I've always thought tracing as a a form of cheating. With recent years I've always had tracing paper on hand incase I needed it to work with a small area on a drawing... I'd say about 5 or more times I've used tracing paper, but never in all of my years have traced a full drawing, then calm I drew it free hand. I always felt I would cheat myself out of my skill if I traced a full photo, then transfer it to the paper...
I know there have been other artists that have traced and traced the full photo and transferred it to paper, then claiming they did it by hand.
I also know there are those out there that trace, but trace things they aren't skilled at. Let's say trying to figure out how the chin is postion on the face, you trace over the chin only and match it to your drawing to see how things are set. Then you start to free hand sketch it out.
What is everyone's take on tracing, and tracing paper?
Have you ever used tracing paper? If so, what do you perfer, or do with it (well I do know what to do with it but was wondering if there are other things you can do with it)?
Have you traced a full drawing on to tracing paper and just left it there without transfering it?
Or do you think it's cheating and why?
Full Version: Tracing and Tracing Paper
QUOTE (skeller1980 @ Feb 13 2009, 11:42 AM) 
I've always thought tracing as a a form of cheating. With recent years I've always had tracing paper on hand incase I needed it to work with a small area on a drawing... I'd say about 5 or more times I've used tracing paper, but never in all of my years have traced a full drawing, then calm I drew it free hand. I always felt I would cheat myself out of my skill if I traced a full photo, then transfer it to the paper...
I know there have been other artists that have traced and traced the full photo and transferred it to paper, then claiming they did it by hand.
I also know there are those out there that trace, but trace things they aren't skilled at. Let's say trying to figure out how the chin is postion on the face, you trace over the chin only and match it to your drawing to see how things are set. Then you start to free hand sketch it out.
What is everyone's take on tracing, and tracing paper?
Have you ever used tracing paper? If so, what do you prefer, or do with it (well I do know what to do with it but was wondering if there are other things you can do with it)?
Have you traced a full drawing on to tracing paper and just left it there without transfering it?
Or do you think it's cheating and why?
I know there have been other artists that have traced and traced the full photo and transferred it to paper, then claiming they did it by hand.
I also know there are those out there that trace, but trace things they aren't skilled at. Let's say trying to figure out how the chin is postion on the face, you trace over the chin only and match it to your drawing to see how things are set. Then you start to free hand sketch it out.
What is everyone's take on tracing, and tracing paper?
Have you ever used tracing paper? If so, what do you prefer, or do with it (well I do know what to do with it but was wondering if there are other things you can do with it)?
Have you traced a full drawing on to tracing paper and just left it there without transfering it?
Or do you think it's cheating and why?
I guess it all depends on your skill level and what is important to you. I use an opaque projector. This lets me enlarge a photo to the size of my support and ensures I have all the proportion correct. I don't draw the complete image with the photo projected on the support, just outline of the dark areas that are most important to the image. It is like a road map and the lines are normally Very light and get erased or buried in the drawing or painting.
My goal is to get my image to look exactly like the original and I don't claim to be an "Artist" . So to me this is a tool that allows me to enjoy painting and drawing but it probably prevents me from becoming better at drawing. Does this matter to me.. well not really, my time is limited so by spending 30-40 minutes in the dark, tracing out the reference lines, I can then start doing the fun part,.. making the drawing or painting come to life. I don't have to spend hours trying to figure out if the eyes are in the right spot of if the head is to big ..
BTW if it were not for the use of tools, I would never have learned I can create a drawing or painting.
All work on my website has been done in this fashion. You can get an idea of what the traced drawing looks like if you look at some of the progress photos in that section of the gallery
The tracing is hardly what you would call a picture, sometimes it doesn't look like anything but scribble!
Visit My Website
I dislike the word "cheating" which invariably comes up in regard to tracing, as it is emotionally-laden and tends to cause heat rather than light to be generated on the subject 
My opinion is that it depends very much on how it is used. (Let me set the scene first, with my answer - it does eventually come back round to tracing, I promise
)
The problems
I think one problem that is seen often in beginners (and sometimes not-so-beginners, too) drawing freehand is difficulty in proportions, so that - with a portrait for example - the individual features are drawn well, but the relationship or scaling of these to each other is off - so that the top of the head is in the wrong place relative to the face, for example, or the mouth is too low and too small, etc...
Now I'd suggest this occurs because the artist has been concentrating on the detail, and ignoring the "big picture" - I think the tendency is to narrowly focus in on the exact place that the tip of the pencil is hitting the paper, like tunnel-vision on the pointy tip of the pencil - and one tends to see people who do this holding the pencil near its tip, and bent over the drawing like they were signing a cheque.
Another problem often seen is that the lengths or angles of lines are off, or that the edge of a face is reduced to a single inaccurate arcing curve.
Gridding?
One thing that's often suggested as a workaround for both sets of problems is gridding - so that a grid is drawn on the ref-photo, and a matching one on the drawing, and the artist then concentrates on trying to accurately put in the lines of the drawing one-square-at-a-time. This can work, but it really ducks the issue, because it reinforces the idea that one must concentrate on the small detail, and provides a way that the artist can get the different areas in the correct relative sizing and proportion without having to think about it at all, or even recognise the true nature of the problem (namely the "tunnel-vision" approach).
Why tracing gets a bad reputation
Tracing is often condemned as "cheating" because again it can be used in an uninformed way, where the artist is focussed down very tightly on an area of the drawing just 3 or 4 millimetres square, and is wholly concentrating on trying to make sure that the pencil doesn't wander off the underlying line on the original image. Now I'd agree that this approach to tracing is bad, because again it doesn't address the real problem, which is the mistaken belief that its all about focussing in very tightly on the location where the pencil-tip hits the page, and then crawling along the line like a frightened tightrope-walker. This sort of attitude to tracing gets the placements, relationships and proportions right, but it teaches nothing about how to do so without a piece of tracing-paper - and thus tracing gets a bad name, and is called "cheating".
