| Author | Message | ||
  Joanna Senior Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 206 Registered: 10-2006 |
Whoops, wrong answer: Basis weight is the standard measurement of an amount of paper. For example, the basis weight of Bond is determined by the weight of 500 sheets of 17"x22" paper (the parent size). If a ream of 17"x22" paper weighs 20 pounds, this is called 20 lb. paper. | ||
Joanna Senior Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 205 Registered: 10-2006 |
22x30 in, I believe | ||
Kaswantee New member Username: Kaswantee Post Number: 1 Registered: 11-2008 |
I have been teaching watercolor for 7 years and tonight I was asked a question I've never gotten before. The weight of watercolor paper is determined by how much a ream (500 sheets) of paper weighs. What size are the sheets that are weighed? Silly, I know, but noone has ever asked before and I've never thought about it! | ||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 495 Registered: 8-2006 |
Way to go, Bonnie. That's what I meant by my last post on the "Lurkers and Newbies" thread! We all need help. There is always more to learn, and most of us learn by doing -- or at least trying. | ||
Whitewatercolor Senior Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 316 Registered: 10-2006 |
I need some good lingo. I'm about to embark on a project I feel very insecure about. I will share the experience, after the fact. Hopefully it will give others courage to step out of the box. Or maybe, it will teach us to say no. I'll share that also. | ||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 492 Registered: 8-2006 |
Galen, I think your work is lovely as well, and I admire you for the good cause you are supporting! The web site is terrific -- I'm sure Marie can especially appreciate it! We haven't given you much room to post again! Don't fade away! You may not know how to teach what you do so well, but I would encourage you to try. Maybe Bonnie can give you the vocabulary for "talking a good line!"  | ||
Whitewatercolor Senior Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 314 Registered: 10-2006 |
Galen1artist: I just looked at your work, both in painting and life, and my advice would be to just do what you do. I guess I should have looked before I commented about teaching. I think you probably have a lot to share. Your paintings are touching. | ||
Joanna Advanced Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 141 Registered: 10-2006 |
Several of my teachers commented that I wield a brush better than a pencil. I hold pencils the wrong way in the first place, and it could be because my fingers are rather long. I find a brush feels better in my hand than a pencil or pen. Maybe it is some latent Asian gene, along with my affinity for Oriental anything. | ||
Whitewatercolor Senior Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 312 Registered: 10-2006 |
Some comments about drawing versus painting. I am always confused by this. Society teaches us to manipulate a pencil first. We may later learn to manipulate a brush. If you can draw with a pencil, there is hope that you will be able to learn to manipulate a brush in a way that you can draw with a brush. A person who can draw with a brush can certainly draw with a pencil if (s)he wants to. You do not need to practice with a pencil to be an accomplished artist. Does anyone disagree? | ||
Joanna Advanced Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 126 Registered: 10-2006 |
--continued The point of this is that when you teach art, you need to cater to all three types of people so they can absorb the knowledge the way they process best. For example, part of the class will focus on how the brush feels on paper, how the paint is diluted to a consistency like weak tea or soup or coffee. You may play music part of the time, or talk people through parts of the painting process. The visuals respond to composition, color mixing theory, etc. If you identify your students' style (clued by their talk and their voices and eye movements) you can individualize instruction to tailor the lesson to their needs in this regards. | ||
Joanna Advanced Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 125 Registered: 10-2006 |
It would seem our family is mostly visuals--my dad was a talented photographer, my brother is likewise, my sister does fused glass and jewelry and I like to paint. Being able to see a painting from your mind's eye to the blank page is probably how we process what we see, but many people are not so visual. As you may know, people fall into visual, auditory, or kinesthetic categories in how they process information in to our brains. If you are kinesthetically inclined, movement and feeling are important--the touch of the paper on the brush, the mixing of paint, the movement of the hand all are a dance that translates to painting. If you are auditory, you may be one of those people who synthesizes colors out of sounds, or not, but you may feel music and sounds translate into a feeling that