Beginner’s portrait drawings after Huston’s heading drawing course

[Jack]

 

Hello NMA’ers,

I have just finished Huston’s Head Drawing course, alongside Maughan’s The Artist’s Complete Guide To Drawing The Head, so I thought it was a good time to reach out for a critique. I’ve dabbled with portraiture in the past, but I have been more structured in my learning the last couple of months. My short-term goal is to develop my portrait drawing with the intention of moving onto oils once drawing comes more naturally. I’d like to work on Todorovitch’s beginner’s portrait painting course once I’m a bit more proficient.

My focus for the four attached pieces was largely around the lay-in, getting the proportions and placement of the features correct, and then exploring the different planes of the face with value (rather than a full rendering). I’d like a critique on improvements I could have made or what I should focus on next. The drawings were based off NMA references from the image library and took around 2hrs each. The two on the left bore little likeness to the references – I just couldn’t get it.

I could also use some help structuring my daily exercises. At the moment my practice centres largely on either focusing on a single feature, i.e. drawing just noses, mouths, eyes, etc for an hour – or, completing 2hr drawings like those I attached. I’m attempting to render what I see as accurately as possible. I enjoy the repetition but are there alternative exercises that’d help me achieve my goal more efficiently?

Many thanks in advance,

Jack

[Boris Cruse]

Looking good Jack.
really getting a sense of the form and good tracking of features in the top right drawing.
Love Huston’s approach. Considering doing some of it again. Or least having Steve’s dulcet tones in the background whilst drawing.
The Joseph Todorovitch greyscale portrait painting stuff is good if you’ve got black and white oil paint at the ready. Brilliantly structured course. I’ve not ventured into the colour bit yet.
Be interested to see what you do in other media.
Cheers

Boris

[Vera Coberley]

Nice work, good sense of proportions and subtle shading! The bottom right portraits seems to have just a little bit of distortion – the perspective of the mouth doesn’t quite seem to match the rest of the face, and my brain can’t quite figure out what’s going on in the transition space from right cheek to hair (the reverse C shape – it may be hair, but it doesn’t seem to connect to the rest of the hair). I’ve heard several artists state that when they draw or paint portraits, likeness is a minor consideration for them (unless when painting a commissioned portrait), so maybe don’t feel too bad about not meeting resemblance (and I did recognize the female model on the left right away).

I second Boris in trying the Todorovich class – I just started it. My portrait’s aren’t as developed as yours, and I’m still enjoying the class and learning a ton. Todorovich does not seem to follow a constructive approach – at least the Grisaille lesson is all about seeing value shapes. It’s nice to have some constructive tools in your belt to check the shapes, but it’s not a primary focus of the class.

[Jack]

Thanks Boris and Vera, I really appreciate the input.

@Vera, you’ve honed in on a few of the features I struggled with in the bottom-right. I tried to simply put down value shapes as I saw them, but the mouth is definitely facing a different direction. It’s skewiff. And the ‘reverse C’ shape was an attempt to depict the shadow of a loose curl of hair on the reference. I ummed-and-ahhed about just ignoring it. I think it was a case of either rendering the hair more intentionally (I struggle with hair and lazily resort to just blanketing it in value), or leaving the shadow out – as it stands it’s a shadow shape without much depiction of the object casting the shadow. It doesn’t ring true, as Huston might put it!

Can you explain what you mean by ‘constructive approach’ vs what Todorovich teaches? One of the things I’ve been struggled with is the process to get pieces started.

