The Modern Sight-Size Method

Is This the Best Technical Training for the Realist Artist?

The technical training of a realist artist today can proceed

in a number of different ways. A comparison of two
different methods illustrates the importance of learning a
variety of skills.
Artists can choose to study flexible skills that allow
complete creative control over their own complex
compositional designs. Artists can also study the modern
copy formula, a process that enables virtually anyone to
mechanically copy a visible object with near
photographic accuracy.
Comparing Definitions
The difference between the use of a traditional flexible
foundation and the modern academic sight-size
method is straightforward: The artist employing a
traditional flexible foundation continually makes a series
of adjustments by eye as he works, leaving the work
extremely flexible and allowing the artist to easily alter
the image countless times until the end of the drawing or
painting process. By contrast, the modern academic sight
-size method teaches the artist to employ a number of
strict rules and measuring devices, such as rulers and
plumb lines, to finalize an accurate image at the
beginning of the drawing process.
The use of traditional flexible foundations is evident in
the early sketches of Peter Paul Rubens, such as in his
sketch for The Presentation in the Temple (above right).
As the final painting demonstrates, Rubens final
composition is significantly different from the one in his
early sketch. The figures of Simeon and the prophetess
Anna are reversed, Marys gesture is altered, and the
kneeling Joseph is turned to the side.
Alternately, the early sketches by an artist using the
modern sight-size method show no alterations. In this
case, the initial sketch is a precise outline designed to
serve as a guide or template for subsequent coloring in
or finishing. These initial outlines are accurately placed
using a variety of rules and measuring aids such as the
plumb line in use to the right. The initial sketch of a head
(right), for example, serves as a perfect template for the
final image. Extremely accurate outlines of the head and
its shadows are placed at the beginning of the process.
Unlike the work by Rubens, no subsequent alterations to
the composition are made.

Using a traditional flexible foundation, the artist makes a series of

adjustments by eye. After the artist is satisfied, the image is secured at the
end of the process. Many differences can therefore be found between the
artist's initial marks and the final composition.
Above left sketch: The Presentation in the Temple by Peter Paul Rubens,
The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Above right painting: (detail) The
Presentation in the Temple by Peter Paul Rubens, Antwerp Cathedral.

Using the modern academic sightsize method a very accurate outline

is secured at the beginning of the
process. These initial outlines are
accurately placed using a variety of
rules and measuring aids such as
the plumb line in use to the left. The
initial outline is a very accurate
template for the finished head
(below).
Left from: The Benefits of Sight-Size
Drawing by Stephen Doherty.
Below from: Cast Drawing Using the
Sight Sizing Approach by Darren
Rousar at www.sightsize.com

Comparing Processes
The processes behind the traditional flexible foundation and the
modern academic sight-size method are very different. When using
the traditional flexible foundation, the artist takes advantage of the
human eyes natural, and incredibly remarkable, ability to recognize
seemingly negligible differences between images. Given three
pictures of a vase below, for example, even an individual with no
artistic training will be able to quickly and easily identify the one
that is slightly tipped. The same can be said of the artist who is
comparing his own sketch to an actual vase. If the artist finds the
tipped vase he has sketched is unacceptable he simply makes a quick
correction.

Leonardo Da Vinci is one such artist who took advantage of the

human ability to swiftly assess and then correct his drawing. In the
Study for the Sforza Monument (right), for example, numerous
corrective marks can be seen around the placement of nearly every
object in the drawing. Because the foundation remains flexible, the
artist has the ability to continually correct his work, make his
assessment again, correct his work, assess, correct, assess, correct,
and so forth . . . until he is at last satisfied with the drawing. To
accomplish this, however, the artists first marks must be extremely
sketchy and brief. This type of mark is specifically designed for easy
reworking or refinement.
The adeptness of the human eye at assessing and correcting a
flexible foundation cannot be underestimated. This skill can be used
not only for creating an accurate account of what the artist sees, but
also designing an image from his imagination. As Leonardo knew
well, our natural ability to assess and correct an image is far better
than our ability to get it right on the first try. Consequently, old
marks need to remain visible for comparison. They are essential for
subsequent alterations. Erasing all of these marks forces the artist to
start completely over from the beginning.