you convey into paint. We all have elements of all three, but one predominates. Visuals are concerned with how they dress, they have pictures on the walls, and they talk fast with hands up above the waist, and their voices come from the top part of the lungs. Auditory people speak more slowly and deliberately, from the middle of the chest, use words like "I hear ya!' And "That sounds great" and they are less likely to care about dress and pictures on the wall. Kinesthetics like cozy fabrics, like exercise or moving, speak from the bottom of the lungs and may speak haltingly, and like experiences that are sensory (taste, smell, feeling, moving.) Use words like "That feels right!" "I get what you mean" "I'm moving toward this decision." | ||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 461 Registered: 8-2006 |
Joanna, Right you are. Good art is a combination of inner feelings and intuition with the disciplines learned and as*imilated by continual practice and experimentation. Your aunt's ability to paint "without drawing" is no mystery. She simply had the unusual ability to draw with her mind. She was projecting the positive and negative shapes and colors from her mind onto the paper as she painted. I hope you inherited that genius from her and your father. | ||
Joanna Advanced Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 124 Registered: 10-2006 |
Well, it turns out our church needs teachers, and once my business practice is at a level where I can take off Saturdays and even leave early one day a week, I hope to teach art there. They have a large elementary through high school. Someone always needs teachers. I think I can teach the method my late aunt used--it's VERY fast. She was very brilliant, like my dad. Amazing people (with some baggage) but brilliant. Her method was direct paint to paper, no pencil, and you visualize shapes, negative space, colors, and I had myself some phenomenal progress after an afternoon with her. I have not ponied up the cash for Jane Seymour's painting kit available here, but I presume it is similar to Gladys' method as she was her teacher. I'm curious though, perhaps I will spring for the materials and see what she made out of the techniques. This painting method from my aunt is such that most people can grasp how to paint in a simple way in an afternoon, then it is a matter as she said, of practice, constant practice. She was always doodling. And she was like that teacher on "The Simpsons" who loved EVERYTHING everyone did (the episode where Marge takes a painting class.) The expressionist method means that the painting comes from within and there is no right or wrong. It is more important to encourage positive thinking than to critique according to one's own lights. Gladys even taught BLIND people to paint (as her own eyesight was failing.) Now with drawing, of course, there are rules you follow, and in that case, there is a right and wrong. Until you master those rules, and then you can form your own rules and break the standard ones with impugnity. So some art teaching is inner-based (emotion, expression) and some is technique-based (draughtsmanship, color theory, composition.) Each has an important role. | ||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 460 Registered: 8-2006 |
Joanna, I read back through the posts on this thread and see you said you teach people to PAINT (not "to draw") by allowing them to trace a photograph to insure an adequate drawing to guide their paint. Sorry I misread. That is certainly an unavoidable necessity when people don't know how to draw! However, we both know they will never become truly great artists until they DO learn to draw. It's a shame people resist learning to draw and want to rush into painting something someone will admire as a "masterpiece." It's the same reason they dislike doing value sketches before painting, or disdain practicing the general elements and principles of design and composition until they become unconscious second nature. Only a few gifted people come with those understandings and abilities built into their intuitions. Most of us have to work hard to acquire the disciplines of art. Sorry you had such a bad experience with teaching kids to draw -- or rather, with one kid and her parents and the dolts who ran the program. Isn't it crazy that one or two people can spoil things for so many? That happens in all areas of life, not just art! Where in the world have people gotten the idea that they deserve praise and rewards for any kind of work, just because their very existence is so wonderful? I even know another art discussion forum that has fallen into that trap. We have lost sight of the value of real achievement and progress in today's culture which demands that all egos be stroked and no exalted self images lowered to reality. That having been said, I recognize also that we live in a tough world, and all of us need the friendship we find in support groups, informal or formally organized. I find that friendship in the people on this board, but it is an honest friendship that speaks the truth wrapped in affection for each other. | ||
