another example of this color-scheme is the drawing by Mr. Gregg,
Fig. 50. The gradation here is from the top of the picture downwards.
The sketch of the coster women by Mr. Pennell, Fig. 31, shows this
gradation reversed.
The drawing of the hansom cab, Fig. 32, by Mr. Raven Hill, illustrates
a very strong color-scheme, - gray and white separated by black,
the gray moderating the black on the upper side, leaving it to
tell strongly against the white below. Notice how luminous is this
same relation of color where it occurs in the Venetian subject by
Rico, Fig. 14. The shadow on the water qualifies the blackness
of the gondola below, permitting a brilliant contrast with the
white walls of the building above.
It is interesting to observe how Vierge and Pennell, but chiefly the
former, very often depend for their grays merely upon the delicate
tone resulting from the rendering of form and of direct shadow,
without any local color. This may be seen in the Vierge drawing,
Fig. 33. Observe in this, as a consequence, how brilliantly the
tiny black counts in the little figure in the centre. Notice, too,
in the drawing of the soldiers by Jeanniot, Fig. 34, that there
is very little black; and yet see how brilliant is the effect,
owing largely to the figures being permitted to stand out against
a white ground in which nothing is indicated but the sky-line of
the large building in the distance.
[Illustration: FIG. 32 L. RAVEN HILL]
[Illustration: FIG. 33 DANIEL VIERGE]
[Illustration: FIG. 34 P. G. JEANNIOT]
CHAPTER V
PRACTICAL PROBLEMS
I have thought it advisable in this chapter to select, and to work
out in some detail, a few actual problems in illustration, so as
to familiarize the student with the practical application of some
of the principles previously laid down.
[Illustration: FIG. 35 FROM A PHOTOGRAPH]
[Illustration: FIG. 36 D. A. GREGG]
[Side note: _First Problem_]
In the first example the photograph, Fig. 35, shows the porch of
an old English country church. Let us see how this subject has
been interpreted in pen and ink by Mr. D. A. Gregg, Fig. 36. In
respect to the lines, the original composition presents nothing
essentially unpleasant. Where the strong accent of a picture occurs
in the centre, however, it is generally desirable to avoid much
emphasis at the edges. For this reason the pen drawing has been
"vignetted," - that is to say, permitted to fade away irregularly
at the edges. Regarding the values, it will be seen that there is
no absolute white in the photograph. A literal rendering of such
low color would, as we saw in the preceding chapter, be out of
the question; and so the essential values which directly contribute
to the expression of the subject and which are independent of local
color or accidental effect have to be sought out. We observe, then,
that the principal note of the photograph is made by the dark part
of the roof under the porch relieved against the light wall beyond.
This is the direct result of light and shade, and is therefore
logically adopted as the principal note of Mr. Gregg's sketch also.
The wall at this point is made perfectly white to heighten the
contrast. To still further increase the light area, the upper part
of the porch has been left almost white, the markings suggesting
the construction of the weather-beaten timber serving to give it
a faint gray tone sufficient to relieve it from the white wall.
The low color of the grass, were it rendered literally, would make
the drawing too heavy and uninteresting, and this is therefore only
suggested in the sketch. The roof of the main building, being equally
objectionable on account of its mass of low tone, is similarly
treated. Mr. Gregg's excellent handling of the old woodwork of the
porch is well worthy of study.
[Side note: _Second Problem_]
Let us take another example. The photograph in Fig. 37 shows a
moat-house in Normandy; and, except that the low tones of the foliage
are exaggerated by the camera, the conditions are practically those
which we would have to consider were we making a sketch on the spot.
First of all, then, does the subject, from the point of view at
which the photograph is taken, compose well?* It cannot be said that
it does. The vertical lines made by the two towers are unpleasantly
emphasized by the trees behind them. The tree on the left were
much better reduced in height and placed somewhat to the right,
so that the top should fill out the awkward angles of the roof
formed by the junction of the tower and the main building. The
trees on the right might be lowered also, but otherwise permitted
to retain their present relation. The growth of ivy on the tower
takes an ugly outline, and might be made more interestingly irregular
in form.