Old marks are an essential part of the process of assessing and

correcting a flexible foundation. Therefore, as seen in Leonardo's
drawing above, a great number of alterations often remain visible
while the artist is working. (The horse has far too many legs.)
Assessing and correcting a flexible foundation by eye is a natural
ability of man, requiring only a few hours of instruction.
Study for the Sforza Monument by Leonardo Da Vinci.

The process used in the modern academic sight-size method is

entirely different. As is well-documented (see, for example,
Drawing with the Sight-Size Method by Ben Rathbone), the sightsize method taught in modern academies and ateliers today focuses
on drawing perfect outlines at the beginning of the process. These
outlines are then carefully colored in. Minor corrections, if any, are
considered mistakes and immediately erased.
The modern academic sight-size method can easily be used to create
an exact copy with near photographic accuracy. This is done by
following a set of strict rules and is aided by such devices as rulers,
calipers, levels, mirrors and plumbs (see right). Artists carefully
measure, then transfer to their paper, an image that is an exact 1:1
ratio to their subject - as seen from the exact point where they stand.
(Indeed, the size of the drawing is dictated by the distance the artist
stands from the subject - its sight-size). Of course while working,
the artists only option is to arrange his easel and his subject so they
appear to him as equal and side by side.
The goal of a sight-size artist is often to become so proficient that he
is able to follow the process without the aid of any measuring tools a task that takes many years to learn. (Surprisingly, the assessing
and altering a flexible foundation by eye is truly a natural ability of
mankind, requiring only a few hours of training.)

As seen above, modern academic sight-size

artists use a variety of measuring devices such
plumbs, calipers, rulers and levels to achieve
an exact copy with near photographic accuracy.
Minor corrections, if any, are considered
mistakes and erased.
This process takes many years to learn.
Images from Drawing with the Sight-Size
Method by Ben Rathbone.

Comparing Purposes

The purpose of the modern academic sight-size method is also quite

different from the purpose of the traditional flexible foundation. The
purpose of the modern academic sight-size method is to duplicate
exactly what the artist sees. It is an academic copy process. Although
all academies today do not teach the modern sight-size method, nearly
all teach a version of the academic copy process. Typically, the
training progresses in three stages. Most often the student will begin
by copying prints or photographs. It has become particularly popular
today for students to copy prints made from lithographs that Charles
Bargue made for students in the 19th century. Some of these contain
step-by-step instructions for copying a specific drawing (right).
Although copying using this method can give the student practice in
skills such as delicate shading and identifying values, the students
principle goal is to make an exact duplicate. For example, students
often copy Bargues lithograph drawn from a cast of the right arm of
Michelangelos Moses (below). Each students work is a near perfect
reproduction of Bargues lithograph. As a consequence, each students
copy is virtually identical to every other student copy, even when
compared with students from different academies around the world
(below).

Lithograph by Charles Bargue

Far left: Moses by Michelangelo, part of the tomb of

Pope Julius ll .
Left: Lithograph by Charles Bargue drawn of a cast
(three dimensional copy) of the right arm of
Michelangelos sculpture.
Below are four excellent, nearly identical, contemporary
academic copies of this Bargue print, made at a variety
of different academic schools in practice today.

Colorado Academy of Art

Academy of Realist Art

Atelier Stockholm

Vitruvian Fine Art Studio

After copying Bargues prints, academic students typically move on to copy plaster casts of
famous sculptures and then advance to making an exact copy of a single standing live
model. The three copies of a cast of Michelangelos sculpture of Giuliano de Medici and
the two figure drawings from a live model below are beautifully executed examples of
these. If the artist has chosen to use the sight-size method, he may employ here the
numerous mechanical devices and rules typical of the process.