But....
How can we get placements, proportions. and relationships right?
I think the key concept is that we have to think big - and see big - what I mean by this is that we need to get away from the idea that we have to focus in on the exact pointy tip of the pencil. How can we do this? There are working approaches which immediately help with this:
1. instead of working on a tabletop crouched over our drawing, put the paper onto a board, and prop it up near-vertically. A painters easel is the ideal thing here (that's what its for, why it was invented in the first place) - but if you don't have one, any arrangement where you can prop it up will do - tape it up to a smooth wall, for example.
2. get back away from the surface, work at arm's length - ideally, do it standing up.
3. hold your pencil at the back, and lightly, not tightly at the tip. Hold your pencil like an orchestral conductor holds his baton.
Now you're ready to do a drawing, at a reasonable size (another mistake beginners make - "I'm only a beginner, not a proper artist - so I should be humble and draw it small, so that I don't waste materials, or look like a pretentious showoff, posing at an easel" ).
How do people do it without tracing?
Now, if we break down what we see - either in a ref-drawing - or even from life! - into a set of straight line-segments first - keep back from the paper, draw holding the pencil at the back, lightly - draw a rapid line, moving from the shoulder and the elbow rather than the wrist (think of that conductor in front of his orchestra). Look at the line you've made, compare it with your reference - is it accurate? Should it be longer or shorter? is it at the correct angle from vertical?. If not, put down a corrected line, check again (rub out the wrong one - erasing isn't "cheating" either!).
As you go, keep checking out how the lines relate to each other, and also check out the sizes and shapes of the spaces they make or enclose. Don't think in terms of features - "eye", nose", and so on, but just in terms of lines of edges you can see - including edges of shadows - and the areas they enclose. Try to break down what you see into abstract shapes, and look for big shapes first, then gradually refine these into smaller shapes. Keep standing well back - occasionally check how you are doing by standing several paces back and taking in the over-all view. Check it in a mirror, too. Realise that (even lots of) time spent getting the big proportions and placements correct is time well-spent. Drawing is not only about doing the shading - and it isn't about speed, either. The winner is the best drawing, not the fastest.
Oh dear, that all sounds a bit advanced to me, I thought this was supposed to be about tracing?
Lets learn how to do most of these things, but using tracing to help us, and learn at the same time! If you can, set up as I've described above, on an easel. If you can't, get your drawing board on a desktop or in your lap, but try to put as much distance between it and your head as you can. Put your ref-image down on the board, and fix it securely, with a piece of tracing-paper on top.
Start by finding three or four points on the ref-image, preferably towards the edges, where you can make dots or crosses for alignment (You can make these yourself on the original ref-photo, if there isn't anything suitable) - the idea of this is that it fixes the alignment of the ref and the tracing - so that if the tracing-paper gets moved, you can easily get it back into the right place.
So, can tracing be a learning tool?
Now, holding the pencil towards the back, and keeping back as far as you can from the board, start tracing - BUT do so thinking of the overall shape of the line you are on - NOT focussed onto the point of the pencil.
DON'T worry about staying exactly on the line, but instead think about travelling along the line and getting the direction and distance correct.
Use the tracing to help you get the line-lengths right, and the angles, and the sizes and shapes of the areas. Remember not to crouch over the drawing. Keep back, hold your pencil at the back end, draw like you're conducting an orchestra, make the lines in rapid smooth movements, with a light touch.
As you are drawing lines or curves, note how your arm feels as you move it rapidly along the correct line - relate the feel of the movement to the visual feedback you are getting from seeing where your tracing-line is in relation to your ref-photo underneath. Feel how drawing a rapid but accurate line is different from either "tightrope-walking" along the line, or from drawing a generic arc.
Used like this, tracing can, I believe, not only get the drawing done - but also be a tool which can help you how to learn to draw accurately without tracing.
(sorry for the "text-wall", but I hope someone might find it helpful)
Dave
My opinion is that it depends very much on how it is used. (Let me set the scene first, with my answer - it does eventually come back round to tracing, I promise
)The problems
I think one problem that is seen often in beginners (and sometimes not-so-beginners, too) drawing freehand is difficulty in proportions, so that - with a portrait for example - the individual features are drawn well, but the relationship or scaling of these to each other is off - so that the top of the head is in the wrong place relative to the face, for example, or the mouth is too low and too small, etc...
Now I'd suggest this occurs because the artist has been concentrating on the detail, and ignoring the "big picture" - I think the tendency is to narrowly focus in on the exact place that the tip of the pencil is hitting the paper, like tunnel-vision on the pointy tip of the pencil - and one tends to see people who do this holding the pencil near its tip, and bent over the drawing like they were signing a cheque.
Another problem often seen is that the lengths or angles of lines are off, or that the edge of a face is reduced to a single inaccurate arcing curve.
Gridding?
One thing that's often suggested as a workaround for both sets of problems is gridding - so that a grid is drawn on the ref-photo, and a matching one on the drawing, and the artist then concentrates on trying to accurately put in the lines of the drawing one-square-at-a-time. This can work, but it really ducks the issue, because it reinforces the idea that one must concentrate on the small detail, and provides a way that the artist can get the different areas in the correct relative sizing and proportion without having to think about it at all, or even recognise the true nature of the problem (namely the "tunnel-vision" approach).
