Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
Ragaisis
member
Reged: 05/16/08
Posts: 76
Loc: Mequon, WI
|
|
Gang,
I'm a VERY beginning sketcher. Yes, I've seen children's crayon drawings that look better than my sketches.
I've been through the tutorials here and have learned a ton. There's so much here that it'll be years before I can get around to actually trying all the things that people recommend.
One thing that I haven't found is how people get that very nice effect of a soft halo around stars when the sketches are scanned into the computer and cleaned up for posting here. It seems to be some sort of digital effect rather than the use of blending on the original sketch. Or am I way off base? Can someone enlighten me?
Thanks,
Chris
P.S. I'll be attending my first star party this weekend - Astrofest. One goal is to come away with a sketch that I'm not too embarrassed to post here.
-------------------- Televue TV85 APO
Vortex Razor 8x42
|
Jeremy Perez
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 08/12/04
Posts: 1676
Loc: Flagstaff, Arizona, USA
|
|
Chris,
You can get that soft halo a couple ways.
The direct approach is to make sure you've darkened the star fairly well with graphite (or charcoal) and then use a blending stump, tissue or just your finger to swirl outward from the star. This will give the impression of glare around it.
You can see an example of this approach in this sketch:
NGC 7062
As you noticed though, digital tools can be used to do this too. I put together a tutorial a couple years ago that shows one way to do it (glow gets added in step 9):
Double Star Digitizing
I'm sure others will be able to offer some more suggestions too. Let me know if you have any questions. I'm looking forward to your sketch.
--------------------
Orion SVP 6LT (6" f/8 Newt) || Orion XT8 (8" f/6 Newt) || 15x70 Oberwerk Binoculars
The Belt Of Venus || Astro-Sketch Gallery || Astro-Sketching Resources || Astro-Photo Gallery
|
Ragaisis
member
Reged: 05/16/08
Posts: 76
Loc: Mequon, WI
|
|
Thanks for those great links. Now I see... I'll see about getting some sketches from Astrofest this weekend scanned in and maybe can post a before/after shot.
Chris
-------------------- Televue TV85 APO
Vortex Razor 8x42
|
rolandlinda3
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 01/24/06
Posts: 1628
Loc: Crozet VA 22932
|
|
Not sure which sketches you are referring to. Simple scanning does not produce a halo. My sketches are straight scanning; if there is a halo it's because I saw a bit of "nebulosity" around a star. If I don't see any, I don't draw any. I do, however, make a common mistake when applying some touches on a sketch that inadvertantly produces a little whitish area around a star. It's bad enough and not representative, I go back and blacken the area. All depends on what you want to portray.
Roland
|
markseibold
sage
Reged: 01/19/08
Posts: 470
Loc: Portland Oregon
|
|
Quote:
Gang,
I'm a VERY beginning sketcher. Yes, I've seen children's crayon drawings that look better than my sketches.
I've been through the tutorials here and have learned a ton. There's so much here that it'll be years before I can get around to actually trying all the things that people recommend.
One thing that I haven't found is how people get that very nice effect of a soft halo around stars when the sketches are scanned into the computer and cleaned up for posting here. It seems to be some sort of digital effect rather than the use of blending on the original sketch. Or am I way off base? Can someone enlighten me?
Thanks,
Chris ************* Chris
Actually children do better because they are uninhibited and not afraid to experiment (read: make innocent mistakes and not fear judgement. By middle age or early adult, we are so intent on avoiding the intimidation of laws and rules, that many are afraid to try at all.) I commend you for trying and inquiring here first! 
I am not sure what others are referring to here with "scanning" as I would never depend on a computer or technology to embellish my art that was done initially as all by hand. *I have submitted one Photoshop work of Jupiter, once but I prefer my brain and mind and bare hand that can do that like all the others, Pollock, Dali, Picasso, and such. (See my lunar image with Jupiter as a soft star-like point in this months contest poll- Top of sketching forum line entries.)
If it is pastels you are speaking of, a star is made by placing a hard pressed point to the paper surface, preferably a sharp chalk pencil, and then a lightly touched scuffing of a soft white or very pale pastel chalk color as desired, around the star point. You may then use whatever method till your hearts content to smudge the chalk lightly around the star point. Many here use blending stumps, their bare fingers, etc. I prefer a cotton swab (Q-Tip) or cotton ball as I am resourceful for materials, [read cheap.] I suppose the blending stump looks more professional at public gatherings but anything including a Kleenex or napkin or your sharp soft corner of your shirt sleeve will do the same.
