"I can't draw" - Let's deal with this myth once and for all

[Rodney]

More often than not creative types find themselves locked in a self contained cycle of non-creativity at one point or another.

One of the most significant of locks they place on the imagination is that of the eternal self fulfilling prophesy of 'I can't draw.'

 

Let's cut to the chase.

 

To draw is to pull something up or toward you (although if something or someone else is drawing in an opposing direction it might also be said to be drawn away or down)

One need not place lines on a piece of paper with graphite, pen or other instrument capable of producing a visible line but some form of line must be placed in order to reveal the structure of a visual idea.

 

One form of drawing is to bring forth lines that form letters which in turn form words and phrases.

As the Psalmist said, "A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver."

It will reflect and illuminate as it shines forth light.

And our eyes will be instinctively drawn to that imagery.

 

We live in a time where our senses are continuously and purposefully drawn toward this idea or that concept.

And as we see something shiny and new it draws us in and we extrapolate, expand and redraw anew upon those.

Subconsciously we take it all in but consciously we often stop there in our creative tracks.

For we find that we cannot draw out our new thing from where we perceive it to be hiding.

 

What can we do then to find it?

Where does it live?

What does it look like?

Is it tall or short? Is it black or white?

Is it colorful? Sad or happy?

What does it resemble the most? What does it least look like?

What other thing in this world can we use as a measuring stick to describe it?

What can we use to formulate our plan and to aid others in their attempt to find it?

 

Everyone that has ever been successful has drawn from the reality around them. Drawing lines of what to include and what to leave out.

Those with a talent for it, adding a pinch of a favored ingredient while tossing in a dash or dosage of another extract.

 

If we cannot draw from what we see plainly in front of us when our eyes are open how can we hope to successfully draw from our imagination?

[robcat2075]

I'll note that Betty Edwards' "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" is a classic book on learning to draw what you see.

[Rodney]

I'll note that Betty Edwards' "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" is a classic book on learning to draw what you see.

 

It's been awhile since I picked up my copy of her book and I confess that I've never read through it.

If I would have had it at an earlier age perhaps it would have altered my approach considerably

When I was a kid I bought in to the idea that 'real artists' didn't use reference but drew forth their creativity from their imagination!

And thus I entered into the world of iconic imagery and symbols (I later titled some of my doodle books 'symbiotics' and 'iconoci'; the latter implying there is more than one way to read and interpret things.

 

Having gone all cerebral here, I sense that similarly the text of Betty Edwards' book tends to scare people away; "Oh, we need to think about drawing... that sounds like too much work to me!"

As a kid I certainly didn't want to make something I enjoyed so much take on the form of some scientific cerebral approach to creativity.

So rather than work hard I settled for abstracting reality through cartoonery; it need not be judged as too unrealistic if it wasn't meant to be realistic in the first place.

 

One doesn't need a how to book to draw anything.

Just place the things in front of you (or in your mind) that begin to describe what you want to see.

Don't know quite what you want? Cut out pictures from a catalog... grab images from Google... mish and mash and change things up until they begin to resemble what you need them to be.

 

Don't have the right model or imagery? Put a temporary proxy there instead.

Don't have a proxy? Put a word or description in its place.

 

We cannot effectively draw upon what cannot be seen.

And this is true for imaginary things as well.

We must begin by picking a known point of reference and extrapolate the details from there.

 

A benefit to being an animator is that we become familiar with seeing moving/changing imagery.

The ability to visualize (and discard at will) massive amounts of imagery is a very useful methodology.

[Simon Edmondson]

Its a while since I read the Betty Edwards book and, having loaned it to someone who hasn't returned it, can't look through it now. What I remember of it was that it was basically dealing with what the educational psychologists call "the reality gap", which is where youngsters want it to 'look real' but are unable to achieve that and get discouraged. At that point they often revert to schematics, or furmulaie , to gain an acceptable result. Such formula stopped the person from seeing what was there and used the method instead. A head is an oval for example, with two dots for eyes, a line for the nose, and another for the mouth...