Why tracing gets a bad reputation
Tracing is often condemned as "cheating" because again it can be used in an uninformed way, where the artist is focussed down very tightly on an area of the drawing just 3 or 4 millimetres square, and is wholly concentrating on trying to make sure that the pencil doesn't wander off the underlying line on the original image. Now I'd agree that this approach to tracing is bad, because again it doesn't address the real problem, which is the mistaken belief that its all about focussing in very tightly on the location where the pencil-tip hits the page, and then crawling along the line like a frightened tightrope-walker. This sort of attitude to tracing gets the placements, relationships and proportions right, but it teaches nothing about how to do so without a piece of tracing-paper - and thus tracing gets a bad name, and is called "cheating".
But....
How can we get placements, proportions. and relationships right?
I think the key concept is that we have to think big - and see big - what I mean by this is that we need to get away from the idea that we have to focus in on the exact pointy tip of the pencil. How can we do this? There are working approaches which immediately help with this:
1. instead of working on a tabletop crouched over our drawing, put the paper onto a board, and prop it up near-vertically. A painters easel is the ideal thing here (that's what its for, why it was invented in the first place) - but if you don't have one, any arrangement where you can prop it up will do - tape it up to a smooth wall, for example.
2. get back away from the surface, work at arm's length - ideally, do it standing up.
3. hold your pencil at the back, and lightly, not tightly at the tip. Hold your pencil like an orchestral conductor holds his baton.
Now you're ready to do a drawing, at a reasonable size (another mistake beginners make - "I'm only a beginner, not a proper artist - so I should be humble and draw it small, so that I don't waste materials, or look like a pretentious showoff, posing at an easel"
).How do people do it without tracing?
Now, if we break down what we see - either in a ref-drawing - or even from life! - into a set of straight line-segments first - keep back from the paper, draw holding the pencil at the back, lightly - draw a rapid line, moving from the shoulder and the elbow rather than the wrist (think of that conductor in front of his orchestra). Look at the line you've made, compare it with your reference - is it accurate? Should it be longer or shorter? is it at the correct angle from vertical?. If not, put down a corrected line, check again (rub out the wrong one - erasing isn't "cheating" either!).
As you go, keep checking out how the lines relate to each other, and also check out the sizes and shapes of the spaces they make or enclose. Don't think in terms of features - "eye", nose", and so on, but just in terms of lines of edges you can see - including edges of shadows - and the areas they enclose. Try to break down what you see into abstract shapes, and look for big shapes first, then gradually refine these into smaller shapes. Keep standing well back - occasionally check how you are doing by standing several paces back and taking in the over-all view. Check it in a mirror, too. Realise that (even lots of) time spent getting the big proportions and placements correct is time well-spent. Drawing is not only about doing the shading - and it isn't about speed, either. The winner is the best drawing, not the fastest.
Oh dear, that all sounds a bit advanced to me, I thought this was supposed to be about tracing?
Lets learn how to do most of these things, but using tracing to help us, and learn at the same time! If you can, set up as I've described above, on an easel. If you can't, get your drawing board on a desktop or in your lap, but try to put as much distance between it and your head as you can. Put your ref-image down on the board, and fix it securely, with a piece of tracing-paper on top.
Start by finding three or four points on the ref-image, preferably towards the edges, where you can make dots or crosses for alignment (You can make these yourself on the original ref-photo, if there isn't anything suitable) - the idea of this is that it fixes the alignment of the ref and the tracing - so that if the tracing-paper gets moved, you can easily get it back into the right place.
So, can tracing be a learning tool?
Now, holding the pencil towards the back, and keeping back as far as you can from the board, start tracing - BUT do so thinking of the overall shape of the line you are on - NOT focussed onto the point of the pencil.
DON'T worry about staying exactly on the line, but instead think about travelling along the line and getting the direction and distance correct.
Use the tracing to help you get the line-lengths right, and the angles, and the sizes and shapes of the areas. Remember not to crouch over the drawing. Keep back, hold your pencil at the back end, draw like you're conducting an orchestra, make the lines in rapid smooth movements, with a light touch.
As you are drawing lines or curves, note how your arm feels as you move it rapidly along the correct line - relate the feel of the movement to the visual feedback you are getting from seeing where your tracing-line is in relation to your ref-photo underneath. Feel how drawing a rapid but accurate line is different from either "tightrope-walking" along the line, or from drawing a generic arc.
Used like this, tracing can, I believe, not only get the drawing done - but also be a tool which can help you how to learn to draw accurately without tracing.
(sorry for the "text-wall", but I hope someone might find it helpful)
Dave
QUOTE (dcorc @ Feb 14 2009, 12:28 AM)
I dislike the word "cheating" which invariably comes up in regard to tracing, as it is emotionally-laden and tends to cause heat rather than light to be generated on the subject
My opinion is that it depends very much on how it is used. (Let me set the scene first, with my answer - it does eventually come back round to tracing, I promise )
The problems
I think one problem that is seen often in beginners (and sometimes not-so-beginners, too) drawing freehand is difficulty in proportions, so that - with a portrait for example - the individual features are drawn well, but the relationship or scaling of these to each other is off - so that the top of the head is in the wrong place relative to the face, for example, or the mouth is too low and too small, etc...
Now I'd suggest this occurs because the artist has been concentrating on the detail, and ignoring the "big picture" - I think the tendency is to narrowly focus in on the exact place that the tip of the pencil is hitting the paper, like tunnel-vision on the pointy tip of the pencil - and one tends to see people who do this holding the pencil near its tip, and bent over the drawing like they were signing a cheque.
Another problem often seen is that the lengths or angles of lines are off, or that the edge of a face is reduced to a single inaccurate arcing curve.
Gridding?