Academic students in Italy working from in-studio casts. These three exquisitely rendered
copies of a cast (Michelangelos Giuliano de Medici.) were produced by three different
students at the Angel Academy

As seen in the examples on this page, the results

of this process can be impressive. The purpose of
an academic copy process is to generate highly
accurate copies of what the artist sees. Of course,
if the artist is looking at something beautiful, then
the finished work will be equally so.
Praise for the academic copy process thus
overlooks two fundamental weaknesses of the
process. First, if a student is making a copy of a
sculpture by Michelangelo, or if a figure is
professionally illuminated by the instructor, or if
the student is guided though the steps of a strictly
detailed copy process, surely the finished piece
can not be solely credited to the student. The
works here are indeed exquisite, but in this highly
controlled environment, are they a reflection of the
students true skill level?
Second, and far more importantly, is the student
learning a useful skill that will later aid in the
making of his own art?

Figurative work by two different students at the Grand Central Academy

Turning now to the purpose of the traditional

flexible foundation, again differences are readily
apparent. Whereas the goal of the sight-size method
is to enable the academic copy process, the goal of
the traditional flexible foundation is to facilitate
creative design. Although the traditional flexible
foundation is easily used to create a highly accurate
image if an artist so chooses, the ultimate function
of the flexible foundation is to aid in the creation of
an original work of art, particularly those with
highly complex compositions.

The figure here

appears to have far too
many legs.
Rubens is not, of
course, looking at a
model and having
trouble identifying the
accurate placement of
the legs. Rather, he is
experimenting while
searching for a
placement that looks
good to him.

Looking at the works of Rubens, Carracci,

Guercino, Degas and others, this purpose of the
traditional flexible foundation is obvious. In
Rubens drawing Mercury Descending (right), for
example, there is a disconcerting number of legs
attached to the figure in a variety of very different
positions. Rubens is not, of course, looking at a
model and having trouble identifying the accurate
placement of the legs. Rather, he is experimenting
while searching for a placement that looks good to
him. He is using his flexible foundation to aid in
creative design, not trying to copy what he sees.
The traditional flexible foundation can be used in a
variety of ways. In Carraccis The Vision of St.
Francis (sketch and final painting to right), for
example, the artist made a quick preliminary sketch
of the overall composition. In this way he can
quickly assess, then accept or reject major ideas of
the whole. This type of foundation sketch enables
the artist to try out a number of very different ideas
quickly while searching for perfection.
Consequently, the sketch often differs significantly
from the finished work. At this stage no attempt is
made to correctly place (or beautifully render)
details such as eyes and fingers. By contrast,
Guercinos Amnon and Tamar (below left) and
Degas Dancer Seen from Behind and Three Studies
of Feet (below right) show these artists using
flexible foundations to refine or fine tune their
images. These are seen as multiple lines in and
around various parts of the figures.

Amnon and Tamar (detail) by Guercino (Giovanni

Francesco Barbieri)

Mercury Descending
by Peter Paul Rubens.

Sketch for The Vision of St. Francis (detail)

by Annibale Carracci

The Vision of St. Francis (detail)

by Annibale Carracci

Dancer Seen from Behind and Three Studies of Feet

(detail) by Edgar Degas

Although the purpose of a flexible foundation remains the

same (to aid the artist during the creative design stage of
his work) the look or type of marks will differ greatly from
artist to artist. In fact, examining how a particular artist
manipulates a flexible foundation gives an insight into the
thinking process of that artist. For example, Raphael often
worked a concept over and over on paper, as is seen in his
sketch for the Alba Madonna (right), until completely
satisfied. He left us with many preparatory drawings
recording his process. These give us a great deal of
understanding, not only of what his flexible foundations
looked like, but how he manipulated them during his
creative process as well. Because he spent so much time
working out his compositions on paper, comparatively
small changes were necessary during the subsequent
painting process.
In contrast to Raphael, Titian was fond of experimenting in
paint directly on the canvas, often altering the actual
painting many times before deciding upon a final version.
Although he left behind few independent sketches, beneath
the top visible layer of his paintings exists evidence of the
many alterations he made. An example of the quick, loose,
fluid brush strokes Titian used for his initial marks can be
seen in an X-radiograph of Marys right hand in his Virgin
and Child (right). These early marks found underneath are
often significantly different from the final visible paint
layer - revealing the alterations Titian made while working.
Variations in flexible foundations not only aid the artist in
realizing individual creative goals, they give us, as students
of these masters, priceless visual snapshots of how they
actually did it. Artists that study the different corrections or
creative manipulations made by an individual master can
gain concrete knowledge of how to achieve specific goals.
As seen in the examples below, art historians also can gain
valuable information by studying the characteristics of
individual artists flexible foundations. The creative
manipulations made to an artists flexible foundation are so
distinctive that experts can even use this information to
assist in determining whether a painting is a forgery. As
with handwriting, how each artist creates and manipulates a
flexible foundation is difficult to counterfeit.

