love it. no shame in his technique whilst also providing a very important lesson. yes its important to be an artist and learn your craft, but when it comes to being an artist for hire, you have to treat it like a job, meet those deadlines and speed up your workflow
Tracing is just a tool, you still need classical training. I challenge anyone who says tracing is "cheating" to try it themselves and come back with Struzan level artwork. Easier said than done.
jemone2005 True. People who do art and have a certain perception thinking people like Struzan or Mark Raats are such cons. I bet, cameras are just as imperfect these days like artists are. The photographs we do can either be misinterpreted or misappropriated. Also, if ppl. think photos are accurate, Study the imperfections of both chemical and digital photos and you'll find that no matter how good your shots are, there will always be bad areas to find. That's why they invented Adobe products to 'correct' (or "cheat") those "mistakes done by cameras." To me, tracing is a part of what makes you a creative person in art. Whether you copy it with or without reference is not to be interpreted as 'cheating' or 'wrong'. If a person dislikes tracing, its either they're ignorant or close minded. Why limit yourself to one approach if you can learn many ways to accomplish your work?
He's not using the projector because he wants to, he uses it because he has to. In commercial illustration deadlines are very tight in which you would be lucky if you were given a full week to complete a job. Most of the time you don't. And even when you do trace, the results are usually very mechanical. That's when your skills as an artist comes in because you're then left to use your knowledge to refine the drawing. The of course there's the painting to look forward to that takes care of the rest. Tracing only speeds up the earliest stages BTW. The steps after that are still very time consuming & I'm sure that more of it was spent refining the drawing before taking it to the color stage. It's all about meeting deadlines while delivering a certain quality expected by the client in which there is absolutely no room for trial & error.
Well said…the work smarter not harder…people don’t understand that much like every other profession…there are deadlines to meet…and to crank out some amazing work…is to understand the skill and how to utilize it while incorporating your own design and taste to it….
I am good friends with many illustrators who were either trained by Struzan or who have worked in the business. News flash... They ALL trace photos to speed up the process of producing a finished poster. If they need to do portraits of accuracy and a full painted poster inside of 1 week then it is the only way to get it done. You don't have the time to sit there and get it right eyeballing it. The point that these guys will tell you is that it is only a tool to speed things up. IT IS NOT A CRUTCH that they rely upon for their art. I know because I have seen them work. I have seen their processes. At the end of the day if someone can produce a traditional piece of art like Struzan by tracing a photo to speed up the process I'll take it over any other piece any day that is not as good but "hey I did it from my head all free-hand". When it's all said and done and I am looking at it in my art folder or hanging on my wall I want to see a gorgeous piece of art. I look at the techniques in rendering and how they have interpreted what they see. It's the end result that counts, particularly in the commercial art world. I have seen plenty of people trace a photo and can't produce art because they have no idea how to interpret a photo as a piece of art or their lack of knowledge of anatomy shows through.
+Joseph Ponce yes I know that... I'm an artist myself so I am fully aware of what it takes. Ultimately what he is saying what you get in the end, not how you get there.
+firestorm387 They all have at one point or another... In commercial art you are always working to a tight deadline so you learn to take short cuts and find ways of speeding the whole process up so you're not drawing 24 hrs a day.
Daniel McIntosh When I first herd this I was disappointed, but after I thought about it I understand why they would do this. When you're under great pressure to get it done fast and accurate there would be no other way. Thank you for the info.
THANK YOU! To all the haters out there listen to the man Drew! It doesn't matter how you get your end image as long as it's what you want in the end! Use a reference picture, trace use a real model who cares!! As long as good work is being produced do it! Everyone draws differently and shouldn't be restricted in to doing art one way or another! AMEN!
If it doesn't matter than why do you care about what others care about? So someone thinks tracing is wrong, if you are saying it's wrong for them to tell you what is or isn't right, what makes you think you should be telling them what is wrong or right? Anyone it matters in the sense of skill, if one wants to prove how good they are then method matters, that is what a person can actually do. Method also can be limiting, such as tracing. If a person can only trace, take away tracing material and they have nothing. For example Greg Land a comic book artist can only trace, his work suffers greatly because of this, while someone like Frank Quitely who draws very well and has a strong understanding of perspective is free to create what he wants. We are both limited and expanded by our methods. It does matter how art is made, and there is also the matter of respect, personally I don't have much respect for tracing, it's easy, and if Drew Struzan only knew how to trace I wouldn't think much of him as artist. You can't necessarily judge a persons actual talent from the end product, that's all this proves. Now from a business point of view technique really doesn't matter, do whatever it takes to make money, from a pride point of view it means a lot.
Drew is 100% right! I am a full time artist and if I need to I will use tracing techniques. But I can draw well freehand too. I had only two years of art school, but I would sit in front of a person or a still life and draw 3 hours at a time. You need that background to be able to trace effectively. It's an art in itself. I have a artist friend who is looks down on this so much. He doesn't even like to use photos and draw freehand from them! He likes to say I only draw from my head -- just like the person Drew is describing.
i have same background.... but sometimes i fear that if i trace then will i able to draw free hand or live....that's why i do live sketches most of time and trace less...
I went to school for Commercial Art. We had a room dedicated just to those projectors, so we could enlarge images and trace them, just as Mr. Struzan is doing. It's COMMERCIAL art. Even Michelangelo used paper to transfer sketches onto the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.
Just because an artists traces, doesn't mean squat even if tracing a photo. It doesn't make one any less of an artist. Not everyone who's not an artist can do a good trace. As one of the comments below states... it's another tool the artist uses. When you're in commercial art, you just want to get the client what he needs to accomplish the job and it still takes talent to pull it off professionally. Take it from me, a professional commercial illustrator with 30 years experience under my belt.
Professional artists see tracing as one of the many tools we use to get work done. People who think tracing is cheating are people who think art is made of lines and nothing else
Drew has done the Art of SO MANY of my favorite films, so great to see the process on how he can capture the likeness of the Actors like he does. I certainly couldn't do this like Drew Struzan. What a Legend.
i learned to draw from observation first, just to prove to myself that i could do it. once i was able to do that, i moved onto tracing because it saves alot of time.
I use a projector for the same reasons. When one of my non-artist friends challenged me on this, I said, "If you think it's easy you do it." I set him up with something fairly easy. It took him forever and he couldn't finish it. It looked like crap! He didn't have a clue how to interpret what he, himself had drawn. He was dumbstruck. I have since done this with several of my non-artist friends with varying results. None of which, were good. If it were easy, the people who paid Struzan on average, $50,000 per piece, could have saved some money and done it themselves.
yes well as he explains that he's not just drawing what is in the photo, but an interpretation of what he sees with his own spin on it. He then re-draws it and adds his understanding of anatomy.
Anyone who thinks Michelangelo or Rembrandt wouldn't have worked this way is a fool. Today, we have photography, projectors, 3d modeling and lighting programs, and Photoshop. Being a visual artist is about knowing what makes a good image, knowing how to make it, and knowing how to put in those subtle little personal touches of your own. Important as it arguably is to be able to draw accurately without tracing...which Drew absolutely can do...developing the ability to work in a professional pipeline and add those little touches that makes each image truly unique and look amazing is way more important.
+XenophanesIAmNot Agree, and you're even righter than you perhaps could think: check out David Hockney's "Secret Knowledge" (book or documentary) and see how old masters used optic aids to perform that amazing art.