One thing that's often suggested as a workaround for both sets of problems is gridding - so that a grid is drawn on the ref-photo, and a matching one on the drawing, and the artist then concentrates on trying to accurately put in the lines of the drawing one-square-at-a-time. This can work, but it really ducks the issue, because it reinforces the idea that one must concentrate on the small detail, and provides a way that the artist can get the different areas in the correct relative sizing and proportion without having to think about it at all, or even recognise the true nature of the problem (namely the "tunnel-vision" approach).
Why tracing gets a bad reputation
Tracing is often condemned as "cheating" because again it can be used in an uninformed way, where the artist is focussed down very tightly on an area of the drawing just 3 or 4 millimetres square, and is wholly concentrating on trying to make sure that the pencil doesn't wander off the underlying line on the original image. Now I'd agree that this approach to tracing is bad, because again it doesn't address the real problem, which is the mistaken belief that its all about focussing in very tightly on the location where the pencil-tip hits the page, and then crawling along the line like a frightened tightrope-walker. This sort of attitude to tracing gets the placements, relationships and proportions right, but it teaches nothing about how to do so without a piece of tracing-paper - and thus tracing gets a bad name, and is called "cheating".
But....
How can we get placements, proportions. and relationships right?
I think the key concept is that we have to think big - and see big - what I mean by this is that we need to get away from the idea that we have to focus in on the exact pointy tip of the pencil. How can we do this? There are working approaches which immediately help with this:
1. instead of working on a tabletop crouched over our drawing, put the paper onto a board, and prop it up near-vertically. A painters easel is the ideal thing here (that's what its for, why it was invented in the first place) - but if you don't have one, any arrangement where you can prop it up will do - tape it up to a smooth wall, for example.
2. get back away from the surface, work at arm's length - ideally, do it standing up.
3. hold your pencil at the back, and lightly, not tightly at the tip. Hold your pencil like an orchestral conductor holds his baton.
Now you're ready to do a drawing, at a reasonable size (another mistake beginners make - "I'm only a beginner, not a proper artist - so I should be humble and draw it small, so that I don't waste materials, or look like a pretentious showoff, posing at an easel" ).
How do people do it without tracing?
Now, if we break down what we see - either in a ref-drawing - or even from life! - into a set of straight line-segments first - keep back from the paper, draw holding the pencil at the back, lightly - draw a rapid line, moving from the shoulder and the elbow rather than the wrist (think of that conductor in front of his orchestra). Look at the line you've made, compare it with your reference - is it accurate? Should it be longer or shorter? is it at the correct angle from vertical?. If not, put down a corrected line, check again (rub out the wrong one - erasing isn't "cheating" either!).
As you go, keep checking out how the lines relate to each other, and also check out the sizes and shapes of the spaces they make or enclose. Don't think in terms of features - "eye", nose", and so on, but just in terms of lines of edges you can see - including edges of shadows - and the areas they enclose. Try to break down what you see into abstract shapes, and look for big shapes first, then gradually refine these into smaller shapes. Keep standing well back - occasionally check how you are doing by standing several paces back and taking in the over-all view. Check it in a mirror, too. Realise that (even lots of) time spent getting the big proportions and placements correct is time well-spent. Drawing is not only about doing the shading - and it isn't about speed, either. The winner is the best drawing, not the fastest.
Oh dear, that all sounds a bit advanced to me, I thought this was supposed to be about tracing?
Lets learn how to do most of these things, but using tracing to help us, and learn at the same time! If you can, set up as I've described above, on an easel. If you can't, get your drawing board on a desktop or in your lap, but try to put as much distance between it and your head as you can. Put your ref-image down on the board, and fix it securely, with a piece of tracing-paper on top.
Start by finding three or four points on the ref-image, preferably towards the edges, where you can make dots or crosses for alignment (You can make these yourself on the original ref-photo, if there isn't anything suitable) - the idea of this is that it fixes the alignment of the ref and the tracing - so that if the tracing-paper gets moved, you can easily get it back into the right place.
So, can tracing be a learning tool?
Now, holding the pencil towards the back, and keeping back as far as you can from the board, start tracing - BUT do so thinking of the overall shape of the line you are on - NOT focussed onto the point of the pencil.
DON'T worry about staying exactly on the line, but instead think about travelling along the line and getting the direction and distance correct.
Use the tracing to help you get the line-lengths right, and the angles, and the sizes and shapes of the areas. Remember not to crouch over the drawing. Keep back, hold your pencil at the back end, draw like you're conducting an orchestra, make the lines in rapid smooth movements, with a light touch.
As you are drawing lines or curves, note how your arm feels as you move it rapidly along the correct line - relate the feel of the movement to the visual feedback you are getting from seeing where your tracing-line is in relation to your ref-photo underneath. Feel how drawing a rapid but accurate line is different from either "tightrope-walking" along the line, or from drawing a generic arc.
Used like this, tracing can, I believe, not only get the drawing done - but also be a tool which can help you how to learn to draw accurately without tracing.
(sorry for the "text-wall", but I hope someone might find it helpful)
Dave
My opinion is that it depends very much on how it is used. (Let me set the scene first, with my answer - it does eventually come back round to tracing, I promise
)The problems
I think one problem that is seen often in beginners (and sometimes not-so-beginners, too) drawing freehand is difficulty in proportions, so that - with a portrait for example - the individual features are drawn well, but the relationship or scaling of these to each other is off - so that the top of the head is in the wrong place relative to the face, for example, or the mouth is too low and too small, etc...
Now I'd suggest this occurs because the artist has been concentrating on the detail, and ignoring the "big picture" - I think the tendency is to narrowly focus in on the exact place that the tip of the pencil is hitting the paper, like tunnel-vision on the pointy tip of the pencil - and one tends to see people who do this holding the pencil near its tip, and bent over the drawing like they were signing a cheque.
Another problem often seen is that the lengths or angles of lines are off, or that the edge of a face is reduced to a single inaccurate arcing curve.