It is more a question of how much patience you can tolerate. Welcome to the world of art, humiliation and patience! 
-best of luck to you
Mark
My Gallery (see all four pages) > http://www.cloudynights.com/photopost/showgallery.php?ppuser=37924&cat=500
|
WadeVC
Carpal Tunnel
 
Reged: 12/02/05
Posts: 2799
Loc: Lodi, California,
|
|
Chris,
There are many ways of achieving this effect, but most are nothing more than mere variations of the other. As Jeremy pointed out, there are several tutorials here on CN that are a great source of information to learning this technique.
Jeremy graciously offered a couple of tutorials, and I would like to offer one as well that covers the digitizing of an Open Cluster, which can be found here:
NGC7789 - Digital Tutorial
Look through the many tutorials and just give it a go.
I do want to stress one major aspect of sketching at the Eyepiece: This is NOT and artists forum, nor is anyone "graded" on the quality of their work. I have heard Jeremey say before, and I must certainly agree...do NOT worry about the quality per se, but be more concerned with the accuracy of the sketch.
For example, if sketching a double stars/star system, strive to represent the accurate placement(s) of the stars involved. The same for any object.
"Realism" or artistic value is NOT a requirement, and should not be. But strive to be accurate, and most important of all: Have Fun Doing it!
Remember, sketching at the EP is just a visual log of your observing session(s), and there are many tools and mediums available for those so interested. Find what works best for you, and enjoy!
I have long been an advocate here on CN (as well as others) that there is no "standard" one must adhere to to enjoy this hobby other than one: Do it to please yourself, and NOT others. If you share your sketches and others like them, great, If they do not like them, that is their opinion...but if YOU like them, you have already discovered the joy of sketching at the EP.
Best of luck, give it a try, and share your final results with us here as we would like to see your efforts.
--------------------
Orion XTi10 f/4.7
Orion XTi8 f/5.9
Meade NGC 70mm f/10
Orion UltraView 10x50 Wide-Angle Binoculars
My Sketch Gallery
My Astronomy Blog
A wise man can see more from the bottom of a well than a fool can from a mountain top.
|
markseibold
sage
Reged: 01/19/08
Posts: 470
Loc: Portland Oregon
|
|
Quote:
Chris,
There are many ways of achieving this effect, but most are nothing more than mere variations of the other. As Jeremy pointed out, there are several tutorials here on CN that are a great source of information to learning this technique.
Jeremy graciously offered a couple of tutorials, and I would like to offer one as well that covers the digitizing of an Open Cluster, which can be found here:
NGC7789 - Digital Tutorial
I do want to stress one major aspect of sketching at the Eyepiece: This is NOT and artists forum, nor is anyone "graded" on the quality of their work. I have heard Jeremey say before, and I must certainly agree...do NOT worry about the quality per se, but be more concerned with the accuracy of the sketch.
For example, if sketching a double stars/star system, strive to represent the accurate placement(s) of the stars involved. The same for any object.
"Realism" or artistic value is NOT a requirement, and should not be. But strive to be accurate, and most important of all: Have Fun Doing it!
Remember, sketching at the EP is just a visual log of your observing session(s), and there are many tools and mediums available for those so interested. Find what works best for you, and enjoy!
I have long been an advocate here on CN (as well as others) that there is no "standard" one must adhere to to enjoy this hobby other than one: Do it to please yourself, and NOT others. If you share your sketches and others like them, great, If they do not like them, that is their opinion...but if YOU like them, you have already discovered the joy of sketching at the EP.
To all and especially Wade and Chris I want to thank Wade for posting this info about digital tutorials as it appears that Roland and I and perhaps others may have misunderstood Chris' questions about digitizing to achieve an artistic and creative effect of a halo appearance around stars.
I was completely unaware that there are programs which have a preliminary star field in the screen to accurately portray the star positions, if that is what I am seeing in these tutorials. I had the impression that all astro artists were working entirely from a blank slate, whether that be a canvas, pastel paper, Photoshop blank screen, etc. I had thought that everyone who produces astro artwork, worked entirely from a blank slate.
I know there are controversial arguments from some who claim that Photoshop and other computer programs are not true classic art mediums as I saw a statement from one such member recently that he refuses to post his hand drawn artwork in the same forum among “Gimped and Photoshopped” works. I still do not know what the term “Gimped” means.
Furthermore I want to apologize to Chris as I did not mean to imply that others should not execute artwork using any digital technology. That of course is a personal choice of all who engage in any creative process. Although I know several have commented here at times that they do not believe that Photoshop art and hand drawn pastels, paintings an/or other classic mediums should be combined in the same forum.
I would hope that Chris at least tries to experiment a little with just old fashioned sketching to paper at first.
As Roland, Frank an myself usually do with pastels, and I am sure I am speaking for many others aside from us old timers, I believe that the old school methods and allowing a new student of artwork and sketching should at least enjoy a little of the classic artistic process for starters. Thre are simply many untold pocesses taing place when one touches the chalk to the paper, that will benfit your artistic enjoyment, that cannot be reproduced with a mouse clicking to a sterile computer screen of filtered matrix dots.
I know many people say that they cannot draw or that their drawings look childlike or they are simply disappointed with their work at first. I would invite them to ask any master artist what that artist thought of their own first attempts to sketch and draw. We all began with a crawl-draw before we could fetch a great sketch.
All artists have heard it many times from our non-artist friends; “God! If I could draw like you, I would quite my office job and make a million as an artist riht now! Little do they know the long years of humiliating and patience building process that is part of the development to the stepping stones of great achievement in art. Herein lies this great artistic process. From your first works, and I recommend that you start with real hardcopy paper and old world mediums like graphite and pastel chalks because you will immediately produce a permanent hard copy archival work, that can be looked back on to review in your portfolio at any time for years to come.
This does not always happen with electronically and digitally produced works. Many digital artists will only save their digital works in electronic memory when they find that it is completed on the screen or worse, accidentally delete several hours of work with no hard copy remaining. Believe me, it happens in our new world of convenient technologies. These problems even span to the professional world. I had an MRI image taken of my shoulder injury last week- They saved it to the latest technology- A CD but not the old world large negative film sheet. I waited a week for my appointment to review the image with my doctor. When I got to the office she says, we cannot look at your image today Mark as our computers are malfunctioning and awaiting repair next week. Had the radiologist made an old world film negative, even with a power failure, we could have merely held the film sheet image up to a daylight window, or for that matter a candle light and the important information could have been seen immediately. It could be life saving or life threatening at that moment. But chalk it up to a computer failure again. Like the HAL in 2001: A Space Odyssey, they cannot be trusted due to human error in the computer.
This old world process of sketching as many still do is so gratifying, and I am sure as a new art student, you will read many other sources to confirm this. Read no further than when my first abstract surreal pastel sketches of a solar prominence that I observed through my solar h-alpha telescope appeared in NASA’s Spaceweather.com front page for three days on October 14 ~ 16, 2006 (see their back dated archives) as I received email from around the world. I had no expectations that many people would write to me commending that they were so glad to see “real hand drawn art” for a change in the web, instead of another digital photograph or simulated computer image that seems to over-saturate the web these days. I look forward to your first work with great enthusiasm Chris! Whatever you do ill be appreciated by all, but it is you that will be the most gratified in what you accomplish with your continued efforts.
Best of luck!
Mark
|
WadeVC
Carpal Tunnel
 
Reged: 12/02/05
Posts: 2799
Loc: Lodi, California,
|
|
Quote:
I was completely unaware that there are programs which have a preliminary star field in the screen to accurately portray the star positions, if that is what I am seeing in these tutorials.
Maybe I am reading this wrong, but I can assure you that I do NOT use any sort of a program that has a "primary star field that portrays the star positions"??
ALL of my digital sketches begin with standard pencil sketches I make at the EP, which are then scanned into PhotoShop, (or Blender, or Fractal Design Painter) and then used as a template to create a digital version of the original.
As a matter of fact, the first line of the tutorial I linked to stated:
As with all my digital sketches, the first step is to scan my original sketch and adjust the levels so that I can see every star/nuance of the sketch on the computer.
Personally, I do not know if there are programs that "have a preliminary star field in the screen to accurately portray the star positions."; but I don't use such.
I think this is one of the biggest misnomers and a reason for some of the dissent among the so-called "true" artists and those like myself and others who are more comfortable in the digital realm. Just far too many believe that digital art is cheating, using shortcuts, ect., and that only the "old-school" artists posses any sort of merit, talent, etc.
For me personally, I can more accurately create a diffused glow in PhotoShop with say "Blur" + "Gaussian Blur" + "Opacity" + "Blend" and/or "Color Mode" versus using a blending stump on paper. It is for this reason my original sketches focus on the proper placement of the object(s) in my sketch, as well as extremely accurate notes of color(s) or subtleness of the object(s); and then I use PhotoShop to more accurately create or finesse the finer nuances of the object(s) digitally.
As in the case of one of my tutorials, the original sketch took almost 3 hours at the EP (and the back and neck let me know about it); and another 3 hours to digitize the original.
I do know of some who will use a star chart or atlas as a background to check the position of the star field against their sketches, but as far as I know, there are no programs out there that give or supply a "preliminary star field".
I really do hope there comes a time when "traditional" artists realize that the only difference between pencil & paper or oil & canvas art and digital art are the tools and medium used. The time, effort, passion, enjoyment, talent & skills are no more or less from one to another.
IMHO, it is comments such as:
"I was completely unaware that there are programs which have a preliminary star field in the screen to accurately portray the star positions, if that is what I am seeing in these tutorials."
Is nothing more than evidentiary proof that there is still a BIG divide among "traditional" artists and digital artists in that old school artists honestly believe that digital art is nothing more than a computerized template that is tweaked to reach an end result.
Quote:
Many digital artists will only save their digital works in electronic memory when they find that it is completed on the screen or worse, accidentally delete several hours of work with no hard copy remaining.
I can not speak for others in this regard, but I output ALL of my digital sketches on one of my high-end printers (Epson Stylus Pro 7880 or Epson Stylus Pro 11880); and naturally I keep all of my original pencil sketches as well. I usually output the digital sketches at a 19" x 17" poster format.
As the Pre-Press Supervisor of a large print shop, I will often times output my sketches on the tail-piece of a 4 or 8-up SIG and the pressman will print this along with the actual client file, my sketch fitting nicely on the gripper side of paper that is usually trimmed and thrown away by the bindery department.
--------------------
Orion XTi10 f/4.7
Orion XTi8 f/5.9
Meade NGC 70mm f/10
Orion UltraView 10x50 Wide-Angle Binoculars
My Sketch Gallery
My Astronomy Blog
A wise man can see more from the bottom of a well than a fool can from a mountain top.
|
rodelaet
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/28/06
Posts: 2658
Loc: 50°56' N - 4°58' E (Belgium)
|
|
Quote:
Personally, I do not know if there are programs that "have a preliminary star field in the screen to accurately portray the star positions."; but I don't use such.
Skycharts is such a program, as many other planetarium programs, and I'm happy to use them.
I use skycharts to compare my field sketch with, when it comes to correct faulty star positions. It happens that the anchor stars on the sketch are a little sloppy. And then the whole starfield is a little out of wack. Some may call this cheating, but I don't agree. I'm not an artist in the first place. My goal is to render an 'eyepiece impression' the best that I can, based on an eyepiece observation. For me, to have a souvenir of my observation, and for the occasional stargazer to understand what view he might expect. And I have fun with it.
The exact star positions of many stars are well known. What is wrong with using that knowledge? Some sketchers use a template to draw saturn and its rings or Jupiter. Are they cheating?
There is more to sketching than just marking star positions. Star brightnesses, nebulous features, structures in galaxies and globulars are very important as well. All these aspects make observing and sketching an exciting experience, which I try to include in a sketch. No planetary program or photograph can reflect the visual impression of the human eye, as a sketch can do.
I see no harm if someone uses a template with the asterism of the Pleyades on, to sketch his/her observation with. The star positions are well known. But the observer may note his personal impression of colors, brightnesses, star patterns, nebulae, etc on that template, and turn it into his peronal eyepiece experience.
Just my 2c's.
And Chris, My simple advice to you is to try and experiment as much as you can, trial and error go a long way.
-------------------- Rony
My Astronomy Sketches
My Binocular Sketches
Edited by rodelaet (09/06/08 12:47 PM)
|
WadeVC
Carpal Tunnel
 
Reged: 12/02/05
Posts: 2799
Loc: Lodi, California,
|
|
Quote:
I'm not an artist in the first place. My goal is to render an 'eyepiece impression' the best that I can, based on an eyepiece observation. For me, to have a souvenir of my observation, and for the occasional stargazer to understand what view he might expect. And I have fun with it. The exact star positions of many stars are well known. What is wrong with using that knowledge? Some sketchers use a template to draw saturn and its rings or Jupiter. Are they cheating?
Very well put Rony. As you pointed out, it is about having fun and the enjoyment of such. I, like you and many others, never professed to be "professional" artists, nor do we desire to make a living as such. Simply put, we enjoy the creative process and in return having a concrete record of our observations.
--------------------
Orion XTi10 f/4.7
Orion XTi8 f/5.9
Meade NGC 70mm f/10
Orion UltraView 10x50 Wide-Angle Binoculars
My Sketch Gallery
My Astronomy Blog
A wise man can see more from the bottom of a well than a fool can from a mountain top.
|
markseibold
sage
Reged: 01/19/08
Posts: 470
Loc: Portland Oregon
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not an artist in the first place. My goal is to render an 'eyepiece impression' the best that I can, based on an eyepiece observation. For me, to have a souvenir of my observation, and for the occasional stargazer to understand what view he might expect. And I have fun with it. The exact star positions of many stars are well known. What is wrong with using that knowledge? Some sketchers use a template to draw saturn and its rings or Jupiter. Are they cheating?
Very well put Rony. As you pointed out, it is about having fun and the enjoyment of such. I, like you and many others, never professed to be "professional" artists, nor do we desire to make a living as such. Simply put, we enjoy the creative process and in return having a concrete record of our observations.
* * * Wade
This raises some interesting thoughts. What happens if someone asks to buy a copy of your work and you sell it? Many would define one who sells his art as a professional. What if you refuse to sell a copy? Would this defy the definition of the term "professional"? I just noticed that under the definition of professional, is also expert. Under the definition of expert, I see amateur: skilled, practiced, proficient, knowledgeable. Are we to avoid these qualities so as just to have fun and avoid being labeled as an artist or a professional?
Are professionals and artists not allowed to have fun? Even if they do this part time and not for a living? I don't think that I can make a living at this. I never professed to be a professional either but when people started demanding to buy my work, should I have tried to make efforts to show less talent, deny the categorical label as an artist so I could just have fun? When I was asked by a local university to teach astronomy as an adjunct professor for a term to a fully accredited class of 25 students, I wondered if I was really qualified as a professional. Of course I was being paid to provide these teaching services as a professional. I guess that made me a professional astronomer for awhile. I chose to be addressed as a professional amateur instead. I held no degree and just after the interview I had just seen the equation in a book about MBA’s and unqualified degree holders without experience in life to qualify for jobs. The equation read: Confidence minus competence equals arrogance. I knew then that I was not really qualified to take the astronomy teaching job as I did not have all the other necessary disciplines like physics, math, classroom practicum or psychology but I did it anyway as it was the chance of lifetime. Ironically, they awarded me the position three days before my 50th birthday. What a gift I thought!
Now what if someone reveres your words here in this forum, appearing as professional? Do you deny professionalism? I think that you and Rony have made the most valuable statements and points here about why we do this. It should be fun. In return, if we get a little practiced and produce better quality work, it may transcend art and also become science for all to learn from. Then again what if it is demanded for sales? Great art and science transcends monetary value.
I still believe that we are all born artists and scientists desiring to become professionals. Half of the fun is the journey to get there.
Mark
|
WadeVC
Carpal Tunnel
 
Reged: 12/02/05
Posts: 2799
Loc: Lodi, California,
|
|
Quote:
What happens if someone asks to buy a copy of your work and you sell it? Many would define one who sells his art as a professional.
That could apply to anything, not just art. If I were to sell a car, would that make me a professional car dealership or salesman? Hardly.
Unfortunately there are too many who honestly believe that just because they sell something, they are a professional in that arena.
If I were to sell one of my sketches, I suppose on a technical make-me-feel-important level I could be considered a professional. But that is not what I consider as being a professional in any given field. I consider a professional as one who makes a living (or a better part of it) based solely on their area of expertise, training and/or skills. To me, there is a BIG difference in professional quality versus being a professional in a given feild or arena.