A lot of people think that tracing is such a crime. Schools teach it the same way they ask artists and illustrators to do artwork by using their eyes, not using a camera, alone. Let's be honest to ourselves, who in this world didn't use any tracing equipment or any such information to copy images? If you say you haven't used any, do you subjectively point a person and claim they're dishonest by using photo references to do their artwork? Define dishonesty? How can guys like Drew Struzan be dishonest and wrong by his actions of copying drawn images (or photo references) through a tracer or projector? - The answer is, there should be NO MALICE or ill will whatsoever in tracing or copying images through a projector. Why? Because the end result will always be defined by how a person perceives beauty and reality. Furthermore, people could care less on how that person approached their work. A British artist named David Hockney made a documentary video called "secret knowledge" where he dispelled most of the greats like Rembrandt, to Vermeer, to Van Gogh, on their work. It was later found out that these 'great masters' are just the same tracers of today's modern era by using what was known that time as "camera obscura." Many artists disagreed with Hockney by what he showed and they tried to debunk his claims. However, if you examine the works of most masters, you begin to see the intricacies of their work and the impossibilities of producing them through the 'naked eye' alone. One more thing, If you think such artists like Photorealism or Hyperrealism are amazing, look at the principles of their work. They don't make artworks that are just the same as photographs without using some projector or tracing equipment to create those paintings.
I always thought I had some sort of trouble doing things by eye, but I'm somewhat relieved to know that he uses a projector because I thought he just had an incredible eye for accuracy or some sort of special talent that I might have been missing, but I understand his concern for time and product. It's not about honor or dishonor or cheating, but for any given piece it comes down to what is more impressive and he is not concerned with the artwork being so much an art piece, but more of a product needed and the need for income. If you use a complete set of tools to do all the work it will always be less impressive than using just your eye and some paint. In the end, what you present can either be more impressive or less impressive by revealing your method. The layman might say it looks great not knowing how you did it and not care, but if you told them you used every tool available and just had to push a button, I am sure the layman would be less impressed by that. There is no cheating really, just less impressive methods of accomplishment. The same way if someone carves something by just a knife in their hand or someone carving something with a laser cutter and finishing up the details with a knife in their hand. One is just more impressive than the other and it's not quite true to say you drew it all or carved it ALL, you drew it and carved it with help and shortcuts and procedures, but it is true you created it and it is in your personal style.
Have you listen what the man is saying? he's tracing his own work his not tracing a photo. This method is used by sorayama as well and they are two of the greatest artists alive. I have seen all the dvd and he shows all his method. He made 3 or 4 versions of the poster before to show the clients, and when the clients chosen what they want, he started the final painting using his own sketch as a reference for the tracing. If you say the man can't draw so you're drowning in your own ignorance.
+andimatrus Agree.And I bet Sorayama had to trace, draw, cut and manage a HELL of masking templates to perform that amazing airbrush works. Drew is not different: to reach this results, just "tracing" is not a warrantee of a fine work, you need to have a solid artistic training and criteria.
andimatrus No, he's drawing placeholders for where he wants to put the photographs. He then traces the photographs in those spots. You misheard what he said.
andimatrus I own the full DVD. His comps use projection of the reference images as well. He states clearly that his comps use "the same process" as his full pieces. Including the tracing of the reference images.
If you have some problem with Drew Struzan using a projector and trace techniques, then a few points for your edification: 1. This is an ancient technique that was first perfected by the many "Old Masters" particularly in the Renaissance. The "camera obscura" and further extension Vermeer's "camera lucida" were used to more quickly and accurately arrange compositions and even establish realistic color palettes. 2. There is no 'cheating' in tracing. It still requires hours of painstaking work and attention to detail. Especially for people like Struzan who do it to help create original compositions and layouts not simply 'copying' what's in a photograph. 3. You're not Drew Struzan, are you? Then shut up. If you can do work as good or better than him, as fast or faster than him, with absolutely none of his tools or 'cheats' or 'shortcuts,' then go ahead and do it. But I haven't heard of you, I've heard of him. So maybe shut up. 4. ALL OLD MASTERS and famed painters had 'workshops' of apprentices who learned and worked under them. Especially groups like the Flemish painters. And these workshops were practically production lines assembling commissions. The 'maestro' would take the commission, do the initial sittings with the subjects to lay down charcoal or graphite line works. Then the apprentices would often paint the majority of the work, even handing it around to the 'specialists' like 'guy who does fruit really well,' or 'guy who can paint armor the best.' After that, the 'master' might touch up the faces, put their finishing flourishes on the piece, and of course sign it then take the cash (want proof? look at some of the works and you'll find out about famous 'goofs' like the baron who has two left armor gauntlets in his painting, because two artists didn't check each others' work). The apprentices were rewarded with room, board, and the experience of working in the master's shop to someday branch out on their own. So if you can accept galleries around the world of 'old masters' without calling them cheats or liars or lazy, you can handle Drew Struzan who does his work entirely on his own, he doesn't hand it off to apprentices then just show up later to sign his name to it (and some modern day 'artists' like Jeff Koons do exactly that, and are rewarded with millions of dollars).
Even though all this is true, someone can still say that all this is not particularly as skillful as someone else. It just means the person wanted to take short cuts or use procedures in order to produce more things with their particular talent and style. Nothing wrong with that of course, but I would be less impressed with the individual pieces themselves depending on how much procedures and help and/or actually work was done by the person saying they created the final piece. I'm definitely against other people doing the work and someone else signing it, like it's a factory or some sort of assembly line and anyone can do the work. If anyone can produce the same quality work as the artist, then it means anyone has that amount of talent. That doesn't mean the original artist doesn't have a style or vision and a talent for that style, but for me they have to do it themselves if they are going to call it theirs, to me that seems obvious. It's either theirs completely or not. For me, the other should sign it too if they worked on it.
If you can't DRAW you CAN'T project. PERIOD. Your work will look like a freakin tracing. The camera obscure was used by renaissance artists and artists like Norman Rockwell and Maxfield Parrish used the same method. And for all you idiots that think it's easy-YOU DO IT. Go right ahead and 'trace' a photo and see what results you get.
i'm really bad to get the proportion right...so what i always do is just tracing the structure roughly and then place the reference beside me and continue drawing while looking the reference.
@@supes1978superman I took a composition class with robert watts and it was pretty similar to this with tracing paper, getting the general shape in and positioning everything underneath a larger sheet of tracing paper. really similar to layers in photoshop and im sure it was the most efficient and economical way to work as a commercial artist 40 some years ago. I just think a lot of people came into drew struzan's work thinking this was all from his head and its just a bit odd to find out tracing is used after his work is marketed in some ways as "traditional" and perhaps having more value than something photoshopped or digital when in fact its pretty much the same idea.
This guy is good. It is true what he says. Only some of it can be hand drawn because now it must be done ten minutes ago. I.E. RIGHT NOW! You don't have time to pour over it the way you do in art school. I know the 14 year olds on the net think they know everything about art because they watch too much ANIME...but they are wrong! I study illustration and graphic design in a well-renowned college and all my deisgn teachers say things like, I know you love to draw, but this has to be done now! Trace your reference and you can refine it later. While in my fine art classes you are told to draw by looking at it and tracing is forbidden. Their is a difference though. Designers have to draw well, but they cannot draw everything and still be done on time. So reference photos are essential. Anybody says otherwise is obviously not an artist. They just think they are. Make sense? I thought it did.
I understood from this video that Drew projected a smaller art that he had sketched earlier on to a bigger canvas and then traced it to ultimately paint the final poster. If so, that is exactly like sketching a thumbnail art and then putting a layer ontop to do the fine linework and details.. he just ised the same idea but on traditional art. He also mentions that he will sometimes trace a photo of a portrait to speed up his work (deadlines are really short). correct me if I am wrong about the first part of my thinking.