Gridding?
One thing that's often suggested as a workaround for both sets of problems is gridding - so that a grid is drawn on the ref-photo, and a matching one on the drawing, and the artist then concentrates on trying to accurately put in the lines of the drawing one-square-at-a-time. This can work, but it really ducks the issue, because it reinforces the idea that one must concentrate on the small detail, and provides a way that the artist can get the different areas in the correct relative sizing and proportion without having to think about it at all, or even recognise the true nature of the problem (namely the "tunnel-vision" approach).
Why tracing gets a bad reputation
Tracing is often condemned as "cheating" because again it can be used in an uninformed way, where the artist is focussed down very tightly on an area of the drawing just 3 or 4 millimetres square, and is wholly concentrating on trying to make sure that the pencil doesn't wander off the underlying line on the original image. Now I'd agree that this approach to tracing is bad, because again it doesn't address the real problem, which is the mistaken belief that its all about focussing in very tightly on the location where the pencil-tip hits the page, and then crawling along the line like a frightened tightrope-walker. This sort of attitude to tracing gets the placements, relationships and proportions right, but it teaches nothing about how to do so without a piece of tracing-paper - and thus tracing gets a bad name, and is called "cheating".
But....
How can we get placements, proportions. and relationships right?
I think the key concept is that we have to think big - and see big - what I mean by this is that we need to get away from the idea that we have to focus in on the exact pointy tip of the pencil. How can we do this? There are working approaches which immediately help with this:
1. instead of working on a tabletop crouched over our drawing, put the paper onto a board, and prop it up near-vertically. A painters easel is the ideal thing here (that's what its for, why it was invented in the first place) - but if you don't have one, any arrangement where you can prop it up will do - tape it up to a smooth wall, for example.
2. get back away from the surface, work at arm's length - ideally, do it standing up.
3. hold your pencil at the back, and lightly, not tightly at the tip. Hold your pencil like an orchestral conductor holds his baton.
Now you're ready to do a drawing, at a reasonable size (another mistake beginners make - "I'm only a beginner, not a proper artist - so I should be humble and draw it small, so that I don't waste materials, or look like a pretentious showoff, posing at an easel"
).How do people do it without tracing?
Now, if we break down what we see - either in a ref-drawing - or even from life! - into a set of straight line-segments first - keep back from the paper, draw holding the pencil at the back, lightly - draw a rapid line, moving from the shoulder and the elbow rather than the wrist (think of that conductor in front of his orchestra). Look at the line you've made, compare it with your reference - is it accurate? Should it be longer or shorter? is it at the correct angle from vertical?. If not, put down a corrected line, check again (rub out the wrong one - erasing isn't "cheating" either!).
As you go, keep checking out how the lines relate to each other, and also check out the sizes and shapes of the spaces they make or enclose. Don't think in terms of features - "eye", nose", and so on, but just in terms of lines of edges you can see - including edges of shadows - and the areas they enclose. Try to break down what you see into abstract shapes, and look for big shapes first, then gradually refine these into smaller shapes. Keep standing well back - occasionally check how you are doing by standing several paces back and taking in the over-all view. Check it in a mirror, too. Realise that (even lots of) time spent getting the big proportions and placements correct is time well-spent. Drawing is not only about doing the shading - and it isn't about speed, either. The winner is the best drawing, not the fastest.
Oh dear, that all sounds a bit advanced to me, I thought this was supposed to be about tracing?
Lets learn how to do most of these things, but using tracing to help us, and learn at the same time! If you can, set up as I've described above, on an easel. If you can't, get your drawing board on a desktop or in your lap, but try to put as much distance between it and your head as you can. Put your ref-image down on the board, and fix it securely, with a piece of tracing-paper on top.
Start by finding three or four points on the ref-image, preferably towards the edges, where you can make dots or crosses for alignment (You can make these yourself on the original ref-photo, if there isn't anything suitable) - the idea of this is that it fixes the alignment of the ref and the tracing - so that if the tracing-paper gets moved, you can easily get it back into the right place.
So, can tracing be a learning tool?
Now, holding the pencil towards the back, and keeping back as far as you can from the board, start tracing - BUT do so thinking of the overall shape of the line you are on - NOT focussed onto the point of the pencil.
DON'T worry about staying exactly on the line, but instead think about travelling along the line and getting the direction and distance correct.
Use the tracing to help you get the line-lengths right, and the angles, and the sizes and shapes of the areas. Remember not to crouch over the drawing. Keep back, hold your pencil at the back end, draw like you're conducting an orchestra, make the lines in rapid smooth movements, with a light touch.
As you are drawing lines or curves, note how your arm feels as you move it rapidly along the correct line - relate the feel of the movement to the visual feedback you are getting from seeing where your tracing-line is in relation to your ref-photo underneath. Feel how drawing a rapid but accurate line is different from either "tightrope-walking" along the line, or from drawing a generic arc.
Used like this, tracing can, I believe, not only get the drawing done - but also be a tool which can help you how to learn to draw accurately without tracing.
(sorry for the "text-wall", but I hope someone might find it helpful)
Dave
Thanks Dave. This puts it in easy to understand terms.
flint
yes that was good .. thank you for the detailed explanation . 
Flintbone .. are you from Flint Michigan ? I am from Mi as well .
Flintbone .. are you from Flint Michigan ? I am from Mi as well .
In addition to the comments already given, I would add the idea that the use of various tools (tracing, projecting, gridding, etc.) can be used to train an artist to see more accurately and then learn to render more accurately over time. An artist can learn to see distances, sizes, proportions more accurately over time, especially when aided early on by the right method and set of tools. There's actually a method that teaches this concept and it's been very well-received.