[Footnote *: The student is advised to consult "Composition," by
Arthur W. Dow. [New York, 1898]]
[Illustration: FIG. 37 FROM A PHOTOGRAPH]
The next consideration is the disposition of the values. In the
photograph the whites are confined to the roadway of the bridge
and the bottom of the tower. This is evidently due, however, to
local color rather than to the direction of the light, which strikes
the nearer tower from the right, the rest of the walls being in
shadow. While the black areas of the picture are large enough to
carry a mass of gray without sacrificing the sunny look, such a
scheme would be likely to produce a labored effect. Two alternative
schemes readily suggest themselves: First, to make the archway the
principal dark, the walls light, with a light half-tone for the
roof, and a darker effect for the trees on the right. Or, second,
to make these trees themselves the principal dark, as suggested by
the photograph, allowing them to count against the gray of the
roof and the ivy of the tower. This latter scheme is that which
has been adopted in the sketch, Fig. 38.
[Illustration: FIG. 38 C. D. M.]
It will be noticed that the trees are not nearly so dark as in
the photograph. If they were, they would be overpowering in so
large an area of white. It was thought better, also, to change the
direction of the light, so that the dark ivy, instead of acting
contradictorily to the effect, might lend character to the shaded
side. The lower portion of the nearer tower was toned in, partly
to qualify the vertical line of the tower, which would have been
unpleasant if the shading were uniform, and partly to carry the
gray around to the entrance. It was thought advisable, also, to
cut from the foreground, raising the upper limit of the picture
correspondingly. (It is far from my intention, however, to convey
the impression that any liberties may be taken with a subject in
order to persuade it into a particular scheme of composition; and
in this very instance an artistic photographer could probably have
discovered a position for his camera which would have obviated the
necessity for any change whatever; - a nearer view of the building,
for one thing, would have considerably lowered the trees.)
[Illustration: FIG. 39 FROM A PHOTOGRAPH]
[Side note: _Third Problem_]
We will consider still another subject. The photograph, Fig. 39,
shows a street in Holland. In this case, the first thing we have
to determine is where the interest of the subject centres. In such
a perspective the salient point of the picture often lies in a
foreground building; or, if the street be merely a setting for the
representation of some incident, in a group of foreground figures.
In either case the emphasis should be placed in the foreground,
the distant vanishing lines of the street being rendered more or
less vaguely. In the present subject, however, the converging sky
and street lines are broken by the quaint clock-tower. This and the
buildings underneath it appeal to us at once as the most important
elements of the picture. The nearer buildings present nothing
intrinsically interesting, and therefore serve no better purpose
than to lead the eye to the centre of interest. Whatever actual
values these intermediate buildings have that will hinder their
usefulness in this regard can, therefore, be changed or actually
ignored without affecting the integrity of the sketch or causing
any pangs of conscience.
The building on the extreme left shows very strong contrasts of
color in the black shadow of the eaves and of the shop-front below.
These contrasts, coming as they do at the edge of the picture,
are bad. They would act like a showy frame on a delicate drawing,
keeping the eye from the real subject. It may be objected, however,
that it is natural that the contrasts should be stronger in the
foreground. Yes; but in looking straight at the clock-tower one does
not see any such dark shadow at the top of the very uninteresting
building in the left foreground. The camera saw it, because the
camera with its hundred eyes sees everything, and does not interest
itself about any one thing in particular. Besides, if the keeper
of the shop had the bad taste to paint it dark we are not bound
to make a record of the fact; nor need we assume that it was done
out of regard to the pictorial possibilities of the street. We
decide, therefore, to render, as faithfully as we may, the values
of the clock-tower and its immediate surroundings, and to disregard
the discordant elements; and we have no hesitation in selecting
for principal emphasis in our drawing, Fig. 40, the shadow under
the projecting building. This dark accent will count brilliantly
against the foreground and the walls of the buildings, which we
will treat broadly as if white, ignoring the slight differences
in value shown in the photograph. We retain, however, the literal
values of the clock-tower and the buildings underneath it, and
express as nearly as we can their interesting variations of texture.