Concerning the authenticity of Raphaels

Madonna of the Pinks at the National Gallery,
London, it was remarked that there were
many slight but significant refinements to
the outlines of forms characteristic of
Raphaels paintings.
Close Examination: Fakes, mistakes and
discoveries at the National Gallery,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/artreviews/7859296/Close-Examination-Fakesmistakes-and-discoveries-at-the-NationalGallery-review.html

Raphael did countless preparatory

drawings to aid in the design of a final
painting.
Raphael, Madonna Studies Muse des
Beaux-Arts, Lille
Alba Madonna, National Gallery of Art
Washington DC

Instead of preparatory drawings, Titian

favored making his corrections or
alterations directly on the canvas using
paint .
In Titians Virgin and Child, Xradiographs reveal the painting
underwent numerous alterations. In the
example to the left dark lines are visible
as part of an early version of the hand.
Titian, Virgin and Child c. 1511,
Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna)
Cited From: Bellini, Giorgione, Titian,
and the Renaissance of Venetian
Painting, Copyright@2006 Board of
Trustees, National Gallery of Art,
Washington, and the Kunsthistorisches
Museum, Vienna. Technical studies of
Painting Methods by Elke Oberthaler
and Elizabeth Walmsley.
www.nga.gov/press/exh/191/methods/
pdf

Concerning the authenticity of

Michelangelos The Torment of
Saint Anthony at Kimbell Art
Museum, Claire Barry, Kimbells
chief conservator, notes The
important technical information that
has come to light includes
revelations of numerous pentimenti,
or artists changes, that show
Michelangelo working through his
ideas in paint.
(https://www.kimbellart.org/News/
News-Article.aspx?nid=119)

Impact on Creativity
If a student masters the use of flexible foundations, clearly this will aid him later when
progressing into designing his own individual artwork. However, strict adherence to an
academic copy process can eventually impede the students progress. This is true for both
creative growth and technical advancement.
Certainly, art students attending all types of schools might find that their early training
includes making accurate copies, but there is a great advantage in making these copies by
manipulating a flexible foundation by eye, without the use of any mechanical aid. In this
way, the student begins his training by practicing the exact same skills he will later use for
creative design. The passage from making accurate copies to creating professional works of
art therefore becomes an effortless passage, as the student has been practicing key basic
skills right from the beginning.
For many artists, the distinction between copying and creating personal works can be
difficult to define. For example, when Rubens copied a painting by Titian, the resulting
work of art looks more like a Rubens painting than a Titian (right).

Venus at her Toilet by Titian

National Gallery of Art Washington DC

On the other hand, if the students early training is restricted to an academic copy process,
their training will include only the meticulous following of a preprogrammed sequence of
steps. After years of adhering to this formula, they become increasingly less inclined (or
unable) to deviate from the formula. Over time, the academic copy process becomes their
only option. Making a perfect accurate image, with no mistakes eventually becomes all
they can do. (Notice how many mistakes Rubens made when copying the Titian.)
Unfortunately, if a student finds himself unable to deviate from perfect accuracy, it then
becomes impossible to learn a number of advanced skills, many of which are at the heart of
creative design. One example of such a technical skill, unavailable to the artist whose single
option is accuracy, is the creative use of illusions. The control of illusions can be a powerful
tool for the realist artist. Different illusions can enhance volume, light, movement and
drama. They can make a flat two-dimensional surface appear three-dimensional, make
figures appear to breathe and objects appear to glow. And, they require a deviation from
accuracy to succeed.
One simple example of how an artist can gain creative control over an illusion is seen in the
below right diagram. The three balls are, of course, all flat two-dimensional shapes just as
this page is two-dimensional. The shading simply gives the illusion that they are round three
-dimensional objects.
However, looking closely at these diagrams, it becomes apparent that the
lighting and the shadows in each are neither accurate nor logical. The light
falling on the top two balls appears to come from the same direction, and yet
the shadows are different. In the bottom two, the light appears to come from
two different directions, but the shadows are now the same. Astonishingly,
an artist can create the illusion of a three-dimensional object without relying
on an accurate copy of what he sees. The design of light and shadows here is
completely invented and quite illogical, yet the illusion of volume still exists.
The implications of this are fantastic. The artist is free to arrange shadows in
any number of designs pleasing to his eye and still be confident that his skill
in creating illusions will be sufficient to make the object appear real. The
realist artist is thus able to incorporate into his art the most complex and
creative compositions of light and dark his imagination has to offer.
An artist who is compelled to accurately copy what he sees has lost all of
these creative options. The light and shadows must be right. Of course, an
accurate copy will produce illusions of reality; a perfect copy of a plaster
cast will indeed look round. However, the artist limited to only one choice,
the accurate one, is at a frustrating disadvantage compared to the artist that
can create an equally real looking work but also choose from an unlimited
number of creative designs.

Peter Paul Rubens (after Titian)

Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza,
Madrid 1608 Venus at her Toilet

Although the light and shadows

are illogical, all three balls to
the left appear equally round.
This enables the artist to
design any number of value
patterns, confident the illusions
will be sufficient to make the
object appear real.
The illusion realist is able to
create a wide variety of creative
designs from his imagination,
never in doubt that his illusions
will give a high degree of
realism to his art. The accurate
realist has but one choice - the
accurate placement of all
values.

The inability to take advantage of the creative flexibility of

illusions dramatically affects the finished look of an artists work.
This can be seen by comparing Paxtons The String of Pearls
(right) and Velazquez The Needlewoman (far right). Paxton, a
noted modern academic accurate realist, renders every detail with
precision. Looking at a detail of the left hand in Paxtons painting
(below left), each wrinkle, each fingernail, each shadow on each
pearl and so forth are visible. The illusions of reality are not
created and placed by the artist to support his creative design,
reality exists simply because everything is included, much the
same way a camera records a scene.
Velazquez on the other hand, took full advantage of his ability to
manipulate illusions. A close look at the hands in The
Needlewoman (below right) shows a loose paint application.
Here, by altering the way the paint was applied to the canvas, by
manipulating the values (in a fashion similar to that shown on the
previous page), and by other artistic sleights of hand, Velazquez
was able to create an illusion of reality without the need for the
precise detailing evident in Paxtons work. Velazquez could
therefore design all aspects of his painting (from the arrangement
of light, shadows and volume to the placement of red accents) in
any manner he chose, confident he could also incorporate and
control whatever illusions of reality he desired as well.
While the accurate realist is restricted to accuracy regardless of
its appeal, the illusion realist is free to create his own design
making creative patterns that are beautiful, or frightening, or
dramatic as he pleases.

Accurate Realism: Paxton

relies on the detailed
accurate depiction of
everything (objects, light,
shadows etc.) to create his
illusion of reality.

Illusion Realism: Diego

Velazquez was free to design
any number of value patterns
pleasing to his eye, knowing his
illusions would be sufficient to
make the work appear real.

The String of Pearls

by Paxton
(detail below left)

The Needlewoman
by Diego Velazquez
(detail below right)

Although the inability to utilize illusions is one of the most serious

limitations of a dependency on accuracy, there are other ways the
academic copy process limits the artists creativity. For example, the
necessity of securing an accurate outline at the beginning of the
working process also has severe drawbacks.
These can be seen by comparing the Veronese sketch to the right with
the academic copy process depicted below. In the Veronese, both the
figure and the values (light and dark areas) are visible together in a
single flexible foundation. The artist can then assess and alter the two
simultaneously as a unit while designing his work. He is able to
constantly view how the two will look together while designing his
composition, thus assuring the final composition as a whole will be to
his liking.
By contrast, during the academic copy process below the outline is
secured first, and the values are colored in later. At no time is there
an opportunity for the artist to observe and adjust how both the figure
and the values will look together. It is a surprise at the end, for good
or ill. When using this process the quality of the copy is completely
dependent on the quality of the original artwork, not the skill of the
copyist.