Quote:
What if you refuse to sell a copy? Would this defy the definition of the term "professional"?
Yes. One does not have to be a professional to claim their right of copyright to any given medium or their refusal to sell that right. U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 - 810
Quote:
Are professionals and artists not allowed to have fun? Even if they do this part time and not for a living?
Somehow I missed in my post where I said that a professional can't have fun? However, if one relies on making a living in their given profession, there certainly are added stresses that the hobbyist is not affected by.
Quote:
Now what if someone reveres your words here in this forum, appearing as professional? Do you deny professionalism?
Yes, I do, have, and always will deny being a professional in this field, arena or profession. I would in no way try to stroke my ego in a way as to try and appear as a professional in the arena of Astronomy...be it sketching, drawing, observing or any other aspect of this science.
My skills may improve, and I may become more proficient at it, but to be considered a professional is, to me, an insult to those who truly are professionals in this feild.
--------------------
Orion XTi10 f/4.7
Orion XTi8 f/5.9
Meade NGC 70mm f/10
Orion UltraView 10x50 Wide-Angle Binoculars
My Sketch Gallery
My Astronomy Blog
A wise man can see more from the bottom of a well than a fool can from a mountain top.
|
jdavalos
member
Reged: 08/24/04
Posts: 60
Loc: Guadalajara, Méx 20.30N\103.20...
|
|
Hi. I think that all you do a great job... no matter what novice, amateur, professional, etc. means, you show great skills on different areas. Some of you like to use paint and paper, other likes to use chalk, and every day more people is using computers. These people are newcomers, so it is normal that there are people thinking that using computers is an easy way to draw something. I've tried to do both ways, by pencil and by computer and believe me, are difficult in any of them. Every work, if it is done with the heart, is the best that you can give to the world. Does not matter if someone dislikes it, if you're happy and some think is great, you've done a good job. Jorge.
--------------------
|
WadeVC
Carpal Tunnel
 
Reged: 12/02/05
Posts: 2799
Loc: Lodi, California,
|
|
Quote:
Every work, if it is done with the heart, is the best that you can give to the world.
That my friend is one of the best ways of putting it I have ever heard!
--------------------
Orion XTi10 f/4.7
Orion XTi8 f/5.9
Meade NGC 70mm f/10
Orion UltraView 10x50 Wide-Angle Binoculars
My Sketch Gallery
My Astronomy Blog
A wise man can see more from the bottom of a well than a fool can from a mountain top.
|
rodelaet
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/28/06
Posts: 2658
Loc: 50°56' N - 4°58' E (Belgium)
|
|
Quote:
Every work, if it is done with the heart, is the best that you can give to the world.
Jorge,
If there was a contest for the quote of the year, you sure have my vote.
-------------------- Rony
My Astronomy Sketches
My Binocular Sketches
|
jdavalos
member
Reged: 08/24/04
Posts: 60
Loc: Guadalajara, Méx 20.30N\103.20...
|
|
Hi. I think that it was a bright instant in my brain...
--------------------
|
WadeVC
Carpal Tunnel
 
Reged: 12/02/05
Posts: 2799
Loc: Lodi, California,
|
|
Quote:
Hi. I think that it was a bright instant in my brain...
--------------------
Orion XTi10 f/4.7
Orion XTi8 f/5.9
Meade NGC 70mm f/10
Orion UltraView 10x50 Wide-Angle Binoculars
My Sketch Gallery
My Astronomy Blog
A wise man can see more from the bottom of a well than a fool can from a mountain top.
|
markseibold
sage
Reged: 01/19/08
Posts: 470
Loc: Portland Oregon
|
|
Jorge
When I went back to my art school to do oil painting at age 38 (that was 1991), 20 years after I originally attended when first out of high school in 1972 at age 17, I seemed to enjoy it more for a number of reasons, but my abilities had not changed much. I remember the teacher saying, "When you want to do a great painting, you realize that it takes a little of this (pointing to his head) and allot of this" (as he pointed to his heart.) 
There were many other great quotes by this sage teacher that kept the students coming back for his classes. I'll eventually quote them here...
-Mark
|
|
2 registered and 4 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: Charlie Hein, cildarith
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 394
|
|
|
|
|
|
|