The buildings on the right are too black in the photograph, and
these, as well as the shadow thrown across the street, we will
considerably lighten. After some experiment, we find that the building
on the extreme left is a nuisance, and we omit it. Even then, the
one with the balcony next to it requires to be toned down in its
strong values, and so the shadows here are made much lighter, the
walls being kept white. It will be found that anything like a strong
emphasis of the projecting eaves of the building would detract
from the effect of the tower, so that the shadow under the eaves
is, therefore, made grayer than in the photograph, while that of
the balcony below is made stronger than the shadow of the eaves,
but is lightened at the edge of the drawing to throw the emphasis
toward the centre.
[Illustration: FIG. 40 C. D. M.]
To add interest to the picture, and more especially to give life
to the shadows, several figures are introduced. It will be noticed
that the cart is inserted at the focal point of the drawing to
better assist the perspective.
CHAPTER VI
ARCHITECTURAL DRAWING
It is but a few years since architects' perspectives were "built
up" (it would be a mistake to say "drawn") by means of a T-square
and the ruling pen; and if architectural drawing has not quite
kept pace with that for general illustration since, a backward
glance over the professional magazines encourages a feeling of
comparative complacency. That so high a standard or so artistic
a character is not observable in architectural as in general
illustration is, I think, not difficult to explain. Very few of the
clever architectural draughtsmen are illustrators by profession.
Few, even of those who are generally known as illustrators, are
anything more - I should perhaps say anything _less_ - than versatile
architects; and yet Mr. Pennell, who would appear to assume, in
his book on drawing, that the point of view of the architect is
normally pictorial, seems at a loss to explain why Mr. Robert Blum,
for instance, can illustrate an architectural subject more artistically
than any of the draughtsmen in the profession. Without accepting
his premises, it is remarkably creditable to architecture that
it counts among its members in this country such men as Mr. B.
G. Goodhue and Mr. Wilson Eyre, Jr., and in England such thorough
artists as Mr. Prentice and Mr. Ernest George - men known even to
distinction for their skill along lines of purely architectural
practice, yet any one of whom would, I venture to say, cause
considerable displacement did he invade the ranks of magazine
illustrators. Moreover (and the suggestion is not unkindly offered),
were the architects and the illustrators to change places architecture
would suffer most by the process.
[Side note: _The Architects' Case_]
That the average architect should be incapable of artistically
illustrating his own design, ought, I think, to be less an occasion
for surprise than that few painters, whose point of view is essentially
pictorial, can make even a tolerable interpretation in line of their
own paintings. Be it remembered that the pictures made by the architect
are seldom the records of actualities. The buildings themselves
are merely contemplated, and the illustrations are worked up from
geometrical elevations in the office, very, very far from Nature.
Moreover, the subjects are not infrequently such as lend themselves
with an ill grace to picturesque illustration. The structure to be
depicted may, for instance, be a heavy cubical mass with a bald
uninteresting sky-line; or it may be a tall office building, impossible
to reconcile with natural accessories either in pictorial scale or
in composition. These natural accessories, too, the draughtsman
must, with an occasional recourse to his photograph album, evolve
out of his inner consciousness. When it is further considered that
such structures, even when actualities, are uncompromisingly stiff
and immaculate in their newness, presenting absolutely none of
those interesting accidents so dear to the artist, and perhaps with
nothing whatever about them of picturesque suggestion, we have a
problem presented which is somewhat analogous to that presented by
the sculpturesque possibilities of "fashionable trousering." That,
with such uninspiring conditions, architectural illustration does not
develop so interesting a character nor attain to so high a standard
as distinguishes general illustration is not to be wondered at. It
is rather an occasion for surprise that it exhibits so little of
the artificiality of the fashion-plate after all, and that the better
part of it, at least, is not more unworthy than figure illustration
would be were it denied the invaluable aid of the living model.
So much by way of apology.
