brianvds

And here's attempt #19. I first hated it, but after a day or two it didn't seem so terrible anymore. Usually it works the other way round: I initially think a drawing or painting worked out nice, and the next day it looks horrible.

Two small oils, both 15cm x 21cm:





Keeping track of my oil paintings, the above two are numbers 17 and 18. Another hundred, and they might actually begin to look like something.

In a lighter vein, two small sketches made with coloured ballpoint pens:





A fun medium, but I have much to learn about it...

Another sketch in ballpoint pen, this time after a painting by Eanger Irving Couse (1866-1936), who was noted for his paintings of Native Americans. As usual, no preparatory drawing in pencil, and thus, lots of errors I'll just have to forgive myself for...

I am a great fan of the work of Rogier van der Weyden (c.1400 - 1464), but I am so completely in awe of it that I tend to be reluctant to even try to copy it, because I just know I'll achieve little more than to insult the man.

But I made the effort to overcome my fear and, in a few quiet moments at work, made a sketch after a detail from his "Descent from the cross." Seeing as most of his surviving drawings are in silverpoint, I decided to use what I consider to be something of a modern equivalent, namely ballpoint pen. Like silverpoint, it gives a thin, even line that cannot be erased, and the overall result is perhaps somewhat similar, although ballpoint does not give the same light, lyrical tone. When using it without a preliminary drawing in pencil, as I did here, it is a terrifying and exhilarating medium, like the artistic equivalent of a roller coaster. Whatever mistakes you make, you just have to live with, or somehow work into the developing drawing.

I can see plenty of hideous errors here. But there isn't a thing I can do about them now, except to try to do better next time. My apologies to Mr. van der Weyden.



And what about the weird title of this post? It is a pun that only people somewhat versed in art history will get.

It has been almost a year since I have last tried to do anything in oil. Withdrawal symptoms compelled me to take them up again. Only to find that I have become rather rusty, and had to relearn all manner of things. Still, in the end the thing didn't look much more or less horrid than all my previous attempts.



I keep track of how many oil paintings I do. This one is number 16. Another hundred or so and perhaps they'll start to look like something.

I stumbled upon this link the other day:

Night of a 1000 drawings

They are collecting small art works by anyone, at whatever level of skill, to sell in order to benefit some or other charity. So why not get a bit of experience while benefiting the poor and downtrodden? Here is what I came up with; it was fairly loosely done from a photo I recently took of jacarandas in bloom in a street near here. This time of year, all of Pretoria is purple with jacaranda blooms. The sketch is A5 size, as they requested, in pen and ink with watercolour:

A few recent small watercolour sketches, all turned into greeting cards...

About 15cm x 10cm:





And about 7cm x 10cm:

Decorations for a Halloween-themed barbecue, rather loosely copied from Goya's "Saturn devouring his children":



and from Arnold Böcklin's "Medusa":



Both Goya and Böcklin are probably turning in their grave, but that's precisely what Halloween is all about, not?

I have something of a love-hate relationship with Michelangelo. His genius is undisputed, but his work can be pretty weird. I'm thinking specifically of his Sistine Chapel decorations, with all those absurdly muscled figures. Including even the women! Still, they make for interesting drawing practice, so I tried my hand at the Delphic sibyl, which is one of the more normal-looking ladies he painted for Pope Julius.

Alas, halfway through the drawing I got the flu, and spent the next week or two in bed staring at the incomplete drawing. Must have been swine flu too, since I haven't had common old seasonal flu in ages. I thought I'm immune, but apparently not. Anyway, by the time I felt like myself again, I was sick of the drawing and left it somewhat incomplete.

Another one of my attempts to follow in the footsteps of the masters of old. This time, I tried out a copy of the Portrait of a gentleman, by Andy of the Chestnut, better known to art historians as Andrea del Castagno (1421-1457). It is entirely in HB mechanical pencil, so I did not get the darks quite as dark as they should be, but I think on this point I have good precedents on my side: in Castagno's time, lots of drawings were done in silverpoint, which tends to be a light, lyrical sort of medium. The original can be seen here, and here's my somewhat dubious copy; I think my drawing actually looks a bit better than this photo of it, which managed to make some dark lines look much darker than they actually are: