DanielG wrote: Tue Jan 24, 2023 1:15 am
These are the latest exercises. I drew these on Strathmore Bristol vellum paper. I think the wood turned out better than previous attempts.
How did I miss this? I'm sorry!
WOOD
Much better! Possibly a little soft and overworked, but that will improve with practice. And the blacks are weak... but you'd expect me to say that
No blunt ends! That alone is worth congratulations. The softness has lost the feel of woodgrain to a large extent, but the grain I can see travels unbroken from end to end. There are no blunt-ended splits, either. And any sections you overlapped with tapered ends have worked really well.
DAN-wood1.jpg
CYLINDER
You've a little way to go yet with this, Dan.
The vertical left-hand shading just stops. You need to gradually decrease pressure as you travel right, so it disappears and blends into the mid-section.
The top of the mid-section is OK, but lower down this also just stops. Those lines really do need to be tapered at the end. Again, practice will solve that for you.
DAN-cylinder1.jpg
SHED
If you were aiming at "rustic" then this is OK. But otherwise it’s not good.
Your shading overall is full of gaps, and no amount of blending will remove them. However, at least those gaps, and your lines of shading, do follow the perspective of the left-hand wall, which is excellent.
I accept that this is "just an exercise" but sooner or later you'll have to give some thought to what it is you're drawing.
For example, the underside of the right-hand eave is lighter than the wall below. Yet it cannot possibly be receiving more light. The shadow cast by that eave has a ragged and blunt edge where, In reality, the light wall would reflect light into that shadow and dilute it.
And it looks hurried. Slow down and give yourself time to think about what it is you're drawing.
DAN-shed-1.jpg
Again - apologies for the delay.