SKR Imaging No, he's sketching *positions* for the photographs. He then puts the photographs in those positions and traces the photographs. He's done other videos showing his workflow.
I trace, not sketches but when doing certain paintings. For YEARS I did eye by hand and I can do it, but it takes 10x as long. I can do it by eye, so don't give a f*** who downs my work for 'tracing' as I could do it just as good by eye, but I don't have time to waste nor sh*t to prove.
I always wondered how they digitized his artwork, specially his later work. Did they use a large scanner or did they take high resolution photographs? Sorry for the silly question.
Not a silly question at all... back in the 80s they used to photograph the artwork using a large format camera. They would put the art under a sheet of glass and photograph it and then use the negative to then add all the other bits to the poster. Once the billing block and titles were added then it would go off to the printers. Today they use large scanners to scan artwork of that size. Anything larger than that size is generally still photographed digitally rather than onto film negative.
Also it's kinda dumb to criticize tracing when it was the artist who did the original work in the first place. -_- This is encouraging though. :D I love this. xD
It's one thing to trace because you have no ability to draw or have very weak skills as an artist. You're either lazy or are *forced* to cut corners. That's just how it is, sometimes. It's another matter if you're a skilled professional - as Struzan is - and are tracing images which you created, yourself. He's transferring *his own work.* That's simple, pragmatic craftsmanship employed by a genuinely brilliant Artist. It's the difference between being an Elvis impersonator - and being Elvis. No disrespect to Elvis impersonators, of course. 😺
If you're starting out then it is perfectly fine. Fomic book illustrator Neal Adams says it's the beat way to learn in the beginning. Eventually you should move to using a grid or graphing method and then start drawing from life. Professionals still trace to speed things up, but it is never a crutch for them. They are not reliant upon that. I don't work as an artist and my time is precious so I tend to use a graphing or grid method most of the time or I might very loosely trace out locations of features to speed things up because I am time poor, but every once in a while I do draw just from sight to exercise those muscles. I think I posted a batman portrait speed drawing video as an example of that. Ultimately at the end of the day the people viewing and appreciating your final art won't see how it was made, but I think on a personal level it is good to have the confidence to know you can pick up a pencil and draw unaided if you need to and you're not pretending to be something you're not, especially if you are going to be a digital artist.
Learn drawing by eye first and that comes after hours of practice and study,Tracing comes later because you need to speed up the picture making process especially if you need to get accuracy particularly for those in the commercial art field.Good luck on your art journey, and wish you the best 😊👍
I have to respectfully disagree. As someone who has often made most of my income from my art I was once accused of tracing and it was one of the most insulting instances in my life. Tracing for practice or to get a feel for shading or shapes is one thing, it's a valid learning tool. Tracing for any art that is going to be sold however is in its own way, cheating. I rely heavily on models and reference images in my own work, when I do so those models or reference images are credited fully as such. To trace those images in a commissioned piece is wrong. I'm not giving the buying the very most of my ability and effort. Even if the end result would look better (and it probably would, I'm no master of anatomy) it would still feel hollow to me. While this artist is truly talented and I can see his position, I would still never consider traced work to be his true effort nor would I consider it to be my own. I certainly wouldn't sell it or purchase it either.
I understand your position. Mine is slightly different. The only person I believe you can cheat is yourself. And that can only be done if you use tracing to circumvent overcoming the skill gap between being unable and able to draw correctly. I respect it both as a tool for learning, and as a tool for production, but I do not respect it as a means of evading the bitter work of self-improvement.
***** Brilliantly put! I agree with you on most of that whole-heartedly. Perhaps in the right environment it could be a valid form of production but in my line, where my commissioners are expecting an original piece, I could never justify tracing. In a line that focuses on creating art for products or marketing or a line in which the customers are fully aware that the art is created that way, I see no problems with it.
@@naomiburger914 Yes, but like I said before, you will never be in his position. You simply cannot work fast enough to create this kind of art and you never will be. Even if you did trace, your work would never come close to Drew Struzan's in a million years. That's a fact.
Drew and many artists use Staedtler pencils ranging from 3H to 8B. It all depends on how you work. Drew relies on the under drawing showing through on the painting where as some other artists don't do as much rendering in pencil as they do the tonal values of the piece with paint. It all depends on what you feel comfortable with.
I see that there's a question that's never been asked how does he create that splatter is it with water or paint thinner I appreciate it thank you very much
I am not sure which spatter you are referring to, but the 3 main ways that the spatter texture is applied is either using an old type writer brush or tooth brush, tapping a paint brush or spritizing the surface with water and then airbrushing over the top. Once the paint is partly dry use paper towel and put it onto the water drop and pat it down on the board. Then lift it up. It is important to to wipe, just pat the paper towel down and lift it straight up. Those are the 3 main ways Drew and other illustrators achieve that sort of texture.
I agree except for the part that the means don't matter, only the ends. If the ends are all that matter then no one ever need to do anything by hand at all, ever again. Art is about the process just as much as the ends.
i think some of you are misunderstanding, he isn't tracing photos or reference shots, but tracing HIS OWN DRAWINGS he has created and comped out for the piece, then blows it up into the projector to get the right proportions and placement onto the gesso board. He then goes in again and looks at set photos as reference to bring in the detail and make adjustments to get the compisition the way he wants it. He isn't tracing photos or other work, the man can draw, pick up his book, or watch his documentary on Netflix
ryxter Regardless of how he approach it, Struzan's work IS Struzan's art, period. He does copy photo references by eye when he does reference sketchwork. But then, is that wrong? Why should it be wrong? By who's standard? - It doesn't matter! Even some of today's modern comic book illustrators such as Jim Lee or Alex Ross uses photo refs to do their work and recreate them through their own expression.
ryxter You misheard what he said. He first draws placeholders for the pictures. He then puts photographs in those positions and traces them. So yes, he is directly tracing photographs. The first drawing you see him do is just a placeholder.
He's tracing his own work. The original drawing he did and enlarging to fit his board. He's a commercial artist with tight deadlines. He can't submit his work with scratched up boards etc. other artists do the same when handing in work. He still has mastery of anatomy, compositions, and design.
+Cyranowan Actually --- Drew said in the video that he traces the outline part of his comps to get that into place (sizing up everything just right ) and then he goes back to the original *photographs* and then, one head at a time, project into place and use the projector to draw (trace) them in.
It really depends on how they are 'marketing' the piece. I have known some artists who do that and claim they have drawn and painted it from scratch which is clearly not the case and is deceiving potential customers who may purchase the piece. Ultimately they are lying to themselves about their own ability. As long as you are open and honest about your process then it's fine. I probably wouldn't go and try and sell the piece unless you were the photographer as well.
I have something now to link all these morons who whine about references and tracing. I keep telling them if you are ordered to draw tom cruise, it better look like tom cruise and his eyes better not be misplaced at all.
This is all well and fine, but I find it slightly ironic that this guy and a bunch of the people he worked for (admirers included)kind of look down on digital manipulation.
There's a big difference between tracing a photo and making it look like a 3D image and photo-kit bashing which is making photos look like they are painted or drawn... Anyone can learn to apply a couple filters and pencil marks to make a photo look drawn or painted within a matter of minutes. It takes much longer for someone to learn how to even trace properly and make a finished drawing. Simple example. There are a lot of people who can take a photo and trace it on some paper, but it doesn't look anywhere near a Struzan picture... There's a lot more knowledge and understanding going on there... That same knowledge and understanding is not really required to photo-kit bash something together.