 

What Edwards did in the book was to use various exercises to stop the student from using an established method of representation and to get them to actually look at the subject as a series of shapes, tonalities and surfaces, which could be re - presented through the pictorial use of graphic media. The use of negative space, silouhette, tonal contrast, could be used to get the desired result. My recollection is that she taught a beginners drawing class and used the techniques she developed to form a curriculum to help people improve their ability toi draw the 'real', in order that they can then transfer those skills to draw with imagination, emotion, "expression" and atmosphere. She was providing the foundations on which the students could develop their skills in other directions. By getting them to see, rather than repeat other systems, she was building a visual vocabulary which enable the students to articulate their responses in different ways.

Simon

 

Ps

In case this all sounds too pretentious on my part, should add that, before my mishap, I applied to do a Phd in " the acquisition and development of visual language".

Also, the PFG, in PFG studios on the end credits of my work, stands for Pretentious Fat Git.

[zandoriastudios]

Using "draw" in the sense of draughtsmanship is a completely different meaning from "draw" as in attract...

 

You said "the Psalmist" in your quote of scripture, that was King David; But the passage is from Proverbs 25, which is attributed to his son Solomon. It also looks like the quote was only partial because there is nothing about "...And our eyes will be instinctively drawn to that imagery..."

 

¹¹ A word fitly spoken
is like apples of gold in a setting of silver.
¹² Like a gold ring or an ornament of gold
is a wise rebuke to a listening ear.
¹³ Like the cold of snow in the time of harvest
are faithful messengers to those who send them;
they refresh the spirit of their masters.
¹⁴ Like clouds and wind without rain
is one who boasts of a gift never given.
¹⁵ With patience a ruler may be persuaded,
and a soft tongue can break bones.
¹⁶ If you have found honey, eat only enough for you,
or else, having too much, you will vomit it.
¹⁷ Let your foot be seldom in your neighbor’s house,
otherwise the neighbor will become weary of you and hate you.

 

 

My art teacher in high school was fond of that book "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" by Edwards and another one called "The Natural Way to Draw" by Nicolaides. I remember doing some exercises from them, but never read them myself...

Some books that were very helpful to me in learning to draw were by Andrew Loomis. An editor at Marvel Comics actually photocopied the entire "Figure Drawing for All Its Worth" (it was out of print) and sent it to me with a reply to my submission, which was very kind--I was pretty young at the time...

 

Drawing is a skill. It is not about "Talent"--this is a myth/lie that people use when they say "I wish I could draw like you"! I know this is true because I can look back on my drawings from when I was young and hadn't developed the skill. I just had the desire to be an artist (and the stubborness to persist)...

The same is true of modeling with splines in Animation:Master. We all suck when we start out. But if we persist, we get better... Remember that when a newbie says "I wish I could model as well as..." <_>

 

 

[robcat2075]

I have the Nicolaides book too. Several times I've set out to work my way through its curriculum but it seems to presume one is an art student in a class with live models who will be there for hours at a time.

[Rodney]

Thanks for the correction William.

I'm always glad to be corrected by bible believers who know their stuff.

 

 

Regarding the origin and similarities of the words 'draught' and 'draw' though I would say naught.

[Rodney]

I truncated my last response because after some consideration I didn't think it worth pointing out my disagreement with the following:

 

Using "draw" in the sense of draughtsmanship is a completely different meaning from "draw" as in attract...

 

 

The dilemma of course being that this entire topic relies upon the meaning of the root words being entirely the opposite of 'completely different' (i.e. that the two words are of common origin). Interesting.

So how does one proceed without offending, especially where no one is particularly invested the underlying subject matter.

Perhaps best to table topic for another time?

 

Should we take the time to outline the origins of the words 'draught' and 'draw'?

I am willing to do this in furtherance of the topic but not at the expense of offending anyone.

 

It's an interesting dilemma with a tinge of irony; Will offered a correction regarding the generally accepted authorship of the verse I paraphrased (or quoted at if you prefer) from Proverbs to which I readily received correction. I am curious if the same general acceptance might extent to the known common origin of the words 'draught' and 'draw'.

