Is cheating using the Camera Lucida tecnique to "create" a drawing?
I start using it a few days ago, and it feels, like, well, cheating...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camera_lucida
>>2287706
post yuour cheated work
>>2287706
There is no such thing as cheating, unless you outright steal from other people's work. But there are other reasons why using the CL may not be the best idea. Would you mind posting one or two of your drawings? We'll be nice.
>>2287706
If it looks good it looks good, end of story. Do what you want, though don't intentionally mislead people on what you are doing because they will lash back at you if you do.
>>2287706
Yes it is cheating, but you are only chating yourself because you arent learning how to construct things = it wont help you drawing from imagination.
>>2287706
The issue with that shit is always the same: You'll get great results, as long as you have the object you want in front of you.
The problem is that when you can only draw shit that's right in front of you using a device, well, that's not a very useful skill. You've become a very slow and inefficient camera at best.
That is what I feel...
Great advice!!!
No Camera Lucida, but takes a pain
>>2287723
>(1.62 MB, 1936x2592)
Cheating, work in progress...
>>2287737
Trash
>>2287737
when you fail at tracing.
>>2287737
loomis
>>2287796
you would know, illustrat
I have one of those neolucida things and honestly it's easier to just fucking draw stuff by looking back and forth. The image shifts around relative to the paper too much when you try to 'trace' it with the damn thing. It's not an overlay like they show it in the video, you just compare the edge of the image you're looking at to the drawing under it and move your head back and forth a fuckton.
>>2287796
You literally have a thread about you not improving, you're the fucking trash.
I give up, I took more time tracing than drawing, the dam thing is not designed for me. Or at least, I will not insist on this.
Cheers
>>2288305
that face. it looks similar to something ive seen before.
>>2288305
>1936x2592
>>2287737
thats cool! whats the image your copying?
>>2288305
From the image, you have no idea how the human body's muscles work. Take a constructive approach and learn dat shit. Otherwise you'll always just trace outlines horribly and fail at anything drawn from imagination.
100% agreed
>>2287706
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camera_lucida
Please OP, elaborate how you constructed your device... or bought it? post pics of device pls
>>2289857
Buy projector. Some artist use it to project their digital lineart/sketch for traditional painting. It's not poor cheat for losers like camera lucida
>>2289864
Not interested in a projector. I can already transfer my lines with various techniques.
I'd like to experience a camera lucida. Have my own opinion, from experience, about artists using them in the past. How it looks, how it feels. Is Hockneys argument right and blah blah. Also just try it out and see if I can make some neat images.
>>2289894
>Is Hockneys argument right
Nope. He's literally a laughing stock when it comes to his theories about old masters.
Friendly reminder that everybody in this thread should watch Tim's Vermeer.
Why use an old fashioned thing like camera lucida when there's much easier things like light tables, projectors, photoshop layers, canvas prints, etc? If you want to make it easier for you, why not go all the way?
>>2287796
takes one to know one
>>2287707
>>2290336
I always found this one hilarious - amazing how lazy he was there with the hands
>>2290375
If you hadn't mentioned it, I wouldn't have even noticed. Jesus Christ.
>>2289857
Is a borrowed NeoLucida, wich now is in the mail, returning to the owner. There is a limited run of ths device. Quite expensive!
>>2290375
I don't see it
>>2290969
the beach is a flat surface but the hands fold as if they were on an edge (i guess the model's hands were)
>>2291032
I guess that's just the nature of studio art. I'm wondering if he just overlooked this in the drawing stage and was just lazy after that?
>>2287706
how did you get/build one?
>>2290078
because a camera lucida is supposed to work for life drawing
>>2291195
youre right, there's obviously just a perfectly square stone slab under the sand where she's sitting
>>2291196
The fingers dig into the sand because until the hand is in a comfortable position
>>2291199
i dont see a single dug-in finger?
>>2291199
this is obviously bait but fuck it. the figure is nice but it doesn't interact with the sand or water in a remotely plausible way. For example why isn't water pooling around her feet? It's obvious bouguereau didn't give it any real thought. If she's really in sand then her palms should be sinking because that's where the weight is, and if she's on some sort of rock or something, the water should be agitated in a way reflective of that. Neither is happening.
>>2291205
not to mention the fact that she's obliviously about to get hit with (what looks like) a big, ice cold wave, which makes the whole painting unintentionally comic.
>>2291205
yeah that's correct. The physics of the environment is completely disregarded, in favor of academic figure work.