I thought the intent was to - as Mr Struzan says - to produce a good picture, regardless of how you go about it. Not sure how relevant 'x person spent x amount of time mastering his craft' is, when you need to get the job done in a short amount of time.
The ultimate goal is one in the same. The two paths are vastly different and require different levels of knowledge and understanding. For someone to photo-kit bash a portrait to look like a drawing requires little to no knowledge of anatomy. The depth of knowledge in actually drawing is far greater than knowing how to just apply a filter in photoshop. Working digitally you have the luxury of an undo function and working on different layers that you can simply discard if you don't like what you have. Working traditionally if you make a mistake you need a far greater knowledge of how to correct or undo that mistake than picking up a brush that has control+z written on it. I can teach someone to digitally manipulate a photo to look painted within 30 minutes and it would look amazing. I could also teach them the fundamentals of portraiture and drawing in 30 mins and they wouldn't produce a portrait anywhere near the same level of quality as the photo-kit bashed product. There-in lies the difference... It doesn't matter if you draw on paper or a wacom cintiq... Drawing is drawing... Photo-kit bashing and digital manipulation is NOT drawing... simple as that...
I agree it's not drawing. But I was talking about producing an attractive piece of advertising in a short amount of time. Not what method or medium represents the creator's knowledge of anatomy, form rendering, composition and so forth. Also I think that if Mr Struzan actually tried a digital software for Illustration, he might actually reconsider his stance on the medium, since being time efficient is of major importance to him.
Commercial artist do trace things because they need to get things done in a short time frame. As Drew says if it gets you what you want then great. It's the end result that matters.
even in renaissance they did using a camera obscura. Basically once art started getting realistic and more complicated than you could do in one life drawing session they have been doing that for traditional art. In digital with transform tools and such it is less necessary but we have our own tricks like using color pallets and photos for texture.
To me, the end result isn't everything. If I don't feel happy with the process, then I'm not happy with the art. And I don't think it's honest to claim full credit for something you traced. But I also think that tracing is fine as a way to save time. And if you're doing art for fun, maybe practicing coloring or some such thing, there's no reason not to trace if you want to. There's no reason to be ashamed of tracing if you're honest about it.
That's the difference between hobby drawing and professional drawing. Hobby artists mainly draw what they draw for themselves, while those who have it as a career have to get from point A to point B, where point B is a customer's hands. If you don't appeal to an audience, you won't get paid.
batvon39 I understand it for this type of work, but I notice some people trace everything and then call it original, when they don't even credit the reference. Which just seems a little pointless to me. I guess that's the one sore spot I have with some people who trace.
batvon39 emsloe Basically what he is saying is that in the commercial world the work has to be done now... not 3 or 4 weeks from now... Movie studios wanted the art done yesterday with 10 different comps worked up. In addition if you have a movie star in which the movie is banking on, then the portraits need to be spot on. Not close enough or near enough. At the end of the day when you are working commercially the company doesn't care how you did it as long as what you produce is what they want and of the highest quality in the minimum amount of turn around time. If you don't feel gratified by your art if you trace it or do whatever then that's entirely on you. Nobody cares if you feel like you cheated (not ripping off another artists work) but you produced an excellent piece of art. There is more to producing a piece of art than just tracing a bunch of heads. There is your interpretation, composition etc. At the end of the day how you do it is your business as long as you get what you want and your client is happy with the end result.
I understand the economy argument, but the closer I get to tracing photo reference stroke for stroke, the less invested I feel in the piece. It's not that I feel like I'm cheating, but that if there is someone out there who is drawing everything straight from the imagination resulting in a great product, I feel like I'm wasting my time. Drew's work is great. The skill and facility for painting is there, and I respect the craft and the craftsman, but I don't think his work is the stuff of legend.
Look, tracing is a hundred percent okay if you are only tracing your work and your work only. I do this technique if it gets hard to eyeball parts of the original or if I'm working with a time limit. An artist's techniques has no merit on how ''''good''' someone is.
+Steven Edison Actually --- Drew said in the video that he traces the outline part of his comps to get that into place (sizing up everything just right ) and then he goes back to the original *photographs* and then, one head at a time, project into place and use the projector to draw (trace) them in.
You make it sound like he's justifying. He's not. He's dispelling an ego ridden misconception perpetuated by non artists, amateurs, and art teachers who never could make a living off their art.
I guess I could play operation and think I am a doctor...just like drew strusan can trace and color by numbers. LOL i am a better artist then you non blessed humans can even fathome.
Zackary Ferorni LOL They do say mental illness is a serious problem now and into the future... You're definitely proof... You can keep trolling this post as well... it makes for good entertainment...
I figured if I did have a mental illness I would have known after a decade served in the army....Hey, I may be crazy but after seeing the world and all walks of life having my abilities slandered by stereotypical americans does not mean anything..I would love to see what happens when drew struzan shows us his life drawing skills not using a projector..You all have diluted TV brains if you think he is as creative or talented as me...I feel like Ichigo did when Aizen told him he was weak lol.
Hahaha what's the matter man. Truth hurt? Your biggest problem is you think you're a good artist. That's a tragedy because as an artist it means you have stopped growing which for you is really bad. You still have light years to go to improve.
Drew Struzan is not that talented of an artist given the fact that he uses a Projector. I can draw and paint better then him any day of the week. He is simply an Auto Tuned artist who got lucky. He shells in comparison to the potential and understanding of art I have aquired in under 2 years of schooling at a community college. Drew Struzan is a H A C K and as talented as a 5 year old to me.
Too Easy my friend... All of my work is hand drawn and then painted using only my brain and hands like a true artist should. www.etsy.com/shop/BlueLionArt
Zackary Ferorni I checked your link. You suck and have way too much ego to be trash talking other artists the way you do. I never put down an artist no matter what their skill or success level but I'm making an exception for you.
Drew is a legend. No one can do movie posters like him
love it. no shame in his technique whilst also providing a very important lesson. yes its important to be an artist and learn your craft, but when it comes to being an artist for hire, you have to treat it like a job, meet those deadlines and speed up your workflow
Tracing is just a tool, you still need classical training. I challenge anyone who says tracing is "cheating" to try it themselves and come back with Struzan level artwork. Easier said than done.
jemone2005 YES! YES! and YES!
jemone2005 True. People who do art and have a certain perception thinking people like Struzan or Mark Raats are such cons. I bet, cameras are just as imperfect these days like artists are. The photographs we do can either be misinterpreted or misappropriated. Also, if ppl. think photos are accurate, Study the imperfections of both chemical and digital photos and you'll find that no matter how good your shots are, there will always be bad areas to find. That's why they invented Adobe products to 'correct' (or "cheat") those "mistakes done by cameras."
To me, tracing is a part of what makes you a creative person in art. Whether you copy it with or without reference is not to be interpreted as 'cheating' or 'wrong'. If a person dislikes tracing, its either they're ignorant or close minded. Why limit yourself to one approach if you can learn many ways to accomplish your work?
jemone2005 I'm so glad someone finally said that.
EXACTLY
You don't necessarily need classical training. Perhaps better is, "... you still need to use tracing creatively".
He's not using the projector because he wants to, he uses it because he has to. In commercial illustration deadlines are very tight in which you would be lucky if you were given a full week to complete a job. Most of the time you don't. And even when you do trace, the results are usually very mechanical. That's when your skills as an artist comes in because you're then left to use your knowledge to refine the drawing. The of course there's the painting to look forward to that takes care of the rest.
Tracing only speeds up the earliest stages BTW. The steps after that are still very time consuming & I'm sure that more of it was spent refining the drawing before taking it to the color stage. It's all about meeting deadlines while delivering a certain quality expected by the client in which there is absolutely no room for trial & error.