In this Veronese, the flexible

foundation consists of both line
and values in their sketchiest
form. Both are altered together.
While designing a complex
composition it is easy for the
artist to constantly asses how
the two look together.

Studies for Judith and

Holofernes David and Goliath
and Other Compositions
(detail)
by Veronese

In a copy process the outlines are secured first then colored in. The figure,
values and colors are not designed together as a unit. When using this
process the quality of the copy is dependant on the quality of the original
artwork, not the skill of the copyist.
above illustration from: http://www.angelartschool.com/methods.html

Now, consider a more complex situation. If the artist sets out

to create a composition where the figures, the values and the
colors all need to be working together harmoniously, there is
an even greater advantage to being able to assess and correct
everything together. The more elements the artist tries to
coordinate, the more difficult it is to find a successful
arrangement without some trial and error. Rubens, a colorist,
takes great advantage of this. In the oil sketch to the right, he
is able to easily design a complex composition that
incorporates color because he can in fact see it while he is
working.
Now, to make it even more complex, if the artist desires to
organize not only the figures, values and colors but other
elements as well, such as highlights or points of interest, it
becomes unbelievably difficult to coordinate this multitude of
elements without actually seeing how everything is working
together at the same time. An artist confined to an academic
copy process, forced to secure the outlines first, then add the
values, then add the color in a linear fashion, literally has no
way of seeing if his composition will work as a whole until
the painting is done - a bit too late to be of practical use.

Here the figures, values, colors and many other elements can be seen
together as a unit. All can then be assessed and altered as needed to
balance the whole.
Sketch of Hercules and Minerva Fighting Mars 1632-40
by Rubens, Louvre Paris France

The inability to easily coordinate the design of a complex composition has a

profound effect on the appearance of an artists work of art. When an artist does not
have the tools to easily organize large numbers of complex elements into a single
cohesive design, his work takes on a characteristic stiff, static, random, or even
photographic appearance. This can be seen by comparing the two paintings on this
page.
The painting on the right was done by Nelson Shanks, a very popular modern
academic accurate realist. The composition is essentially a collection of very well
painted individual objects. The rendering of each separate object far outshines any
unifying compositional design. For example, the red color in the Shanks painting is
scattered randomly about. There is red material, red on the paint can, red on the
woman lips, fingers, toes, ears and so forth. Shanks took a tremendous amount of
care painting the red material behind the womans ankle. However, if the red shape
was a bit higher, a bit wider or a bit darker it would have little effect on the
composition as a whole. Likewise, there is no intentional design of dark shapes in
the Shanks painting. Dark shadows are sprinkled randomly about.
By contrast, Sargent (below) displays a cohesive design that demonstrates a great
degree of creative control over the entire composition. Of course, Sargent is skilled
at creating a number of illusions such as those used to enhance movement, light,
volume and drama. But more importantly, he fully understands that any deviation
from accuracy will not harm his illusions. He can have both his creative design and
reality.
For example, there is a large dark shape that starts on the left side of the painting and
snakes along the floor, rolls up and through the womans torso, then back to the
floor ending on the right side of the painting. This shape contributes considerably to
the feeling of movement in the picture. Similarly, the red-orange color appears as a
splash on the right edge of the picture and a small, single dramatic point of interest
on the chair to the left. The movement between these two accents of red-orange echo
the movement of the dancer- expanding to the right.
Unlike the Shanks picture, altering the placement, hue or brightness of this color by
even a small amount would be detrimental to the work as a whole. Sargent has
coordinated everything perfectly, from the overall pattern of his design to the
smallest detail. Whereas Shanks spent considerable time detailing objects, Sargent
spent his time designing a perfect composition.

Sophia, An Anthology
by Nelson Shanks

El Jaleo
by John Singer Sargent

Modern academic accurate realists rarely attempt complex

multi-figure compositions. Without the ability to fully utilize
illusions, and without the ability to manipulate multiple
elements into a cohesive whole, the task of designing an entire
complex composition is extraordinarily difficult. If the artist
has only one option (to accurately copy what he sees), when he
is faced with more objects he merely keeps recording until the
collection grows to a noisy or awkward cacophony.

