’s Leonardo Da Vinci: Complete Paintings and Drawings.

First impressions: Love/awe of the machinations of a bear’s biology. Visual rhythm in the metacarpals allowed to “shine” in simple lines and contrast between dark ink and white highlighting. And the color choice did more for the drawing than a simple black and white drawing — a case of more is more. The brown showcases the blue and contrasts nicely with the white, and vice versa.

These things I tried to transfer over to my copy of the drawing.

Step 1: I created a carbon copy by first tracing directly from the book and then flipping it over and drawing over the lines with a lead pencil.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Step 2: I went through a process of applying ink and adding highlights.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

But I didn’t like how this turned out, as I got over-zealous with the ink (which I did for Da Vinci’s Study of a Lily as well).

So I tried again.

Step 1: I made a carbon copy.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Both carbon copies produced very blurry lines, so when the flow of a line was cut off, I had to meticulously find all the pieces making up its “flow” and connect them by eye to make sure it flowed in the same way.

Step 2: I applied ink, but more gently this time, using the pen the way I did the pencil. When I saw the pen as a pen, I was very heavy-handed, and it’s a delicate drawing. So I needed to strike up a balance between the considerations for delicacy of the lines and the intensity of the contrast between the colors.

The first layer of ink was too light, so I carefully added another layer, etc.

Step 3: I tried to give it a little volume. I’m very new to hatching, and it shows, but the white highlights added volume in a really nice way, especially to the toe bones.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Overall: It’s not exactly to my liking, but I guess that’s where I am as an artist. I couldn’t quite get the volume of the heel the way it was achieved in the original, and although I chose a very light blue laid paper, it wasn’t as blue as the one in the book. On the other hand, while the first copy had better contrast in some places, I like the second copy better for being a more delicate drawing. I think I’m making progress.

Materials

Laid paper, 90 gsm, light blue
Ball point pen, black
Lead pencil, black
Gel pen, sepia (small)

Copy of Anatomical Study of a Bear’s Foot, circa 1490, from Leonardo da Vinci: Complete Paintings and Drawings

Coffee, Tea and Da Vinci

Do you ever browse through art books and think, Wow, I wish I had that. Well, I do… and often. Obviously, drawings you may find in a book by a renowned artist is likely out of anyone’s reach, and obviously anything by Da Vinci is in a museum by now. But damn, I still want one… of this drawing… and that drawing…

So I got to thinking… I have a very limited budget — and I want to be happy — and if money can’t buy what I want anyway, how about some good ol’ fashion elbow grease? I then had an ah-hah moment. I could use this desire for stuff as motivation to develop some skills for my own work.

Da Vinci Complete Paintings and DrawingsI have a bad online shopping habit, and I recently purchased a few art books, one of which is Leonardo Da Vinci: Complete Paintings and Drawings, by Johannes Nathan, et. al.

It includes a biography and treats Da Vinci’s work by categories as well as offers notes on individuals pieces, so you can spend a nice afternoon with it or simply pick it up to look for a specific work and read a little at a time. It is the perfect coffee table book for people who love coffee table books.

I’d also bought Christopher Nichols’ Leonardo da Vinci: Flights of the Mind, and in it there’s a small picture of Study of a Lily, which immediately caught my eye… and using both books, I set out to make a copy of my own.

Step 1: I used tracing paper to copy directly out of the book. I know I should be using this step to develop an eye for proportions, but… I’m lazy and am limited in time (I see my life dwindling away before my eyes… always), and this is what takes the longest to perfect in a drawing.

Da Vinci: Complete Paintings and Drawings 

As you can see, the drawing is clipped at the bottom, so I used Christopher Nichols’ book, which has a smaller but full picture, as a reference for the bottom of the stem, as well as for seeing how the lily was framed by the paper.

Step 2: I flipped the tracing paper over and traced over the lines with a pencil, making a “carbon copy.” I then used the dull edge of my lead pencil’s eraser cap to rub the image onto water color paper.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Step 3: Using a “carbon copy” produced a blurry image, so I had to smooth out the lines; IE, I had to consider the “gesture” or flow of the lines. (See Nicolaides and Me.)

From far away, you can see a lily, but up close, the lines didn’t make sense, and I had to continually ask myself, What am I looking at? What does this line do for the overall drawing and does this line connect to that line or that line?

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

I then went over it with a fine pen in sepia.

Step 4: Color. I began with a light wash of tea. Yes, red tea. I shameslessly used the good kind too. I mean, there’s good tea and there’s bad tea… and I used the good tea. (This is my idea of seizing the day.)

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Step 5: Volume. So far, I have two browns: the bold lines of the sepia pen and the wash, which makes the background the same color as the lily. If I kept the background white, the lily would’ve stood out more like a cartoony graphic, especially with the bold outline. By sharing the same color range, the lily looks more like it’s in its natural setting.

I then used coffee to add shadows or, by deliberately leaving certain areas clean of coffee, I created the illusion of highlights.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

I also added actual highlights, but only to mimic the original drawing, with a white pastel pencil.

Here is the final drawing in detail…

Not a perfect copy. After applying ink, I realized I’d gotten a few places wrong. I also overdid the ink, so the outline is much more bold and makes the lily look more cartoony and less natural than in the original drawing. (I have a tendency to obsess over making perfect lines.)

I mean, there is definitely a lot of “me” in this drawing; however, I think it has its own charm and I was able to produce the same “gesture” as the original.

Materials

Strathmore Water Color Paper, Series 300
Gel pen, sepia (small)
Tea (wash)
Coffee

Copy of a Study of Lily from Leonardo da Vinci: Complete Paintings and Drawings