.........
Well said…the work smarter not harder…people don’t understand that much like every other profession…there are deadlines to meet…and to crank out some amazing work…is to understand the skill and how to utilize it while incorporating your own design and taste to it….
I am good friends with many illustrators who were either trained by Struzan or who have worked in the business. News flash... They ALL trace photos to speed up the process of producing a finished poster. If they need to do portraits of accuracy and a full painted poster inside of 1 week then it is the only way to get it done. You don't have the time to sit there and get it right eyeballing it. The point that these guys will tell you is that it is only a tool to speed things up. IT IS NOT A CRUTCH that they rely upon for their art. I know because I have seen them work. I have seen their processes. At the end of the day if someone can produce a traditional piece of art like Struzan by tracing a photo to speed up the process I'll take it over any other piece any day that is not as good but "hey I did it from my head all free-hand". When it's all said and done and I am looking at it in my art folder or hanging on my wall I want to see a gorgeous piece of art. I look at the techniques in rendering and how they have interpreted what they see. It's the end result that counts, particularly in the commercial art world. I have seen plenty of people trace a photo and can't produce art because they have no idea how to interpret a photo as a piece of art or their lack of knowledge of anatomy shows through.
+Daniel McIntosh They didn't get that good by tracing tho. It takes thousands of hours of traditional training / practice
+Joseph Ponce yes I know that... I'm an artist myself so I am fully aware of what it takes. Ultimately what he is saying what you get in the end, not how you get there.
+Daniel McIntosh I may be wrong but I think even Norman Rockwell used a projector some times.
+firestorm387 They all have at one point or another... In commercial art you are always working to a tight deadline so you learn to take short cuts and find ways of speeding the whole process up so you're not drawing 24 hrs a day.
Daniel McIntosh When I first herd this I was disappointed, but after I thought about it I understand why they would do this. When you're under great pressure to get it done fast and accurate there would be no other way. Thank you for the info.
THANK YOU! To all the haters out there listen to the man Drew! It doesn't matter how you get your end image as long as it's what you want in the end! Use a reference picture, trace use a real model who cares!! As long as good work is being produced do it! Everyone draws differently and shouldn't be restricted in to doing art one way or another! AMEN!
If it doesn't matter than why do you care about what others care about? So someone thinks tracing is wrong, if you are saying it's wrong for them to tell you what is or isn't right, what makes you think you should be telling them what is wrong or right? Anyone it matters in the sense of skill, if one wants to prove how good they are then method matters, that is what a person can actually do. Method also can be limiting, such as tracing. If a person can only trace, take away tracing material and they have nothing. For example Greg Land a comic book artist can only trace, his work suffers greatly because of this, while someone like Frank Quitely who draws very well and has a strong understanding of perspective is free to create what he wants. We are both limited and expanded by our methods. It does matter how art is made, and there is also the matter of respect, personally I don't have much respect for tracing, it's easy, and if Drew Struzan only knew how to trace I wouldn't think much of him as artist.
You can't necessarily judge a persons actual talent from the end product, that's all this proves. Now from a business point of view technique really doesn't matter, do whatever it takes to make money, from a pride point of view it means a lot.
Drew is 100% right! I am a full time artist and if I need to I will use tracing techniques. But I can draw well freehand too. I had only two years of art school, but I would sit in front of a person or a still life and draw 3 hours at a time. You need that background to be able to trace effectively. It's an art in itself. I have a artist friend who is looks down on this so much. He doesn't even like to use photos and draw freehand from them! He likes to say I only draw from my head -- just like the person Drew is describing.
i have same background.... but sometimes i fear that if i trace then will i able to draw free hand or live....that's why i do live sketches most of time and trace less...
Tracing isn’t an art but the only thing that matters is the finished product
I went to school for Commercial Art. We had a room dedicated just to those projectors, so we could enlarge images and trace them, just as Mr. Struzan is doing. It's COMMERCIAL art.
Even Michelangelo used paper to transfer sketches onto the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.
Just because an artists traces, doesn't mean squat even if tracing a photo. It doesn't make one any less of an artist. Not everyone who's not an artist can do a good trace. As one of the comments below states... it's another tool the artist uses. When you're in commercial art, you just want to get the client what he needs to accomplish the job and it still takes talent to pull it off professionally. Take it from me, a professional commercial illustrator with 30 years experience under my belt.
Professional artists see tracing as one of the many tools we use to get work done. People who think tracing is cheating are people who think art is made of lines and nothing else
The projector catches the form...you catch the soul!
Drew has done the Art of SO MANY of my favorite films, so great to see the process on how he can capture the likeness of the Actors like he does. I certainly couldn't do this like Drew Struzan. What a Legend.
tracing doesnt mean the picture will automaticly look good. i've seen lots of traced pictures that look terrible.
i learned to draw from observation first, just to prove to myself that i could do it. once i was able to do that, i moved onto tracing because it saves alot of time.
I use a projector for the same reasons. When one of my non-artist friends challenged me on this, I said, "If you think it's easy you do it." I set him up with something fairly easy. It took him forever and he couldn't finish it. It looked like crap! He didn't have a clue how to interpret what he, himself had drawn. He was dumbstruck. I have since done this with several of my non-artist friends with varying results. None of which, were good. If it were easy, the people who paid Struzan on average, $50,000 per piece, could have saved some money and done it themselves.
yes well as he explains that he's not just drawing what is in the photo, but an interpretation of what he sees with his own spin on it. He then re-draws it and adds his understanding of anatomy.
Anyone who thinks Michelangelo or Rembrandt wouldn't have worked this way is a fool. Today, we have photography, projectors, 3d modeling and lighting programs, and Photoshop. Being a visual artist is about knowing what makes a good image, knowing how to make it, and knowing how to put in those subtle little personal touches of your own. Important as it arguably is to be able to draw accurately without tracing...which Drew absolutely can do...developing the ability to work in a professional pipeline and add those little touches that makes each image truly unique and look amazing is way more important.
+XenophanesIAmNot Agree, and you're even righter than you perhaps could think: check out David Hockney's "Secret Knowledge" (book or documentary) and see how old masters used optic aids to perform that amazing art.
Thank you for posting this video Daniel McIntosh.
I really enjoyed watching it, thanks so much, peace!
Love this video
Accusing an artist of cheating because he traces would be like accusing a chef of cheating because he uses a cake tin.
Never draw anything you can copy
Never copy anything you can trace
Never trace anything you can cut out and paste up
Wally Wood
Or a recipe and changes it to his or her taste
A lot of people think that tracing is such a crime. Schools teach it the same way they ask artists and illustrators to do artwork by using their eyes, not using a camera, alone.
Let's be honest to ourselves, who in this world didn't use any tracing equipment or any such information to copy images? If you say you haven't used any, do you subjectively point a person and claim they're dishonest by using photo references to do their artwork? Define dishonesty? How can guys like Drew Struzan be dishonest and wrong by his actions of copying drawn images (or photo references) through a tracer or projector?
- The answer is, there should be NO MALICE or ill will whatsoever in tracing or copying images through a projector. Why? Because the end result will always be defined by how a person perceives beauty and reality. Furthermore, people could care less on how that person approached their work.
A British artist named David Hockney made a documentary video called "secret knowledge" where he dispelled most of the greats like Rembrandt, to Vermeer, to Van Gogh, on their work. It was later found out that these 'great masters' are just the same tracers of today's modern era by using what was known that time as "camera obscura." Many artists disagreed with Hockney by what he showed and they tried to debunk his claims. However, if you examine the works of most masters, you begin to see the intricacies of their work and the impossibilities of producing them through the 'naked eye' alone.
One more thing, If you think such artists like Photorealism or Hyperrealism are amazing, look at the principles of their work. They don't make artworks that are just the same as photographs without using some projector or tracing equipment to create those paintings.
I'd love to see more of this. Thanks for sharing.
Drew currently has a sale on this DVD at the moment on his site
Thanks!
Everyone can trace and yet Drew's work is still the best out there. Hmmm? I guess it's a little more than just tracing. LOL!
I always thought I had some sort of trouble doing things by eye, but I'm somewhat relieved to know that he uses a projector because I thought he just had an incredible eye for accuracy or some sort of special talent that I might have been missing, but I understand his concern for time and product. It's not about honor or dishonor or cheating, but for any given piece it comes down to what is more impressive and he is not concerned with the artwork being so much an art piece, but more of a product needed and the need for income. If you use a complete set of tools to do all the work it will always be less impressive than using just your eye and some paint. In the end, what you present can either be more impressive or less impressive by revealing your method. The layman might say it looks great not knowing how you did it and not care, but if you told them you used every tool available and just had to push a button, I am sure the layman would be less impressed by that. There is no cheating really, just less impressive methods of accomplishment. The same way if someone carves something by just a knife in their hand or someone carving something with a laser cutter and finishing up the details with a knife in their hand. One is just more impressive than the other and it's not quite true to say you drew it all or carved it ALL, you drew it and carved it with help and shortcuts and procedures, but it is true you created it and it is in your personal style.
A wise artist once said to me.
"Sometimes don't explain your methods....they will never understand". Commercial art has deadlines!
This is the way....
Have you listen what the man is saying? he's tracing his own work his not tracing a photo. This method is used by sorayama as well and they are two of the greatest artists alive. I have seen all the dvd and he shows all his method. He made 3 or 4 versions of the poster before to show the clients, and when the clients chosen what they want, he started the final painting using his own sketch as a reference for the tracing. If you say the man can't draw so you're drowning in your own ignorance.
+andimatrus Agree.And I bet Sorayama had to trace, draw, cut and manage a HELL of masking templates to perform that amazing airbrush works. Drew is not different: to reach this results, just "tracing" is not a warrantee of a fine work, you need to have a solid artistic training and criteria.
Hell yeah! exactly!.
andimatrus No, he's drawing placeholders for where he wants to put the photographs. He then traces the photographs in those spots. You misheard what he said.
Not at all, have you seen the projection? The projection is a painting as well... It is shown in the video for god's sake.
andimatrus I own the full DVD. His comps use projection of the reference images as well. He states clearly that his comps use "the same process" as his full pieces. Including the tracing of the reference images.
If you have some problem with Drew Struzan using a projector and trace techniques, then a few points for your edification:
1. This is an ancient technique that was first perfected by the many "Old Masters" particularly in the Renaissance. The "camera obscura" and further extension Vermeer's "camera lucida" were used to more quickly and accurately arrange compositions and even establish realistic color palettes.
2. There is no 'cheating' in tracing. It still requires hours of painstaking work and attention to detail. Especially for people like Struzan who do it to help create original compositions and layouts not simply 'copying' what's in a photograph.
3. You're not Drew Struzan, are you? Then shut up. If you can do work as good or better than him, as fast or faster than him, with absolutely none of his tools or 'cheats' or 'shortcuts,' then go ahead and do it. But I haven't heard of you, I've heard of him. So maybe shut up.
4. ALL OLD MASTERS and famed painters had 'workshops' of apprentices who learned and worked under them. Especially groups like the Flemish painters. And these workshops were practically production lines assembling commissions. The 'maestro' would take the commission, do the initial sittings with the subjects to lay down charcoal or graphite line works. Then the apprentices would often paint the majority of the work, even handing it around to the 'specialists' like 'guy who does fruit really well,' or 'guy who can paint armor the best.' After that, the 'master' might touch up the faces, put their finishing flourishes on the piece, and of course sign it then take the cash (want proof? look at some of the works and you'll find out about famous 'goofs' like the baron who has two left armor gauntlets in his painting, because two artists didn't check each others' work). The apprentices were rewarded with room, board, and the experience of working in the master's shop to someday branch out on their own. So if you can accept galleries around the world of 'old masters' without calling them cheats or liars or lazy, you can handle Drew Struzan who does his work entirely on his own, he doesn't hand it off to apprentices then just show up later to sign his name to it (and some modern day 'artists' like Jeff Koons do exactly that, and are rewarded with millions of dollars).
Even though all this is true, someone can still say that all this is not particularly as skillful as someone else. It just means the person wanted to take short cuts or use procedures in order to produce more things with their particular talent and style. Nothing wrong with that of course, but I would be less impressed with the individual pieces themselves depending on how much procedures and help and/or actually work was done by the person saying they created the final piece. I'm definitely against other people doing the work and someone else signing it, like it's a factory or some sort of assembly line and anyone can do the work. If anyone can produce the same quality work as the artist, then it means anyone has that amount of talent. That doesn't mean the original artist doesn't have a style or vision and a talent for that style, but for me they have to do it themselves if they are going to call it theirs, to me that seems obvious. It's either theirs completely or not. For me, the other should sign it too if they worked on it.
If you can't DRAW you CAN'T project.
PERIOD.
Your work will look like a freakin tracing. The camera obscure was used by renaissance artists and artists like Norman Rockwell and Maxfield Parrish used the same method.
And for all you idiots that think it's easy-YOU DO IT.
Go right ahead and 'trace' a photo and see what results you get.
i'm really bad to get the proportion right...so what i always do is just tracing the structure roughly and then place the reference beside me and continue drawing while looking the reference.
"Is motion capture or rotoscope cheating??...."Just a thought!.💭😌
I see people defending tracing from critics in these comments but not a single person criticizing it.
So the point you are trying to make is?
@@supes1978superman I took a composition class with robert watts and it was pretty similar to this with tracing paper, getting the general shape in and positioning everything underneath a larger sheet of tracing paper. really similar to layers in photoshop and im sure it was the most efficient and economical way to work as a commercial artist 40 some years ago. I just think a lot of people came into drew struzan's work thinking this was all from his head and its just a bit odd to find out tracing is used after his work is marketed in some ways as "traditional" and perhaps having more value than something photoshopped or digital when in fact its pretty much the same idea.
This guy is good. It is true what he says. Only some of it can be hand drawn because now it must be done ten minutes ago. I.E. RIGHT NOW! You don't have time to pour over it the way you do in art school. I know the 14 year olds on the net think they know everything about art because they watch too much ANIME...but they are wrong! I study illustration and graphic design in a well-renowned college and all my deisgn teachers say things like, I know you love to draw, but this has to be done now! Trace your reference and you can refine it later. While in my fine art classes you are told to draw by looking at it and tracing is forbidden. Their is a difference though. Designers have to draw well, but they cannot draw everything and still be done on time. So reference photos are essential. Anybody says otherwise is obviously not an artist. They just think they are. Make sense? I thought it did.
I use a projector or graphite paper, cause when you're pressed for time from a client, freehanding is time-consuming.
He traced...but the hard work is still made on his own....RENDERING.
I understood from this video that Drew projected a smaller art that he had sketched earlier on to a bigger canvas and then traced it to ultimately paint the final poster.
If so, that is exactly like sketching a thumbnail art and then putting a layer ontop to do the fine linework and details.. he just ised the same idea but on traditional art.
He also mentions that he will sometimes trace a photo of a portrait to speed up his work (deadlines are really short).
correct me if I am wrong about the first part of my thinking.