[Side note: _The Architects' Point of View_]
The architectural perspective, however, is not to be regarded purely
from the pictorial point of view. It is an illustration first, a
picture afterwards, and almost invariably deals with an individual
building, which is the essential subject. This building cannot,
therefore, be made a mere foil for interesting "picturesqueries,"
nor subordinated to any scenic effect of landscape or chiaroscuro.
Natural accessories or interesting bits of street life may be added
to give it an appropriate setting; but the result must clearly
read "Building, with landscape," not "Landscape, with building."
Much suggestion for the sympathetic handling of particular subjects
may be found in the character of the architecture itself. The
illustrator ought to enter into the spirit of the designer, ought to
feel just what natural accessories lend themselves most harmoniously
to this or that particular type. If the architecture be quaint
and picturesque it must not have prosaic surroundings. If, on the
other hand, it be formal or monumental, the character and scale of
the accessories should be accordingly serious and dignified. The
rendering ought also to vary with the subject, - a free picturesque
manner for the one, a more studied and responsible handling for
the other. Technique is the language of art, and a stiff pompous
phraseology will accord ill with a story of quaint humor or pathos,
while the homely diction that might answer very well would be sure to
struggle at a disadvantage with the stately meanings and diplomatic
subtleties of a state document.
[Side note: _Rendering of Detail_]
It would be well for the student, before venturing upon whole subjects,
to learn to render details, such as windows, cornices, etc. Windows
are a most important feature of the architectural drawing, and the
beginner must study them carefully, experimenting for the method
which will best represent their glassy surfaces. No material gives
such play of light and shade as glass does. One window is never
absolutely like another; so that while a certain uniformity in
their value may be required for breadth of effect in the drawing of
a building, there is plenty of opportunity for incidental variety
in their treatment.
A few practical hints on the rendering of windows may prove serviceable.
Always emphasize the sash. Where there is no recess, as in wooden
buildings, strengthen the inner line of sash, as in Fig. 41. In
masonry buildings the frame and sash can be given their proper
values, the area of wood being treated broadly, without regard
to the individual members. The wood may, however, be left white
if required, as would be the case in Colonial designs. In either
case the dark shadow which the sash casts on the glass should be
suggested, if the scale of the drawing be such as to permit of it.
Do not try to show too much. One is apt to make a fussy effect,
if, for instance, one insists on always shading the soffit of the
masonry opening, especially if the scale of the drawing be small.
Besides, a white soffit is not a false but merely a forced value,
as in strong sunlight the reflected light is considerable. If the
frame be left white, however, the soffit ought to be shaded, otherwise
it will be difficult to keep the values distinct. In respect of
wooden buildings there is no need to always complete the mouldings
of the architrave. Notice in Fig. 41 that, in the window without
the muntins, the mouldings have been carried round the top to give
color, but that in the other they are merely suggested at the corners
so as to avoid confusion. Care should be taken to avoid mechanical
rendering of the muntins. For the glass itself, a uniformly flat
tone is to be avoided. The tones should soften vaguely. It will be
found, too, that it is not advisable to have a strong dark effect
at the top of the window and another at the bottom; one should
predominate.
[Illustration: FIG. 41 C. D. M.]
The student after careful study of Fig. 41 should make from it
enlarged drawings, and afterwards, laying the book aside, proceed
to render them in his own way. When he has done so, let him compare
his work with the originals. This process ought to be repeated
several times, the aim being always for _similarity_, not for
_literalness_ of effect. If he can get equally good results with
another method he need not be disconcerted at the lack of any further
resemblance.
The cornice with its shadow is another salient feature. In short
shadows, such as those cast by cornices, it is well, if a sunny
effect be desired, to accent the bottom edge of the shadow. The shadow
lines ought to be generally parallel, but with enough variation to
obviate a mechanical effect. They need not be vertical lines, - in
fact it is better that they should take the same slant as the light.
If they are not absolutely perpendicular, however, it is well to make
them distinctly oblique, otherwise the effect will be unpleasant.
A clever sketch of a cornice by Mr. George F. Newton is shown in
Fig. 42. Notice how well the texture of the brick is expressed
by the looseness of the pen work. Some of the detail, too, is
dexterously handled, notably the bead and button moulding.