As an example, take a builder who day after day cuts 5 foot lengths of wood. After measuring them for years and years, he "teaches his intuition," finally being able to cut an accurate 5 foot length without a measuring tape. In the same way, as an artist repeats a measurement over and over, he will teach his intuition and become more accurate.
Unfortunately, too many of us "wing it" because we're impatient and never even really try to be accurate, measuring with our pencil is as close as we get. But what if we did take accurate measurements of the distance from the bottom of the nose to the top of the lip. Day after day, subject after subject, eventually we'd train our intuition such that we can "know" and render the accurate distance just by looking at it.
Then we hear claims that attempts at accuracy go against artistic expression (anti-tracing, anti-projecting). I don't buy into this argument. The ability to accurately depict a subject actually *enhances* artistic expression. How is this? The story goes that a head model is perusing the art students' finished works and comments to the professor, "How interesting it is to see all of the different 'perspectives' and 'perceptions' of the students." The professor replies, "Oh, you mean the mistakes?" When we can't render accurately, we are forced to do the only thing we can: render inaccurately (what many call artistic expression). If we *could* render accurately, we would then have the ability to choose one or the other, thus freeing the artist for TRUE artistic expression.
Did that make any sense?
As an example, take a builder who day after day cuts 5 foot lengths of wood. After measuring them for years and years, he "teaches his intuition," finally being able to cut an accurate 5 foot length without a measuring tape. In the same way, as an artist repeats a measurement over and over, he will teach his intuition and become more accurate.
Unfortunately, too many of us "wing it" because we're impatient and never even really try to be accurate, measuring with our pencil is as close as we get. But what if we did take accurate measurements of the distance from the bottom of the nose to the top of the lip. Day after day, subject after subject, eventually we'd train our intuition such that we can "know" and render the accurate distance just by looking at it.
Then we hear claims that attempts at accuracy go against artistic expression (anti-tracing, anti-projecting). I don't buy into this argument. The ability to accurately depict a subject actually *enhances* artistic expression. How is this? The story goes that a head model is perusing the art students' finished works and comments to the professor, "How interesting it is to see all of the different 'perspectives' and 'perceptions' of the students." The professor replies, "Oh, you mean the mistakes?" When we can't render accurately, we are forced to do the only thing we can: render inaccurately (what many call artistic expression). If we *could* render accurately, we would then have the ability to choose one or the other, thus freeing the artist for TRUE artistic expression.
Did that make any sense?
jthork...that made perfect sense ...... I know people have used a light box .....but dont this mean you have to have the image already ?
and using a grid seems like it takes a long long time not only that you have to erase the lines ...right ?
Tracing paper seems you have to draw it twice and still you need to get it on your art paper ...is that where the light box comes in ...?
my husband bought me a light box for christmas but I have not used it .....all the images i draw are either real life or on my pc ...I do not want to waste printer ink to print it off ....how do the light box work ?
and using a grid seems like it takes a long long time not only that you have to erase the lines ...right ?
Tracing paper seems you have to draw it twice and still you need to get it on your art paper ...is that where the light box comes in ...?
my husband bought me a light box for christmas but I have not used it .....all the images i draw are either real life or on my pc ...I do not want to waste printer ink to print it off ....how do the light box work ?
QUOTE (kim1963 @ Feb 14 2009, 07:35 PM)
yes that was good .. thank you for the detailed explanation .
Flintbone .. are you from Flint Michigan ? I am from Mi as well .
Flintbone .. are you from Flint Michigan ? I am from Mi as well .
Hi Kim. No, I'm in Kentucky. My first name is Flint.
flint
Well Flint welcome to drawspace hun .....I have a uncle flint from tenn. its a very unique name .
Hi, Kim. Actually, since you mentioned you draw from real life, this method may work well for you. It might be able to be used with a printed image, but from what I've seen, I think a live subject works best for this method. There's no light box involved. It's actually very simple. You can do a search on YouTube to see the method in use. Search YouTube for "Accurasee".
Ok I looked that up .. and I ask myself if making the drawing exact is really worth all the measuring and stuff ...wow it seems like alot of work .. interesting for sure and would be fun to try but for every drawing it would take me forever . thanks for sharing that because I found it pretty cool to watch him .
I thought the same thing...it would be a lot of extra work. His response to me was two-fold: 1) getting proper size/proportions, perspective does take some time in the beginning, but he says after the foundation is done, the work goes much more smoothly and quickly (ever gotten half way thru a piece only to realize some foundational aspect was not correct and it's hard to complete the work to your satisfaction? ; and 2) this is intended to be used to the extent that it's comfortable for the artist. He said some of his students get *very* rigid with its use initially (he tells them to relax), but over time as they teach their intuitive, they rely less on the tools. In his own use of the method, he says he does most of his work free form, but every so often checks his accuracy with the tools and when he finds something's off, it's just a quick correction rather than having to fix it down the line, quitting or just accepting a crummy piece.
He believes it's made him a better artist. But no method or tool is for everyone!
; and 2) this is intended to be used to the extent that it's comfortable for the artist. He said some of his students get *very* rigid with its use initially (he tells them to relax), but over time as they teach their intuitive, they rely less on the tools. In his own use of the method, he says he does most of his work free form, but every so often checks his accuracy with the tools and when he finds something's off, it's just a quick correction rather than having to fix it down the line, quitting or just accepting a crummy piece.He believes it's made him a better artist. But no method or tool is for everyone!
QUOTE (skeller1980 @ Feb 13 2009, 10:42 AM)
I've always thought tracing as a a form of cheating. With recent years I've always had tracing paper on hand incase I needed it to work with a small area on a drawing... I'd say about 5 or more times I've used tracing paper, but never in all of my years have traced a full drawing, then calm I drew it free hand. I always felt I would cheat myself out of my skill if I traced a full photo, then transfer it to the paper...
