Neat bit of kit

[DennisS]

Bought this a few weeks ago from Ken Bromley. It is described as scale dividers and it allows you to scale up (or down) a drawing (or photo)n to make it larger or smaller. You set the knob at a point along the middle, take a dimension off the original artwork with one set of points, then mark the copy with the other set. I had to mark the side myself using a rule and trial and error, but it goes up to 4:1 in half stop graduations. I use it for scaling up life drawings onto canvases for painting, although you can use it to measure straight from the model by holding it at arms length to sight points on your subject, I haven't tried that yet. It was used in the past to scale up drawings for frescoes and murals. Works well so far, although as it is only wood I think it may wear at the cross points and become inaccurate, however a friend knows a retired toolmaker who he says will be able to make me one made of metal.

[CliffordAlls]

There's no substitute for talent.

[DennisS]

Do I take it that you think this is cheating Clifford?

[Gazira]

Originally Posted by DennisS

Do I take it that you think this is cheating Clifford?

No such thing as cheating in art as far as I'm concerned.

Looks handy, might set some woodworking friends on to it.

[DennisS]

Knob has mysteriously been uncensored... knob, knob, knob,

[CliffordAlls]

Originally Posted by DennisS

Do I take it that you think this is cheating Clifford?

Silly remark - sorry!

[DennisS]

Not silly Clifford,I just thought as the site has been a bit dull lately it might start a discussion on what is cheating and what is not. I think of it as a tool that enables me to do something (scaling up a drawing) that I could do by other means, but it makes it more efficient and accurate. The work slaving over a hot model has to still be done, it is just that I now prefer to do that on paper and transfer the drawing to the canvas when I am happy with it, so the skills are still there. Also it is just nice tinkering about with a new piece of kit. But where does one draw the line? I think if you can do something already and it helps you do it more efficiently fine, but if it does the work for you, and you claim the credit, I don't know.

[Beemer]

Originally Posted by DennisS

... it might start a discussion on what is cheating and what is not.

An interesting question. I recall a situation when I was in a pose and using a stick as a prop. One student complained that he couldn't get the stick straight so the tutor suggested that he should use a ruler to draw a straight line. This brought a howl of derision from another student who was adamant that using a ruler was cheating.

So, question of the day, is using a ruler when drawing simply making use of a tool to achieve the desired result, or is it cheating?

Paul.

[Malcolm@Westby]

Getting a vertical plumb line into a drawing is a useful device. Holding up a ruler to establish an angle or level is fine - but i wouldn't use it to actually draw straight lines in a piece of work though.

[DennisS]

In a freehand drawing in the life room, a dead straight line would look dead and wrong with all the other expressive lines, but I use rulers, set squares and T squares to get straight lines in a painting.

[PeterH]

Back to Dennis' original post, for one of my life poses for a sculpture group, over the course of 3 sessions, one of the members made a one third size sculpture of me using a rather more elegant, curved example of this, made using exactly the same principles, with the hinge naturally set at one third.

[CliffordAlls]

Originally Posted by DennisS

Not silly Clifford,I just thought as the site has been a bit dull lately it might start a discussion on what is cheating and what is not. I think of it as a tool that enables me to do something (scaling up a drawing) that I could do by other means, but it makes it more efficient and accurate. The work slaving over a hot model has to still be done, it is just that I now prefer to do that on paper and transfer the drawing to the canvas when I am happy with it, so the skills are still there. Also it is just nice tinkering about with a new piece of kit. But where does one draw the line? I think if you can do something already and it helps you do it more efficiently fine, but if it does the work for you, and you claim the credit, I don't know.

Difficult question, Dennis. I suppose one starts with the premise that the more talented an artist is, the less liikely s/he is to need aids, though still may use them. Those less gifted might use those same aids as an essential piece of kit to compensate for less transparent ability.

If the end justifies the means I personally don't see anything wrong with that. The objective is to 'create' from one's own starting point and nobody should feel they are cheating merely because they need more tools than others to do so.

That said, someone who denied using such aids when they did would be a cheat I suppose. Tracing images to make a work must be quite marginal. If the whole work is traced from a third party source I guess that would be a cheat, but perhaps not if the traced object comprised a relatively small part of a 'bigger picture'.

Clearly on the other side of the line is claiming credit for work and ideas that are not ones own, copying other peoples' work and passing it off as original, applying a false signature or provenance to a work plus other permutations I can't think of.

Maybe in the end some cheating at least has to be judged subjectively. What one artist might consider to be cheating may not be considered so by another. What an art buyer might consider a cheat may be completely different.

Apparently Damien Hirst commissioned a jeweller to make his diamond encrusted skull. Some might call that cheating; others might say that it remains the product of his creative mind regardless and is thus not a cheat.

Some Old Masters regularly used their students or others to create or contribute to their paintings - hence 'school of....' Provided the product remained the brain child of the Master then that was evidently considered OK.

[DennisS]

Walter Sickert said of photographic references that the only people who should use them are those who don't have to, so that sums up what you say. From your posts on your experiences of working for someone who has taken about a year or more to do a painting some artists clearly enjoy the process of creating the work on the canvas from scratch, letting it evolve and change and I respect that, (I am to some extent one of them), but it is not the only way. I have over the past year become interested in early renaissance painting and this was largely done from preparatory drawings. I am exploring that route myself so the canvas becomes an empty stage on which to place figures props etc, rather than painting what is in front of you. I draw my models in the studio and with the aid of the scaling device I can enlarge or reduce the drawings to fit. At the moment I find this fascinating and hope to have results to show here soon. I have also taken photos and scaled these in the same way, but prefer the purity of the drawings, as I feel I have to put in a bit of hard objective looking somewhere along the line.

