One of the wonderful things about drawing from life, or drawing from direct observation, is that you don't have to draw from a photo!

But (you may ask) isn't drawing from a photo easier? The camera, we think, records with unerring accuracy. In actuality, though, photographs present images that are distorted from the way we actually see with our human eyes. This is partly because a camera sees with one eye, while we see an image fused by our brain from the twin inputs of our eyes. Also, the camera records images on a flat piece of film or electronic chip, while our eyes "record" images on the curved inner screen of our retinas. I will save for another hub a more in-depth, technical explanation of why these differences cause a considerable difference between direct eyesight and eyesight via the photographic image.

Anyhow, unless you are an artist/illustrator with considerable experience in such matters, making a drawing or painting that is based on a photo will probably yield results that fall far short of your artistic potential, although you may not realize it. Also, it denies you the opportunity to cultivate your powers of observation and perception to their fullest. So--- DON'T let the thought of drawing from life intimidate you! If you prepare properly, it can be an experience of surprising intensity as you learn to channel those powers of perception and observation. You will feel like a superhero feels when they learn to harness and control their superpowers! And I think you will find, after a little practice, that it's easier than you think!

How to prepare? Well, for starters, you can learn several methods of "making it easier to draw from life", by studying for a few minutes the above drawing by Seurat. Suerat is more widely known for his pointillist paintings, in which small dabs or dots of pure, unmixed paint are applied to a canvas. When seen from very close up, the viewer may see just individual "dots". From a few feet away, the viewer's eyes "blend" the colors optically.

Of course, the pointillist technique seems like a slow, laborious process. On the other hand, Seurat's drawing technique seems very labor-saving!

Notice also how Seurat is able to achieve a wide variety of effects with his technique, as can be seen in the additional three drawings shown at the right. How does he achieve it?

Well, first the drawing media he used: strong heavy-textured paper, drawn on with a somewhat oily, chalk-like conte crayon.

Next, notice the way he simplifies the forms in a manner that is realistic and representational, yet somewhat abstracted, emphasizing the underlying geometry and structure. He does not spend time getting bogged down in small details (although these drawings are accurate enough to serve as studies for a very detailed image).

A key to such simplification and "representational abstraction" is the way in which Seurat LIGHTS the subject. A skillful artist can to some degree create or adjust lighting effects that are not actually present in the real scene. However, I believe that when Seurat made this drawing, the model was actually lit by a strong directional lighting from one or more real light sources.

Notice how the patterns of light and dark make it easy to break the figure and background up into interesting shapes. Some areas of the drawing have strong contrasts: a dark edge against a light background, or a bright edge against a dark background. Yet there are also areas where Seurat allows "lost edges", such as the bottom center of the drawing, where it is hard to see the exact boundary between the model's dark pants and the dark pool of cast shadow below. Look at the drawing long enough, let your eye roam freely and naturally over the page, and after awhile you will find your eyes "adjusting", in a way that may remind you of the way your eyes adjust after you enter a darkened room. Although the visual adjustment is not literally the same kind, the feeling is similar, because you start to distinguish details and interpret the meanings of shapes that weren't visible to you at first.

So, if you want to follow Seurat's lead in achieving bold results, yet with economy and simplicity, I would recommend first of all learning to control lighting. You may actually want to practice at first with a still life, before working your way up to a human model. Every-day objects like bottles, cans, boxes, pots, pans, etc. etc. can be set up to make a still life arrangement. You don't have to make it complicated, especially since you can use lighting to break the forms up into even more interesting patterns of light and dark. If you are using items that are "throw-aways" you can even apply a coat of white paint to them. This makes it easier to focus on light and dark, rather than having to worry about many shades of color at first. (This is similar to the idea of learning to draw from white plaster casts).

Most drawing studios at schools have track lighting arrangements, as well as free-standing lamps, that can be positioned and switched on or off for various lighting effects. If you are working at home and don't have an elaborated studio set-up, you will probably still have plenty of lighting options to choose from. Besides normal overhead lights, you can use a corner lamp, or a desk lamp. Of course you can also take advantage of sunlight. If you do use sunlight, indirect light from a north-facing window will make it easier to avoid rapid changes in the direction of the light that you would get from a south-facing window (as well as over-intensity).

You can also take a lesson from photographers, and use a REFLECTOR, which can simply be a piece of white posterboard positioned somewhere outside "the picture" to reflect more light back onto the darker side of the subject. Think of the intense direct light as the "sunlight" of your picture, and the gentler light bounced back from the reflector as the "moonlight".

Once you have set up your still life arrangement and lighting the way you want it, you will need the paper and drawing media you plan to use. You don't have to use conte crayon, although Seurat certainly made very good use of it. Other options would be some kind of charcoal or pastel. A stick of charcoal or pastel or conte crayon with flat sides is good for labor-saving purposes, because you can use the entire length of the side to lay down broad strokes or sweeps of tone. Keep in mind that if you are using paper with a heavy texture, a light touch will be enough to transfer tone from a soft piece of charcoal.

You can start with light pressure, and as the basic composition takes shape overall, return to some areas to lay down darker and darker tones with heavier pressure. In a way, it will be like watching a photograph develop. As for paper, eventually you'll probably want to find some good quality, acid-free paper on which your drawings will last for a long time. But when you're just starting out, one way to save money at first is to use something like coarse newsprint, or brown kraft paper (the kind often used for wrapping parcels). These types of paper are not acid-free, so drawings made on them won't be archival quality. But, you can afford to practice more, and therefore might be able to improve more rapidly and thus sooner be ready to invest more money in more permanent types of paper. Anyway, the newsprint and kraft paper will still hold together for quite a few years.

Another way to work quickly and in a labor-saving way is to first lay down a tone all over the paper. You can do this with charcoal, pastel, or even powdered graphite, rubbing it into the paper somewhat with a chamois. Then use an eraser to "draw" areas of light (or brightness) into the dark tone, and charcoal etc to add areas of darker tone. You can experiment with various types of erasers, because different types pick up tone in different ways and at different rates. You can also experiment with using other media such as colored pencil to add finer detail to your drawing.