Ok faggots, recommend me some historical books in the cannon of art education.
Like what text do artists in the reinaissance and baroque used to learn art.
>inb4 some faggot says huh duh loomis is better than reading ancient art books
I'm not asking for loomis, fucking retards.
I wanna read historical books on art education, because I want to.
renaissance and baroque artists apprenticed under masters starting from a young age. though they were mostly literate, most of their training came from working closely side by side with their master working their way from menial tasks like grinding pigments, to making copies of works made by their masters or other artists. Students were trained in their master's style to assist him in larger works, sometimes the master would only paint the central figures and faces and his apprentice(s) would do the background work. Eventually when he's proven his proficiency, an artist could open up shop of his own and take on students.
>>2432404
I find impossible to believe there wont be some technical book after the printing press were commonly available.
>>2432408
If I remember correctly, the most commonly printed things at the time were religious texts and classic Greek and Roman texts. Considering the Master-Apprentice way of teaching, with the student basically living with the master, I'm not sure if it even occurred to artists at the time the need to mass produce their teachings.
I could be wrong though, I just never heard of printed books. Just personal ones like Da Vinci's stuff.
>>2432427
By that last line I mean I never heard of printed books for art during that era.
>>2432379
Bargue Plates?
>>2432434
That was 19th century.
>>2432439
Like I said, I could be wrong.
GAWD that rape face meme