The strength of the cornice shadow should be determined by the tone
of the roof above it. To obtain for this shadow the very distinct
value which it ought to have, however, does not require that the
roof be kept always much lighter than it. In the gable roof in
Fig. 57, the tone of the roof is shaded lighter as it approaches
the eaves, so that the shadow may count more emphatically. This
order may be reversed, as in the case of a building with dark roof
and light walls, in which case the shadow may be grayer than the
lower portion of the roof, as in "B" in Fig. 44.
[Illustration: FIG. 42 GEORGE F. NEWTON]
But the beginner should not yet hurry on to whole subjects. A church
porch, as in Fig. 35, or a dormer with its shadow cast on a roof,
as in Fig. 43, will be just as beneficial a study for him as an
entire building, and will afford quite as good an opportunity for
testing his knowledge of the principles of pen drawing, with the
added advantage that either of the subjects mentioned can be mapped
out in a few minutes, and that a failure or two, therefore, will
not prove so discouraging as if a more intricate subject had to
be re-drawn. I have known promising beginners to give up pen and
ink drawing in despair because they found themselves unequal to
subjects which would have presented not a few difficulties to the
experienced illustrator. When the beginner grows faint-hearted,
let him seek consolation and encouragement in the thought that were
pen drawing something to be mastered in a week or a month there
would be small merit in the accomplishment.
[Illustration: FIG. 43 C. D. M.]
[Side note: _A General System_]
It is a common fault of students to dive into the picture unthinkingly,
beginning anywhere, without the vaguest plan of a general effect,
whereas it is of the utmost importance that every stroke of the
pen be made with intelligent regard to the ultimate result. The
following general method will be found valuable.
Pencil the outline of the entire subject before beginning the pen
work. It will not do to start on the rendering as soon as the building
alone is pencilled out, leaving the accessories to be put in as
one goes along. The adjacent buildings, the foliage, and even the
figures must be drawn - carefully drawn - before the pen is taken up.
The whole subject from the very beginning should be under control,
and to that end it becomes necessary to have all the elements of
it pre-arranged.
[Side note: _Arrangement of the Values_]
Next scheme out the values. This is the time to do the thinking. Do
not start out rashly as soon as everything is outlined in pencil,
confident in the belief that all windows, for instance, are dark,
and that you may as well make them so at once and be done with
them. This will be only to court disaster. Besides, all windows
are not dark; they may be very light indeed. The color value of
nothing is absolute. A shadow may seem almost black till a figure
passes into it, when it may become quite gray by comparison. So a
window with the sun shining full upon it, or even one in shade, on
which a reflected light is cast, may be brilliantly light until the
next instant a cloud shadow is reflected in it, making it densely
black. Arrange the values, therefore, with reference to one general
effect, deciding first of all on the direction of the light. Should
this be such as to throw large areas of shadow, these masses of
gray will be important elements in the color-scheme. An excellent
way to study values is to make a tracing-paper copy of the line
drawing and to experiment on this for the color with charcoal,
making several sketches if necessary. After having determined on
a satisfactory scheme, put fixatif on the rough sketch and keep
it in sight. Otherwise, one is liable, especially if the subject
is an intricate one, to be led astray by little opportunities for
interesting effects here and there, only to discover, when too
late, that these effects do not hang together and that the drawing
has lost its breadth. The rough sketch is to the draughts man what
manuscript notes are to the lecturer.
[Side note: _Treatment of Detail_]
Do not be over-conscious of detail. It is a common weakness of the
architectural draughts man to be too sophisticated in his pictorial
illustration. He knows so much about the building that no matter how
many thousand yards away from it he may stand he will see things
that would not reveal themselves to another with the assistance
of a field-glass. He is conscious of the fact that there are just
so many brick courses to the foot, that the clapboards are laid
just so many inches to the weather, that there are just so many
mouldings in the belt course, - that everything in general is very,
very mathematical. This is not because his point of view is too
big, but because it is too small. He who sees so much never by any