The work by Surdo below exemplifies the problem. Each

individual figure speaks well of the basic copy skills of the
artist. However, the work sorely lacks a creative, cohesive
design. Compare his scattered pattern of light and dark to the
picture by Rembrandt to the right. In the Rembrandt, the
dramatic teardrop of light falling in the center not only ties the
composition together, the teardrop shape reflects the poignancy
of the subject matter.

The Descent from the Cross by Rembrandt

by Bruno A Surdo, Founder of The School of Representational Art in Chicago

Academic accurate realists are often attracted to portraiture. Indeed, an accurate copy
of a single head, painted in a controlled studio environment, can be astonishingly
beautiful. The head to the right is exquisite. It clearly demonstrates the artists
remarkable copy skills as well as his superb facility with paint.
Again, however, problems quickly multiply as the artist attempts anything but
copying a single object in a controlled lighting situation. Without the compositional
skills to coordinate a multitude of elements into a cohesive whole, the artist merely
copies each and every additional object. This is evident in the portraits below,
produced in copious numbers by modern academic accurate realists. While some may
have a degree of popular appeal, the vast majority resemble little more than stiff,
faithfully painted copies of mediocre photographic snapshots - even when the artist
works from a live model.

Marvin Mattelson Pia Mattelson

instructor at School of Visual Arts in NY

Michael Chelich
Instructor at The School of
Representational Art In Chicago

By contrast, in the painting to the right the artist has

taken complete control of his compositional design. For
example, the blue and purple colors in the girls hair
ribbon are also found in the chair cushion, the front and
back of her dress and indeed splashed liberally in the
shadows of her skin. The chair, her ribbons and her skin
thus becomes part of a greater pattern, a graceful arch
that echoes the direction of her gaze. Likewise, the
horizontal arm of the chair and the vertical wall on the
right together form a second more intimate frame
around her. The artist was far more concerned with the
beauty of the painting as a whole than the correct
depiction any one piece such as the hand (seen in the
detail to the right).
No such attention to the overall design is evident in the
three formal portraits above. The chairs are very wellpainted chairs. And, each and every separate finger is
painted well. Unfortunately, the creative organization of
colors, values, accents, volume, textures and the vast
number of other valuable elements of design are
completely neglected by these artists who are
preoccupied with the accurate depiction of every visible
object.

Daniel Graves, Hans 2005

Iris by Daniel Graves,

founder and director of The Florence
Academy of Art

A Young Girl Reading

by Jean-Honor Fragonard
with detail

Academic training has had a variety of definitions over the years. The debate
over its value is not new. Alarmingly, even the academies of the past were not
as formulaic as what we see in the academies today. Bouguereau (below), an
excellent academic painter of the 19th century, has clearly mastered the
manipulation of a flexible foundation.
And yet, one could hardly think Bouguereau would advocate a training method
limited to formulaic studies such as is demonstrated in the Gottlieb lesson below.

Bouguereaus development of Nymphs and Satyr.

Today more than ever it is difficult to disagree with Peter Paul Rubens:
"But Sir Peter Rubens tol mee that at his being in Italy, divers of his nation
had followed this Academicall course for twenty Yearses together to little or
noe purpose. Besides these dull, tedious and heavy wayes doe ever
presuppose Animam in digitis [literally, where the spirit rests in the fingers,
i.e., where the skill of their fingers is primary, as in dry, mechanical
drawings], a man whose soule hath taken up his Lodging in his fingers
ends, and meanes to sacrifice his spirits and time for a Life and a day in
this study onely." Norgate 1997, pp. 108, 20910, n. 307.
(This excerpt is from an essay, written by Anne-Marie Logan and Michiel C.
Plomp, derived from the exhibition catalogue Peter Paul Rubens: The
Drawings (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2005).

by Adran Gottlieb

Trinka Margua Simon

trinkamarguasimon.com
artist, author, former copyist and instructor at the Smithsonian.