If one is to accept that the sense of the words 'draught' and 'draw' is 'completely different' there is little purpose in this topic.

 

As an example; let me suggest that the principles of animation labeled 'Appeal' and 'Solid Drawing' can be more clearly seen to be different sides of the same coin where one correctly senses the meaning of the underlying words. The first attracts the attention of the reader/viewer/audience while the latter visually grounds the concept into some sense of (generally acceptable) reality.

 

Why is this important?

Because artists and animators (as we are currently demonstrating) commonly misunderstand the sense and meaning of one of their favorite words; 'draw'.

[markw]

Tricky things words.

Can be slippery as eels sometimes

[Rodney]

Tricky things words.

Can be slippery as eels sometimes

 

 

Ah, but that's why when placed together with other words they begin to form context.

[markw]

 

Tricky things words.

Can be slippery as eels sometimes

 

 

Ah, but that's why when placed together with other words they begin to form context.

 

Very true, context is everything!

You really notice that when living in a foreign language.

 

As for drawing/painting I think everyone can do it, it's just that in adults often an individuals expectations are conditioned by art made by other more seasoned artists. And when an individuals first works do not meet the level of this other work, the reaction is often, "I can't draw".

But what we see today in the work of other artists didn't just happen for them one morning when they picked up a pencil for the first time but is the result of hundreds if not thousands of hours of past work. And this learning, even for experienced artists, never ends.

Every finished piece of work is actually just more practice for the next one.

 

Often people do not realise the effort this all takes and think that somehow the process should be easy/fast but mostly it's not. With time and experience it can become easier, faster but there will always be effort required from the one creating.

As with any acquired skill, learning from other more experienced partitioners will speed ones own development. But in the end it all comes down to the would be artist actually putting in the hours "doing". There is no way around this.

[Rodney]

Often people do not realise the effort this all takes

 

 

There is no way around this.

 

 

But isn't there?

Can't everyone just scratch lines on paper (or pixels) and draw?

 

I'm not talking about reproducing the Mona Lisa here... that might be adjudged to be more akin to producing art.

I'm talking about communicating ideas through drawings.

Alternatively, we'll have to do this through words (which in written form are just culturally accepted codified drawings).

[markw]

Ah, forgive me Rodney, I'm guilty of having made an assumption back there.
I was think of someone who did want to produce art that maybe could be judged against other established artists.

Yes everyone can just scratch lines or even squiggles if they prefer.
But in order to communicate a specific idea they need to be able to order their lines and/or squiggles in such a way that the desired meaning is correctly conveyed.
But again this requires some form of effort on the part of the person doing the scratching, as several attempts may be needed before they find the best combination of scratches to correctly convey their idea.

[Rodney]

several attempts may be needed before they find the best combination of scratches to correctly convey their idea.

 

 

And this is the beauty of animation in that rough ideas (of movement and form) are can quickly be carved out of empty space.

This working through concepts via multiple attempts isn't exclusive to animators but animation trained artists certainly have an advantage in it.

Animators usually don't grow too fond of one solitary image that will or will not change. They know that image will all too soon pass away.

I have a few entries on my blog that attempts to outline the importance of roughing out ideas; one is 'Get a Plan'.

 

This seems to be a bit harder for computer animators outside of the paradigm of manipulation of objects in a puppet-like fashion although for the most part we've adapted well.

 

So lets roll this back a little and ask the question again as to why drawing is so important.

 

Quite often in our attempts to put together a scene we operate on a continual process of filling in empty space.

Namely, we have our basic setup (concept) and then upon further reflection determine something to be missing from a given space.

These are often background objects... the additional details that won't interact directly with characters but do have an associated history assigned to them.

Something to give the scene a sense of actually being lived in.

While not all important to the story if these elements were real they would have been manufactured by someone, put in place by someone and generally have some purpose for occupying that space. They are elements that contribute revealing a character's personal interests and personality. Externally, those elements are not important so in rough sketches they may only need to be hinted at with squiggly lines or a hastily placed word (ex: 'pile of crumpled papers').

