JB,

I thought you might be interested in an email response I received from Neal Adams last week that he said I could share, on a recent controversy involving a current "hot" artist and tracing photo art/light box usage.  Here's the reply and then I have a question for you:

Dear David,

You may pass this on for me.

As far as becoming a realistic artist is concerned and having the freedom to advance in your career in any direction yoou choose, if you do not spend a significant, really significant amount of time tracing photographs you might as well "shoot yourself in the arm." The same goes for an artist who refuses to study anatomy (and there are many of those) or perspective (and there are many of those.)

I look reuglarly at artist's work, even pros who's anatomy studies stopped at lesson B, perspective studies stopped at two point perspective and straight perspective lines and never learned that nothing in perspective is BASED on straight lines.

Not to trace photographs is not to learn. Not tracing photos is anti-intelectual. Not tracing photos leads to life-long bad habits and earns no respect from accomplished artists.

Buffoons, who know nothing about art will chide and tease "artists who trace" in INGNORANCE, but remember this, "listening to ignorant people makes you ignorant."

Unless you, as a young artist, think you have some sort of addictive personality and if you study anatomy you will draw anatomy studies all your life and if you study perspective you will do perspective studies all your life, you may, no one knows, become an accomplished architectural artist or scenic designer or such. You may become a medical illustrator, or if you trace photos you may become a great illustrator, or if you trace photos you may become a great comic book artist. You can even become one without it.

Your chances are simply less when you turn your back on skills. If you don't carry a sketchbook, and use it; if you don't go to life drawing classes; if you don't spend time tracing; studying anatomy, perspective, light and shade, positive and negative space, design and composition, etc. you will never know your real potential.

If you listen to buffoons you will learn less. It is a simply equation. You are learning for YOU. Not to satisfy some smartass comment from your associates, and if you put asside ANY tool, ANY, because of them, you are made less by it.

Let them hoot. You abilities, like a young bird, are yours to free, will they fly, or crash to the ground because you fell prey to an ignorant word?

Cheers,
-Neal

First of all, too cool that he responded to my email.

Secondly, I was wondering what you thought of his comments.  I don't think Neal is totally advocating using a light box for current professional work (although Steve Lieber, a fellow board member I believe, did find a website where Neal talks about using tracing when doing the daily comic strips in the 50's), but do you think it's proper to do so? 

David

JB,

Did you use more photos for reference during your UXM and Charlton days?

David

However -- learning to "see" is a big part of learning to draw. But a bigger part is learning how to channel those images from your eyes to your hands.

It was while I was at Charlton that I stopped using extensive photo reference, using it from then on only in very specific instances, like if I had to draw the Chrysler Building© or some other such real world object.

I never have had a problem with artists using photo reference. If they didn't thee only shots we'd see of Paris would be a badly drawn Eiffel Tower (from those who didn't live in Paris, that is), because they'd have to rely on memory alone.

Now, swiping (as opposed to homages), in professional work is another matter. I believe that is stealing someone else's vision, so to speak. Using the Eiffel Tower reference, two people can look at the same thing in real life, or in a photo and come away with accurate, but very different interpretations of that object.

I've been an aspiring artist for most of my life, but I've been sidetracked, so to speak, by running a shop for the past decade. I still plan on self-publishing my own comic at some point, and possibly even trying to do some freelance work if time allows me to pursue that course.

When I was younger my absolute favorite artists were JB and George Perez (and they still are tops for me). I tried to intentionlly emulate their work as a child, but without swiping. I've swiped maybe less than ten times in my whole life. I would try to mimic gestures, the way JB drew clothing moving (with looked so fluid and natural, more than any other artist), and machinery, etc.

My work looked nothing like those artists.

At roughly about my teenage years, I stopped trying to draw like anyone, and just started drawing however it came out. All of a sudden people were looking at my art and commenting, "You're a John Byrne fan, aren't you?" Some would even notice the Perez influence, among some other artists. Even a Marvel editor at WizardWorld Chicago noticed my influences when I showed my work to him a couple of years ago.

While I like to think I have a style of my own, clearly the work of other artists and their influence on me shows through.

"do you feel learning how to draw is actually learning how to see? "-Charles.

Recognising that this was badged as a question to JB, who has now commented.

I wanted to comment that, for me, learning how to draw is show others what you see. The limit is the medium. When you boil it down, drawing with "pen & ink" is nothing more than hand writing. The difference is that the shape of a letter conveys the information the viewer needs to recognise a sound or emphisis. In art the line you recognise is designed to convey a texture or lighting effect. They are still two dimensionsl pen lines on paper. What makes an artist like John "great" is that his "translation" from his minds eye to yours using lines which appear to be the way you "think" those lines should appear. You feel they are familiar and in a lot of ways you've come understand the "shorthand" that John uses to convey differing moods, textures and shade.

When you find an artist that you like, it's because you are tuning into their "description" of the world they are illustrating. Think back to the number of times you've looked at art you haven't liked and lots of things appear to be wrong. You are not "hearing" that artists translation, he/she is speaking another language, yet they may remain popular simply because there are others who do "see" the art the way that artist does.