I know there have been other artists that have traced and traced the full photo and transferred it to paper, then claiming they did it by hand.
I also know there are those out there that trace, but trace things they aren't skilled at. Let's say trying to figure out how the chin is postion on the face, you trace over the chin only and match it to your drawing to see how things are set. Then you start to free hand sketch it out.
What is everyone's take on tracing, and tracing paper?
Have you ever used tracing paper? If so, what do you perfer, or do with it (well I do know what to do with it but was wondering if there are other things you can do with it)?
Have you traced a full drawing on to tracing paper and just left it there without transfering it?
Or do you think it's cheating and why?
I know there have been other artists that have traced and traced the full photo and transferred it to paper, then claiming they did it by hand.
I also know there are those out there that trace, but trace things they aren't skilled at. Let's say trying to figure out how the chin is postion on the face, you trace over the chin only and match it to your drawing to see how things are set. Then you start to free hand sketch it out.
What is everyone's take on tracing, and tracing paper?
Have you ever used tracing paper? If so, what do you perfer, or do with it (well I do know what to do with it but was wondering if there are other things you can do with it)?
Have you traced a full drawing on to tracing paper and just left it there without transfering it?
Or do you think it's cheating and why?
I dont feel its cheating at all. Because usually when you trace - its just an outline and you bring it to life with shading which is an art in itself. There are tons of professional artists that "trace." One of my favorite airbrush artists Craig Frasier is a master of airbrushing beautiful murals on the hood of cars, and before he starts he projects his image and traces it onto a hood or cycle tank. Does this mean hes not a good artist? Not at all, its a time saving device.. And remember one thing, your customer doesn't care how the work got done - all he or she cares about is the final project. Also, tracing helps build an eye for drawing, the more you trace, eventually it becomes more natural and you wont have to as much. This is just the way I feel about it by all means.
-Jim
QUOTE (Jimmer1220 @ Feb 23 2009, 03:47 AM)
I dont feel its cheating at all. Because usually when you trace - its just an outline and you bring it to life with shading which is an art in itself. There are tons of professional artists that "trace."
Perfectly explained! That's exactly my position too. Tracing, gridding, projection... all produce guidelines. It's what you do within those lines, and how you manipulate them as you work, that really counts.
Tracing, or any other transfer tool, does NOT produce a drawing!
Personally, I used to use an opaque projector (Artograph DB300) but now, when I'm composing a new study, I use my computer instead. Some elements are scanned photos with the backgrounds cut away (but more usually, for speed, traced outlines from photos); some are sketches from life; and the setting for the scene is often a thumbnail drawing. All are loaded onto separate layers in Photoshop where the composition takes place. The final printout is loaded into the Artograph and transferred to my drawing paper.
The result is a set of fairly accurate guidelines. They're the armature around which I sculpt with my pencils. They're not sacrosanct and I adjust them at will as I work.
They are a set of guides, not route maps, that keep me on the right track as I progress through the drawing. They map the positions of major features but leave the ultimate appearance to me. They're tools - in the same way that a fresco artist's apprentices would pounce through the artist's line drawing on paper through to that day's wet plaster.
Tracing, gridding, projection...... none produce drawings, they can't handle interpretation, they can't inject emotion. They're just lines that, as I've said elsewhere, children can colour in or in which we artists can work our magic.
I don't care what methods I use to produce the guidelines but I prefer those that offer accuracy of position and save me time.
I can see a case for believing that drawing from life, for example, will enhance the artist's understanding of the final drawing, where tracing will not. But I'd argue that if you the artist, can "live" within the world you are creating, you experience the same understanding, and that will be reflected in your interpretation.
--------
PS: Hi, Flint! I'm looking forward to meeting you in Tennessee this August
QUOTE (Mike Sibley @ Feb 25 2009, 01:25 PM)
Perfectly explained! That's exactly my position too. Tracing, gridding, projection... all produce guidelines. It's what you do within those lines, and how you manipulate them as you work, that really counts.
Tracing, or any other transfer tool, does NOT produce a drawing!
Personally, I used to use an opaque projector (Artograph DB300) but now, when I'm composing a new study, I use my computer instead. Some elements are scanned photos with the backgrounds cut away (but more usually, for speed, traced outlines from photos); some are sketches from life; and the setting for the scene is often a thumbnail drawing. All are loaded onto separate layers in Photoshop where the composition takes place. The final printout is loaded into the Artograph and transferred to my drawing paper.
The result is a set of fairly accurate guidelines. They're the armature around which I sculpt with my pencils. They're not sacrosanct and I adjust them at will as I work.
They are a set of guides, not route maps, that keep me on the right track as I progress through the drawing. They map the positions of major features but leave the ultimate appearance to me. They're tools - in the same way that a fresco artist's apprentices would pounce through the artist's line drawing on paper through to that day's wet plaster.
Tracing, gridding, projection...... none produce drawings, they can't handle interpretation, they can't inject emotion. They're just lines that, as I've said elsewhere, children can colour in or in which we artists can work our magic.
I don't care what methods I use to produce the guidelines but I prefer those that offer accuracy of position and save me time.
I can see a case for believing that drawing from life, for example, will enhance the artist's understanding of the final drawing, where tracing will not. But I'd argue that if you the artist, can "live" within the world you are creating, you experience the same understanding, and that will be reflected in your interpretation.
--------
PS: Hi, Flint! I'm looking forward to meeting you in Tennessee this August
Tracing, or any other transfer tool, does NOT produce a drawing!