SKR Imaging No, he's sketching *positions* for the photographs. He then puts the photographs in those positions and traces the photographs. He's done other videos showing his workflow.
I trace, not sketches but when doing certain paintings. For YEARS I did eye by hand and I can do it, but it takes 10x as long. I can do it by eye, so don't give a f*** who downs my work for 'tracing' as I could do it just as good by eye, but I don't have time to waste nor sh*t to prove.
Don't stress, even if you explain they will never understand 😂😂😂
It's not how you get, it's how you get in the end.
I always wondered how they digitized his artwork, specially his later work. Did they use a large scanner or did they take high resolution photographs? Sorry for the silly question.
Not a silly question at all... back in the 80s they used to photograph the artwork using a large format camera. They would put the art under a sheet of glass and photograph it and then use the negative to then add all the other bits to the poster. Once the billing block and titles were added then it would go off to the printers. Today they use large scanners to scan artwork of that size. Anything larger than that size is generally still photographed digitally rather than onto film negative.
Also it's kinda dumb to criticize tracing when it was the artist who did the original work in the first place. -_- This is encouraging though. :D I love this. xD
what he does is akin to a translator using a CAT tool (trados, etc.) to speed up his workflow. both techniques are legit.
When you are working to an extremely tight schedule,of course you would trace it,otherwise it wouldn't get done.No brainer.
weird commet but anyways how do you get a pencil led to be that long do you have to have a certain sharpener something ??
Tracing your own work 👍
Tracing others’ work 👎
Where is this taken from?
What brand projector ?
It's one thing to trace because you have no ability to draw or have very weak skills as an artist. You're either lazy or are *forced* to cut corners. That's just how it is, sometimes.
It's another matter if you're a skilled professional - as Struzan is - and are tracing images which you created, yourself. He's transferring *his own work.* That's simple, pragmatic craftsmanship employed by a genuinely brilliant Artist.
It's the difference between being an Elvis impersonator - and being Elvis.
No disrespect to Elvis impersonators, of course. 😺
I wonder What kind of projector that is.
if i trace will i still get better at drawing? i really want to get better
If you're starting out then it is perfectly fine. Fomic book illustrator Neal Adams says it's the beat way to learn in the beginning. Eventually you should move to using a grid or graphing method and then start drawing from life. Professionals still trace to speed things up, but it is never a crutch for them. They are not reliant upon that. I don't work as an artist and my time is precious so I tend to use a graphing or grid method most of the time or I might very loosely trace out locations of features to speed things up because I am time poor, but every once in a while I do draw just from sight to exercise those muscles. I think I posted a batman portrait speed drawing video as an example of that. Ultimately at the end of the day the people viewing and appreciating your final art won't see how it was made, but I think on a personal level it is good to have the confidence to know you can pick up a pencil and draw unaided if you need to and you're not pretending to be something you're not, especially if you are going to be a digital artist.
@@supes1978superman i think i failed to understand this
Learn drawing by eye first and that comes after hours of practice and study,Tracing comes later because you need to speed up the picture making process especially if you need to get accuracy particularly for those in the commercial art field.Good luck on your art journey, and wish you the best 😊👍
I have to respectfully disagree. As someone who has often made most of my income from my art I was once accused of tracing and it was one of the most insulting instances in my life. Tracing for practice or to get a feel for shading or shapes is one thing, it's a valid learning tool. Tracing for any art that is going to be sold however is in its own way, cheating. I rely heavily on models and reference images in my own work, when I do so those models or reference images are credited fully as such. To trace those images in a commissioned piece is wrong. I'm not giving the buying the very most of my ability and effort. Even if the end result would look better (and it probably would, I'm no master of anatomy) it would still feel hollow to me. While this artist is truly talented and I can see his position, I would still never consider traced work to be his true effort nor would I consider it to be my own. I certainly wouldn't sell it or purchase it either.
I understand your position. Mine is slightly different.
The only person I believe you can cheat is yourself. And that can only be done if you use tracing to circumvent overcoming the skill gap between being unable and able to draw correctly. I respect it both as a tool for learning, and as a tool for production, but I do not respect it as a means of evading the bitter work of self-improvement.
***** Brilliantly put! I agree with you on most of that whole-heartedly. Perhaps in the right environment it could be a valid form of production but in my line, where my commissioners are expecting an original piece, I could never justify tracing. In a line that focuses on creating art for products or marketing or a line in which the customers are fully aware that the art is created that way, I see no problems with it.
@@naomiburger914 Yes, but like I said before, you will never be in his position. You simply cannot work fast enough to create this kind of art and you never will be. Even if you did trace, your work would never come close to Drew Struzan's in a million years. That's a fact.
After tracing what kind of pencil do you use and brand thank you
Drew and many artists use Staedtler pencils ranging from 3H to 8B. It all depends on how you work. Drew relies on the under drawing showing through on the painting where as some other artists don't do as much rendering in pencil as they do the tonal values of the piece with paint. It all depends on what you feel comfortable with.
Daniel McIntosh thank you very much this has been very helpful
Thank you this has been very helpful
I see that there's a question that's never been asked how does he create that splatter is it with water or paint thinner I appreciate it thank you very much
I am not sure which spatter you are referring to, but the 3 main ways that the spatter texture is applied is either using an old type writer brush or tooth brush, tapping a paint brush or spritizing the surface with water and then airbrushing over the top. Once the paint is partly dry use paper towel and put it onto the water drop and pat it down on the board. Then lift it up. It is important to to wipe, just pat the paper towel down and lift it straight up. Those are the 3 main ways Drew and other illustrators achieve that sort of texture.
I agree except for the part that the means don't matter, only the ends. If the ends are all that matter then no one ever need to do anything by hand at all, ever again. Art is about the process just as much as the ends.
He is tracing his own preliminary sketch not a photo !
What projector is he using?
I think it is an Artograph projector. There was an article written where he discusses how he made the 10th Anniversary star wars poster.
i think some of you are misunderstanding, he isn't tracing photos or reference shots, but tracing HIS OWN DRAWINGS he has created and comped out for the piece, then blows it up into the projector to get the right proportions and placement onto the gesso board. He then goes in again and looks at set photos as reference to bring in the detail and make adjustments to get the compisition the way he wants it. He isn't tracing photos or other work, the man can draw, pick up his book, or watch his documentary on Netflix
ryxter Regardless of how he approach it, Struzan's work IS Struzan's art, period. He does copy photo references by eye when he does reference sketchwork. But then, is that wrong? Why should it be wrong? By who's standard? - It doesn't matter!
Even some of today's modern comic book illustrators such as Jim Lee or Alex Ross uses photo refs to do their work and recreate them through their own expression.
ryxter You misheard what he said. He first draws placeholders for the pictures. He then puts photographs in those positions and traces them. So yes, he is directly tracing photographs. The first drawing you see him do is just a placeholder.
1989 Oprah Winfreys head on Ann Margaret's body on the cover of tv guide.
He's tracing his own work. The original drawing he did and enlarging to fit his board. He's a commercial artist with tight deadlines. He can't submit his work with scratched up boards etc. other artists do the same when handing in work. He still has mastery of anatomy, compositions, and design.
+Cyranowan Actually --- Drew said in the video that he traces the outline part of his comps to get that into place (sizing up everything just right ) and then he goes back to the original *photographs* and then, one head at a time, project into place and use the projector to draw (trace) them in.
Some artists print out a photo on canvas and then paint over it...is that cheating?