 

In identifying what will most likely occupy a given space, our work can quickly progress to filling in other (less important) empty spaces.

Assuming of course these aren't required to remain 'empty' space (i.e. space the characters will move through in the scene).

 

And here we enter the realm of layout... putting everything in its proper place.

Now this could be done on the fly... create a model of everything we think we might need... and place them.

Through drawing (thumbnailing, storyboarding, etc.) we cut to the chase and quickly (in a matter of seconds) begin to visualize what really will occupy (or not occupy)... and this part is important... camera space.

 

But here we are getting ahead of ourselves because in development we generally do not want to confine our creativity to that little area constricted by the camera or stage .

Optimally, we will quickly explore space that the camera may not see as well.

Why? Because in the development stage we are only exploring what might work best for the camera (i.e. the audience) to see.

We may discover that another approach... a different orientation... a different location... works better.

 

Thus, in the development stage (where we aren't yet locked down to detailed direction we will see later in production) we can draw from a much wider range of possibilities.

[robcat2075]

I think the public at large regards graphic art as mostly the product of inspiration. That's the way its treated in movies and the skills to make art are rarely discussed.

 

On the other hand it's pretty much an accepted truth among the public that fine musicians have spent many hours and years practicing their skills.

 

The public grasps the "work" of music more than of art so they are less likely to understand that art... drawing... could be worked at to get better.

[markw]

I think the public at large regards graphic art as mostly the product of inspiration. That's the way its treated in movies and the skills to make art are rarely discussed.

 

On the other hand it's pretty much an accepted truth among the public that fine musicians have spent many hours and years practicing their skills.

 

The public grasps the "work" of music more than of art so they are less likely to understand that art... drawing... could be worked at to get better.

I like that comparison Robert, nicely put.

[Rodney]

I think this is also where we get into what Will was saying regarding 'talent' versus 'skill'.

The general public believing that certain individuals are born with a gift.

 

I'm not one of those who thinks folks are born with the ability to draw unless by that we are acknowledging that almost everyone is born with that ability.

I do think that interest has everything to do with it. Those with an interest in drawing will get better and better at it while those without an interest generally fall into that 'I can't even draw a straight line' camp.

 

Exposure has a lot to do with it as well.

When I first encountered comic books I was entranced by the drawings I saw there.

I distinctly recall making note of the different styles of artists as well and can even pinpoint the characters that awareness related to; Marvel's 'Black Panther' and Disney's Bageera from 'Jungle Book'. I recall staring and staring and flipping back and forth between those two characters trying to understand more fully how one was a man in an (more or less) animal suit and the other was a talking animal. But it went further than that... the differences in drawing styles were in some ways very similar and in other ways very different. And I marveled at how different people could draw those two characters. Now note that at this time that to my knowledge I had never read a full comic book with Black Panther and I'd never seen Jungle Book. I was comparing the artwork from an in-house advertisement in a comic book (probably 'Kid Colt Outlaw' but possibly Fantastic Four) with the artwork that accompanied an LP narrative storybook record from 'Jungle Book'. I was similarly captivated with the drawings of Maleficent... wow... someone drew that!

 

From that point on I sought out similar drawings wherever I could find them and began (slowly) to try to draw similar characters.

I distinctly recall drawing my own version of what I thought R2D2 and C3PO might look like (I changed them to be my own characters) because I didn't really know what those characters were like from the films. I didn't see Star Wars until many years later. I did see Disney's 'Robin Hood' in the theater (1975 timeframe) and that fully convinced me of the superiority of animation. I must admit however that I didn't have a clue as to how that film (or other animation on TV). Around that same time though an aunt gifted us with a couple Big Little Books... the ones with the flip book animation in the upper right hand corner. I must have flipped those pages for ages... and from that point on I had trouble being pulled away from the TV. I was just soaking everything I could see in at every opportunity I could get.

 

I do also recall that there was one big empty hole in my understanding that didn't get filled for many years and that was the concept of inbetweening.