Personally, I used to use an opaque projector (Artograph DB300) but now, when I'm composing a new study, I use my computer instead. Some elements are scanned photos with the backgrounds cut away (but more usually, for speed, traced outlines from photos); some are sketches from life; and the setting for the scene is often a thumbnail drawing. All are loaded onto separate layers in Photoshop where the composition takes place. The final printout is loaded into the Artograph and transferred to my drawing paper.
The result is a set of fairly accurate guidelines. They're the armature around which I sculpt with my pencils. They're not sacrosanct and I adjust them at will as I work.
They are a set of guides, not route maps, that keep me on the right track as I progress through the drawing. They map the positions of major features but leave the ultimate appearance to me. They're tools - in the same way that a fresco artist's apprentices would pounce through the artist's line drawing on paper through to that day's wet plaster.
Tracing, gridding, projection...... none produce drawings, they can't handle interpretation, they can't inject emotion. They're just lines that, as I've said elsewhere, children can colour in or in which we artists can work our magic.
I don't care what methods I use to produce the guidelines but I prefer those that offer accuracy of position and save me time.
I can see a case for believing that drawing from life, for example, will enhance the artist's understanding of the final drawing, where tracing will not. But I'd argue that if you the artist, can "live" within the world you are creating, you experience the same understanding, and that will be reflected in your interpretation.
--------
PS: Hi, Flint! I'm looking forward to meeting you in Tennessee this August
OMG..it is THE mike sibley....that is soo cool..what a nice surprise..welcome to drawspace, i see you will be a teacher here now
Well I don't trace with paper but sometimes I look at a picture and just try to re draw it. If I would use paper to trace it'd be just for myself like for a drawing i'd like to hang in my room or something. But I don't draw that often i'm trying to get back in the habit by joining the art trades.
I don't think I've ever traced except for a few times as a child. I thought that it was cheating back then but I know better now. I suppose it definately boils down to what you want from an image. For me, it's all in the line. I want my lines to have energy and expression so that they come together to create an image that is full of life. I rarely care if a person that I'm sketching looks photorealistic. I suppose this stems from my love of animation as a child, I used to prefer to watch the documentaries about how they made the cartoons over the finished product. It's always capturing the moment that makes me want to draw.
I'm sure that this can be done by good tracers but it still doesn't appeal to me.
I'm sure that this can be done by good tracers but it still doesn't appeal to me.
The only reason why I say the "cheating" is because at another site that I go to there was a situation that a artist traced, and used it as a tool to claim they could draw.
Just to get that cleared with some of you...
And some very good posts to I might add. Thank you!
Just to get that cleared with some of you...
And some very good posts to I might add. Thank you!
In my opinion tracing, tracing papter, measureing, grids, projectors, or any other method of transfering an image should be used to either help us learn to see more accurately or to help us transfer an image we have created to anohter surface. I don't call anything cheating unless there is a rule against it and we are trying to decieve someone. All of our modern inventions and technologies are based on "cheating", if finding a more accurate and efficent way of doing something is "cheating".
Bobby
Bobby
Hi,
it's funny how this subject pops up from time to time. After reading some comments I used to think that drawing from a photo was not artistic, or even a bit cheating. Then I realised being able to do it was some kind of art. And making it realistic without measurements besides 4 small lines on the sides was my way of including challenge while getting good results. And those 2 feelings are the basis of my fun.
I guess the same idea applies to tracing. If a person needs it to get the result they expect, I guess it makes them happy, and I'm sure they are learning at the same time.
And THAT's what's important!
it's funny how this subject pops up from time to time. After reading some comments I used to think that drawing from a photo was not artistic, or even a bit cheating. Then I realised being able to do it was some kind of art. And making it realistic without measurements besides 4 small lines on the sides was my way of including challenge while getting good results. And those 2 feelings are the basis of my fun.
I guess the same idea applies to tracing. If a person needs it to get the result they expect, I guess it makes them happy, and I'm sure they are learning at the same time.
And THAT's what's important!
QUOTE (Nathalie Renaud @ Feb 27 2009, 02:04 AM)
I guess the same idea applies to tracing. If a person needs it to get the result they expect, I guess it makes them happy, and I'm sure they are learning at the same time. And THAT's what's important!
Absolutely! I'm not sure where this notion of tracing being cheating arose, but I suspect it came from people who don't draw, and who think drawing means "copying" instead of interpretation and creation.
Tracing at least gives accurate placement of features. And, even if an entire drawing was based on tracing, I can't see how the tracer can fail to learn something about the subject. It may even help the artist to understand the true shapes of things rather than their perception of those shapes.
QUOTE (Mike Sibley @ Feb 25 2009, 12:25 PM)
--------
PS: Hi, Flint! I'm looking forward to meeting you in Tennessee this August
PS: Hi, Flint! I'm looking forward to meeting you in Tennessee this August
Hi, Mike. I'm looking forward to meeting you also. I'm also looking forward to the workshop.
Flint
I use a grid, drawn (or even better, printed) onto a piece of tracing paper. I then draw on the tracing paper using the grid.
This way, you're more likely to get the placement correct, plus you are actually learning to guage lengths and distances.
Once I'm happy with the drawing I transfer it to my paper. The image on the tracing paper can then be used for future reference
by placing it over your drawing to check that everything is still in the correct place as your drawing progresses.
Hi Mike, great to see you here at Drawspace
This way, you're more likely to get the placement correct, plus you are actually learning to guage lengths and distances.
Once I'm happy with the drawing I transfer it to my paper. The image on the tracing paper can then be used for future reference
by placing it over your drawing to check that everything is still in the correct place as your drawing progresses.
Hi Mike, great to see you here at Drawspace
QUOTE (Greeneyes @ Feb 28 2009, 10:56 PM)
Hi Mike, great to see you here at Drawspace
Thanks, Jan...... I feel at home already!
I went to your site Mike ....very good work ...I have added it to my favs
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.