[Gazira]

Originally Posted by DennisS

Walter Sickert said of photographic references that the only people who should use them are those who don't have to, .

Lovely idea, but I bet he never had to draw a comic strip where the hero has to carry a Glock 9mm and ride a vintage Triumph Bonneville around downtown New York whilst being pursued by villains in a Humvee shooting Uzis.

I'm a great believer in people putting in the work in the life class to get the skills, but we live in an age of information overload and where Medieval artists only had to have a mental image of a person, the devil, and maybe a few horrific weapons in order to create a picture, a 21st Century artist has an overwhelming variety of things to get right. Fortunately, we also have a dizzying number of toys to help us, I can't see the point in not using them.

[DennisS]

That's true but sometimes the toys take over. For instance, as I browse for images and interesting artists it is amazing how many photoshopped images there are of female nudes turned into fantasy images with wings, vampires and the like. Don't particularly object, just interested in the way technology has made these kind of images ubiquitous.

[CliffordAlls]

There was a zimmer frame outside the studio where I worked this evening - not belonging to any of the artists present. It made a wonderful prop for a few contorted poses. I hope I shan't be needing one anytime soon as a result!!

[Gazira]

Originally Posted by DennisS

That's true but sometimes the toys take over. For instance, as I browse for images and interesting artists it is amazing how many photoshopped images there are of female nudes turned into fantasy images with wings, vampires and the like. Don't particularly object, just interested in the way technology has made these kind of images ubiquitous.

Or manga drawing...or, rather, one particular school of manga drawing. There are actually a lot of different styles in Japan.

The cool tool I'm considering right now is one of the cheap digital projectors you can plug into a laptop. It opens up a few possibilities, from projecting grids on to a model to making backdrops.

[CliffordAlls]

Originally Posted by Gazira

Or manga drawing...or, rather, one particular school of manga drawing. There are actually a lot of different styles in Japan.

The cool tool I'm considering right now is one of the cheap digital projectors you can plug into a laptop. It opens up a few possibilities, from projecting grids on to a model to making backdrops.

I've modelled in front of projected images Gaz. The effect is powerful, I'm told, though cannot see the actual image myself obviously. It enables artists to line up the most unlikely points using the grid, e.g. nipple and elbow! From the model's perspective, you thus have to keep dead still or these lineups will change, resulting in a distorted picture.

[Gazira]

Originally Posted by CliffordAlls

I've modelled in front of projected images Gaz. The effect is powerful, I'm told, though cannot see the actual image myself obviously. It enables artists to line up the most unlikely points using the grid, e.g. nipple and elbow! From the model's perspective, you thus have to keep dead still or these lineups will change, resulting in a distorted picture.

What I'd really like to have a go at is fixing up a tablet computer to a projector and drawing through the tablet onto the model. I think it could be a great way to demonstrate various drawing techniques. Unfortunately the boffins at Samsung tell me it can't be done with my tablet. One of the newer models, or an I-Pad, might be able to try it.

I'm going to be trying the projector idea out with my partner at a workshop she's running soon. I'll be modeling, so I won't get to see the results properly, but we'll obviously be able to plan it quite well.

[Bea]

Hi Gaz and Clifford.The simple projection of images onto the body for life drawing is a great tool for students to learn to draw accurately.It has been used now for quite some years at colleges.Another way is for the model to be surrounded by four posts,with strings tied around and attached to the posts.As you say Clifford it does help the model to find out if they move at all during the pose,and is difficult to reposition after a break,but does encourage student interaction and sometimes compromise in repositioning the model.Apart from grid projections it has been found useful to use horizontal stripes from projections of eg zebras.An artist I modelled for some years ago used the shadows from horizontal blinds on my figure,but it was for effect rather than measuring.In recent years college photographic students are increasingly using projected images as backdrops for photo shoots,followed sometimes by a bit of photoshopping to achieve the final photograph.Yep modern technology is useful.

[Gazira]

Originally Posted by Bea

Hi Gaz and Clifford.The simple projection of images onto the body for life drawing is a great tool for students to learn to draw accurately.It has been used now for quite some years at colleges.Another way is for the model to be surrounded by four posts,with strings tied around and attached to the posts.As you say Clifford it does help the model to find out if they move at all during the pose,and is difficult to reposition after a break,but does encourage student interaction and sometimes compromise in repositioning the model.Apart from grid projections it has been found useful to use horizontal stripes from projections of eg zebras.An artist I modelled for some years ago used the shadows from horizontal blinds on my figure,but it was for effect rather than measuring.In recent years college photographic students are increasingly using projected images as backdrops for photo shoots,followed sometimes by a bit of photoshopping to achieve the final photograph.Yep modern technology is useful.

Technology is also getting ridiculously cheap and portable. You can plug a projector into your mobile phone nowadays, although how much power they have I'm not sure.

Certainly worth looking into for the tool kit of any model or class organiser, especially as they're also very good for watching the Game of Thrones DVDs on!