Even though I did have access to several of Walter Foster's books Preston Blair's 'Cartooning' and 'Animation' as well as one on drawing horses and one on painting I couldn't grasp the concept of what how inbetweening was handled. If I had been exposed to someone that showed me the process at that stage... woah... the mind boggles. As it was I was fascinated by animation but knew I lacking in understanding the process so my interests gravitated to something that made more sense... designing my own comic book characters.

 

(We are getting back on track so bear with me!)

Most of what I did in my early formative years was trace out a rough outline from a comic book (usually a cover because the larger images were easier to see through the paper).

I would then start to modify the tracing to turn it into a new character.

I still recall one of my favorite tracing references.. SubMariner (from Tales to Astonish).

That was the comic book that had me running around the house terrorizing my sister and brother while yelling 'You punny human beings!'

It wasn't until my Mom stopped me and asked what I was saying that I started to realize that 'punny' and 'puny' were very different words and one of them didn't make a whole lot of sense.

Hmmm... so much for what I could be taught by the SubMareener. (I was curred of 'punny' but didn't get beyond that until much much later)

 

So...

Exposure.

Tracing.

These are referential forms that move us toward 'creativity'.

 

These apply so fully to drawing they it should be underlined and bolded for emphasis.

An example of this is the person who says, "I can draw but I can't draw hands."

Well, how does one get better at drawing hands?

Target that weakness and draw and draw and draw more hands.

Expose yourself to a variety of hand gestures (you've probably got two of them close by... so reference them!)

Trace them if you have to but place an emphasis on those things that you feel weakest at in drawing.

Can't draw eyes? Draw eyes until you can no longer stand them.

Having issues with horses? Read and reference everything you can on them.

Collect images. And don't just stydy photos of the real thing.

Look at paintings, sketches, cartoons... don't just chase after realism.

Why does that artist emphasis this?

Why does that cartoonist exaggerate that?

How does that animator get such a wonderful performance in so few frames?

Still don't know even after diving in deeply... replicate the reference... read or listen to an interview... study similar works... delve into 'how to books' and ''behind the scenes'.

Get at it while you still have interest and...

 

Perhaps most importantly... if you can find a way to remember what your knowledge level was before and then again after you learned that knew thing you'll be able to understand the ground you've gained all the better. One of the best ways to record this is via a sketchbook but it could also be project files, self made tutorials sharing what we've learned, animatics and difficult tasks that challenge our current level of experience... quickly sketched thumbnails that force us to abbreviate and jettison all but the most essential details...

 

Each time we draw from our fund of mental understanding related to any subject matter we become more intimately attuned to it.

[robcat2075]

expanding on my previous thought... CG has added a new complication to the general public's understanding of art skills.

 

Some will think the computer does all the work while others perhaps understand there is some knowledge or software that must be mastered before you can get the computer to do all the work.

[DZ4]

This is a very interesting topic.

 

Because...

 

It always seems like there's nobody out there....

 

If a flood of animators came along you'd tell them to get out or try to play leader...

 

It has to be basic psychology here...you want to share, etc...messes you up, cause you want to get rich too!

 

Then, maybe they can draw and just say they can't as a defense...buying time.

 

 

You've got a lot of psychology written here and I'll read it all at some point. I hate the part where it all boils down to money, but that would motivate one to (quickly!, earnestly!, expeditiously!,) learn how to draw...!

 

Unless you have a way to motivate out of fear...

 

But why motivate anyone to learn to draw? Let them use an excuse and do nothing...right? It's way out there...I think...but I'm just spun here...

 

On one hand...you want to share and on the other you want to draw paradise and live life like you know can exist...but,,,

 

So, if someone says they can't draw, find them a job shoveling, unless they are actually defunct. Look at how much "crap" is on TV...how many books written...how many magazines... ... You don't have to be great (yet don't quit your day job!), but anything is good as long as it is intended to get better I do believe.

 

 

Trick is to not give a sh** about it. That way you can't mess up...sort of...I think it's somewhere in there.

[pixelplucker]

I can do just about anything except make money...