[Vera Coberley]

By constructive, I mean thinking about the underlying 3D shapes of the head – the front plane, side plane, eye sockets with eye spheres. Especially in the earlier classes of the Huston head drawing course, he basically puts in a light wireframe, as I recall, before fleshing out the details (but in later classes, he omits that step). This is similar to the beginning drawing classes you can find on NMA, where you lightly draw in all sides of the object, even the hidden ones, just to make sure “it all adds up”. In the Todorovich Grisaille class, we sketch in a little wireframe (long axis, eye sockets, etc), but then it all gets overlaid with a mass of paint – it’s more about “which major value shapes can you identify”? Construction (at least the implicit knowledge) comes back into play as you refine your value shapes to build volume. I think in general, lightly sketching in the long axis of the face and marking the major landmarks (brow ridge, lower eye socket, bottom of nose, lower lip, chin dip, chin …) is a good place to go. I keep reminding myself to start with the eyes, as I tend to render them askew, and it’s probably the first thing anyone would notice. That way, if I mess up too badly, I’m only a few minutes of effort in to the work 🙂

[Vera Coberley]

I did one run through Ray Bustos’ anatomy course – you may find the classes on head and shoulders useful. There are also some lessons in the Russian drawing course that I plan to tackle at some point – the planes of the head (Asaro head), and the shoulder girdle. I also want to do some skull drawings and solidify my knowledge around that. But right now, I’m so excited about oil paints – it will all have to wait!

[Jack]

Ah yes, I know what you mean Vera. I’m supplementing Huston’s course with Villpu’s (which I find slightly more involved/advanced) and his approach is ‘construction’ exactly as you described. The book I’ve been using to date, The Artist’s Complete Guide to the Head, barely mentions proportion, let alone construction. He advocated an approach which sounds more similar to Todorovich – seeing and replicating shapes of value. Two different approaches, I suppose.

 

[Peter Anton]

Yes, I think the puzzle piece approach (viewing reality as shapes of value) is better for creating an exact likeness from life. It’s weakness is that you won’t understand the form in 3 dimensions, so you can’t turn it, stretch it, or repurpose it with your imagination. I think it’s good to learn both, since they each are valuable tools to have access to.

[Carlos Perez]

Hi Jack, I loved the focal points of the top female portrait, I congrats on your extensive and specific way of asking for feedback.

You certainly  achieved your goal of placing your features and placements  correctly though there’s something that doesn’t quite fit on the bottom male portrait, I’d say it needs more backhead, the dark nastro’s lines pop up too much and i feel that focal point is not that interesting and the forehead feels too squearish in my opinion, however the main goal was achieved.

About the training routine I’d recommend doing 20 Mts lay-ins ( and 2 value portraits ) instead of 2hrs and drawing a bunch of features  in all positions  from photos and from imagination to process the already learned Reading about their functions, i used to do that accompanied with reading Beverly halle book on artitic anatomy.  I was doing one week on each feature, using the first 2 hrs of my  day, after drinking coffe and taking some breakfast  so i could be as fresh and ready to learn as possible.

Your portraiture is quite good, I know you’re focused on the rendering aspect and your goals are portraiture based  however i’d suggest as well dabble on the figure, perspective, composition, and art history, so we avoid overworking only one aspect like that guy that only works out biceps at the gym jahajhaja.

Thanks for sharing Jack  ::)

[Jack]

Hello there Carlos,

Thanks for taking the time to provide feedback and support – very helpful! The bottom-left male portrait was my first attempt at bringing together all the features w/ value in one go. A lot of erasing went on as I juggled things around before settling on what you see. It’s a mess, and you’re right about part of the skull missing… or something being off. I’ve done a further six of these types of drawings and hopefully there has been some improvement. The initial lay-in is still a big weakness; I am constantly on guard for nicely rendered features in the wrong place or size.

As you suggest I’ll include a 20-minute lay in my routine, practice getting the right proportion/size down. It’s always tempting to keep working on a drawing post-lay in, I need to get better at moving on!

I’d love to include figure drawing soon – I’m signed up for a live class in the Autumn. I’m only sticking to portraiture for now as I’m trying to get the most out of the 10-15 hours I can spend on art each week. And for whatever reason, I find the systematic approach to portraiture easier than drawing from nature (although my long-term goal is actually landscapes!). Plus there is enough to keep me learning – but perhaps there’s room for more subjects!

Thanks again

[Author]

Posts