Photographic Methods
Many of my subjects are so remote or of such difficult access that the creation of a painting on location is flatly impossible, or simply so impractical that I could never finish the work in a reasonable period of time if I were to insist on travelling to the site again and again. In such cases, I rely on the use of high-resolution digital photos, which provide large images with great detail. The majority of my landscape paintings have been photo-based studio productions since the beginning of 2001, but I continue to enjoy doing drawings and small paintings on location when possible.
I generally use many photos of each subject - sometimes more than 100 photos for a complex scene - including numerous close-ups of critical areas, in order to capture all of the visual information that I'll need in order to complete a large-scale studio painting. I view these images directly from a computer monitor while working in the studio, since printing photos is impractical, expensive, and usually results in a loss of color quality. Monitor viewing also allows me to zoom in to a 100% magnified view of the image, or back to a wider view, as necessary.
I currently use a Canon Rebel, usually with a Canon 17-40mm f/4 L lens, although I also use a Canon 70-200mm lens when I need to get closer to a subject.
Photography and Projection
I would be remiss if I failed to mention my feelings about projection. Projection is the practice of using an ordinary photographic projector to do exactly what projectors are meant to do: project photos onto a surface. An increasing number of artists are projecting their photos onto canvas or paper, for the purpose of tracing the subject in order to skip the slow and laborious process of drawing. Projection has become so commonplace that many artists with strong drawing skills are automatically assumed to be using projection.
I have conflicted feelings regarding this practice.
On the one hand, I’m instinctively inclined to regard projection as the work of the Devil.
On the other hand, I know that projection has been used effectively by very capable artists to produce work of such surpassing greatness that we could scarcely denigrate it. The best example that I can think of is the work of Norman Rockwell.
Rockwell produced many, many paintings for his commercial illustration projects, and he met his deadlines by speeding up his process with a projector, which at that time was called a “balopticon.” There’s a very funny quote from Rockwell that expresses his love/hate relationship with this device:
“The balopticon is an evil, inartistic, habit-forming, lazy, and vicious machine. It is also a useful, timesaving, practical, and helpful one. I use it often - and am thoroughly ashamed of it. I hide it whenever I hear people coming.”
(This is attributed to his book, “Rockwell on Rockwell: How I Make A Picture,” although I haven’t verified that).
Having seen many of Rockwell’s paintings in person, I can tell you that these are some of the finest paintings you’ll ever see. Rockwell’s use of projection does not detract even slightly from the many other virtues of his work, and we would have far fewer of these iconic pictures if not for the balopticon. So there’s an argument to be made, in his case, that projection has given us something priceless that we would otherwise have been deprived of.
With all of that said, I never project. It’s a personal choice. I don’t have deadlines to meet, and I prefer to keep my drawing skills sharp through free-hand drawing.
I do, however, sometimes transfer the basic shapes of an image by means of a grid. I typically do this with very large canvases. I draw a grid of 4-inch squares (or larger) over my canvas, and overlay a similar grid over my reference image. Then I place the subject on the canvas by following its main outlines from one square to the next. I only need to place the largest shapes. This is not such a precise process as projection, but it must be conceded that it’s definitely a related sort of process.
My biggest gripe with projection occurs in the realm of competition - there is something inherently absurd about the prospect of a free-hand artist showing work in a competition where his/her work is to be judged against that of other artists who use projection, as if the two processes demonstrate comparable skill.
But what about the grid method of transfer? Should that practice be excluded from competition, too? And how would any of this be enforced? Ultimately, this is a subjective realm of opinion rather than fact, and the resulting work can only be valued on the merit of the final product.