It really depends on how they are 'marketing' the piece. I have known some artists who do that and claim they have drawn and painted it from scratch which is clearly not the case and is deceiving potential customers who may purchase the piece. Ultimately they are lying to themselves about their own ability. As long as you are open and honest about your process then it's fine. I probably wouldn't go and try and sell the piece unless you were the photographer as well.
I have something now to link all these morons who whine about references and tracing. I keep telling them if you are ordered to draw tom cruise, it better look like tom cruise and his eyes better not be misplaced at all.
This is all well and fine, but I find it slightly ironic that this guy and a bunch of the people he worked for (admirers included)kind of look down on digital manipulation.
There's a big difference between tracing a photo and making it look like a 3D image and photo-kit bashing which is making photos look like they are painted or drawn... Anyone can learn to apply a couple filters and pencil marks to make a photo look drawn or painted within a matter of minutes. It takes much longer for someone to learn how to even trace properly and make a finished drawing. Simple example. There are a lot of people who can take a photo and trace it on some paper, but it doesn't look anywhere near a Struzan picture... There's a lot more knowledge and understanding going on there... That same knowledge and understanding is not really required to photo-kit bash something together.
I thought the intent was to - as Mr Struzan says - to produce a good picture, regardless of how you go about it. Not sure how relevant 'x person spent x amount of time mastering his craft' is, when you need to get the job done in a short amount of time.
The ultimate goal is one in the same. The two paths are vastly different and require different levels of knowledge and understanding. For someone to photo-kit bash a portrait to look like a drawing requires little to no knowledge of anatomy. The depth of knowledge in actually drawing is far greater than knowing how to just apply a filter in photoshop. Working digitally you have the luxury of an undo function and working on different layers that you can simply discard if you don't like what you have. Working traditionally if you make a mistake you need a far greater knowledge of how to correct or undo that mistake than picking up a brush that has control+z written on it. I can teach someone to digitally manipulate a photo to look painted within 30 minutes and it would look amazing. I could also teach them the fundamentals of portraiture and drawing in 30 mins and they wouldn't produce a portrait anywhere near the same level of quality as the photo-kit bashed product. There-in lies the difference... It doesn't matter if you draw on paper or a wacom cintiq... Drawing is drawing... Photo-kit bashing and digital manipulation is NOT drawing... simple as that...
I agree it's not drawing. But I was talking about producing an attractive piece of advertising in a short amount of time. Not what method or medium represents the creator's knowledge of anatomy, form rendering, composition and so forth.
Also I think that if Mr Struzan actually tried a digital software for Illustration, he might actually reconsider his stance on the medium, since being time efficient is of major importance to him.
oh so masters trace when they are drawing.
Commercial artist do trace things because they need to get things done in a short time frame. As Drew says if it gets you what you want then great. It's the end result that matters.
even in renaissance they did using a camera obscura. Basically once art started getting realistic and more complicated than you could do in one life drawing session they have been doing that for traditional art. In digital with transform tools and such it is less necessary but we have our own tricks like using color pallets and photos for texture.
To me, the end result isn't everything. If I don't feel happy with the process, then I'm not happy with the art. And I don't think it's honest to claim full credit for something you traced.
But I also think that tracing is fine as a way to save time. And if you're doing art for fun, maybe practicing coloring or some such thing, there's no reason not to trace if you want to. There's no reason to be ashamed of tracing if you're honest about it.
That's the difference between hobby drawing and professional drawing. Hobby artists mainly draw what they draw for themselves, while those who have it as a career have to get from point A to point B, where point B is a customer's hands. If you don't appeal to an audience, you won't get paid.
batvon39 I understand it for this type of work, but I notice some people trace everything and then call it original, when they don't even credit the reference. Which just seems a little pointless to me. I guess that's the one sore spot I have with some people who trace.
emsloe I can see where you're coming from. I think it should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
batvon39
emsloe
Basically what he is saying is that in the commercial world the work has to be done now... not 3 or 4 weeks from now... Movie studios wanted the art done yesterday with 10 different comps worked up. In addition if you have a movie star in which the movie is banking on, then the portraits need to be spot on. Not close enough or near enough. At the end of the day when you are working commercially the company doesn't care how you did it as long as what you produce is what they want and of the highest quality in the minimum amount of turn around time. If you don't feel gratified by your art if you trace it or do whatever then that's entirely on you. Nobody cares if you feel like you cheated (not ripping off another artists work) but you produced an excellent piece of art. There is more to producing a piece of art than just tracing a bunch of heads. There is your interpretation, composition etc. At the end of the day how you do it is your business as long as you get what you want and your client is happy with the end result.
So he's projecting a smaller version of the drawing he did?
I understand the economy argument, but the closer I get to tracing photo reference stroke for stroke, the less invested I feel in the piece. It's not that I feel like I'm cheating, but that if there is someone out there who is drawing everything straight from the imagination resulting in a great product, I feel like I'm wasting my time. Drew's work is great. The skill and facility for painting is there, and I respect the craft and the craftsman, but I don't think his work is the stuff of legend.
Look, tracing is a hundred percent okay if you are only tracing your work and your work only. I do this technique if it gets hard to eyeball parts of the original or if I'm working with a time limit. An artist's techniques has no merit on how ''''good''' someone is.
+Steven Edison Actually --- Drew said in the video that he traces the outline part of his comps to get that into place (sizing up everything just right ) and then he goes back to the original *photographs* and then, one head at a time, project into place and use the projector to draw (trace) them in.
+James Gowan Ah, thanks for clearing that up. I appreciate the feedback.
Or he could just screencap it and them photoshop it a bit.
+chisese You are absolutely right. You could. And while you at it, then go and produce some. It's easy and takes no time at all.
He really went out of his way to justify the fact that he traces.
You make it sound like he's justifying. He's not. He's dispelling an ego ridden misconception perpetuated by non artists, amateurs, and art teachers who never could make a living off their art.
I would love to see if Drew can harness true emotion and create art from within himself rather then be auto tuned like Britany Spears.
I guess I could play operation and think I am a doctor...just like drew strusan can trace and color by numbers. LOL i am a better artist then you non blessed humans can even fathome.
Zackary Ferorni LOL They do say mental illness is a serious problem now and into the future... You're definitely proof... You can keep trolling this post as well... it makes for good entertainment...
I figured if I did have a mental illness I would have known after a decade served in the army....Hey, I may be crazy but after seeing the world and all walks of life having my abilities slandered by stereotypical americans does not mean anything..I would love to see what happens when drew struzan shows us his life drawing skills not using a projector..You all have diluted TV brains if you think he is as creative or talented as me...I feel like Ichigo did when Aizen told him he was weak lol.
Pick up any of his books that has his non commercial work. Oh and stop talking out your ass... All you are doing is embarrassing yourself...
Hahaha what's the matter man. Truth hurt? Your biggest problem is you think you're a good artist. That's a tragedy because as an artist it means you have stopped growing which for you is really bad. You still have light years to go to improve.
Drew Struzan is not that talented of an artist given the fact that he uses a Projector. I can draw and paint better then him any day of the week. He is simply an Auto Tuned artist who got lucky. He shells in comparison to the potential and understanding of art I have aquired in under 2 years of schooling at a community college. Drew Struzan is a H A C K and as talented as a 5 year old to me.
Let's see your work.
Too Easy my friend... All of my work is hand drawn and then painted using only my brain and hands like a true artist should.
www.etsy.com/shop/BlueLionArt
Zackary Ferorni I checked your link. You suck and have way too much ego to be trash talking other artists the way you do. I never put down an artist no matter what their skill or success level but I'm making an exception for you.
Say what you want about tracing, but you are delusional if you think your work is anywhere near Struzan level.
AI image generation has entered the chatroom