Joanna Advanced Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 123 Registered: 10-2006 |
Gosh no, how could it be teaching to draw? I merely suggest it for painting technique when draughtsmanship is not able to be taught at the same time or before. I did teach a drawing class. It was the least popular class to teach at the studio, so I got to do it. The students were sometimes lazy with it all, so I incented them (not a word, I know) with free marbles for engaging in class dialog. I had a big sack and they got a dip in the sack and could grab marbles when they participated or did homework and turned it in. Then one little girl got in a snit because she was once denied a dip in the marble sack for not doing her homework (she got many more marbles that class for participation but once I had to say NO because she didn't perform.) She ratted me out to MOM, and Mom complained to the staff, and lo I don't teach anymore. They weren't "comfortable" with the "fabulous prizes" (my nickname for the marbles) and didn't figure out that I require specific performance for reward. A funny concept, I know. ' And you know, since the info went to me third hand and no one spoke directly to me, that's quite all right. Because I won't waste my time on people who don't talk directly to me about their issues. And my time is beyond valuable. So I do not work at that center anymore because they are dolts. We had some great progress from the students: we did leaving OUT things from your picture (framing and composition), perspective, shading, and versions (doing same thing, different angle), shapes in things (draw a bear with circles and cylinders.) The kids did great. I had them draw teddy bears, their backyard, portraits, their house with perspective and three views of the same thing in a triptych. | ||
Eugene Senior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 415 Registered: 8-2006 |
Tracing a photo may help beginners to get a nice painting but it is not teaching then to draw. Drawing is a skill acquired only by hard practice and a lot of sketching | ||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 454 Registered: 8-2006 |
Joanna, I'm sorry to hear you, and I suppose all of us, have lost your aunt. She must have been a fine artist -- I would love to hear more about her career and her paintings. | ||
Joanna Advanced Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 118 Registered: 10-2006 |
Her method (may her soul rest in peace, she passed away about 6 months ago) really results in some great paintings. I had a few moments with her some years ago, and painted quite a few paintings I like. I moved on to more tight stuff, but occasionally I do this style. Jane Seymour (actress, not wife of Henry VIII) was her pupil and did pretty well with it. | ||
Grizrev Senior Member Username: Grizrev Post Number: 450 Registered: 8-2006 |
Joanna, I've taken my deep breath and think you are right about teaching people to draw by tracing photographs, IF that is the only way you can persuade them to use a good drawing as the basis for a good painting (which I do think is essential, especially in representational painting). At the same time, allowing a beginner to use a crutch like this has the danger of becoming a permanent approach, or at least delaying the development of true and intuitive drawing skills, which are essential to a "painterly" and creative approach to art. I think I prefer your aunt's approach of focusing on negative space and applying the paint directly and creatively! | ||
Joanna Advanced Member Username: Joanna Post Number: 103 Registered: 10-2006 |
This is anathema (so take a DEEEEEEEPPPPP cleansing breath) but you can teach people to paint using (huff) tracing over photographs. I use computer printouts of some kind of subject, have graphite paper under that, and trace the outline for people. The painting of it is challenging enough that the line drawing, tuned up by hand is original enough. Just make sure it isn't a copyrighted image. Most people find this is a helpful way to learn to apply watercolor. Alternately, I learned a method from my aunt, who was a fairly good painter, to look at negative space and apply watercolor directly, in an expressionistic way, to the paper. You can get some really wonderful results that way. | ||
Eugene Senior Member Username: Eugene Post Number: 399 Registered: 8-2006 |
I agree with both Marie and George. I used to teach workshops and the biggest problem is always the most people want to paint, but cant draw. I now live in a big retirement community and help our “watercolor group”. but this is a different situation--they’re not trying to become great artists and the don’t have time to learn drawing. (ages range from 65 to 90) so I encourage them to do simple things that don’t require much drawing. And show them how to do a basic wash and tell them it’s only a piece of paper they’re messing up. And if they have too much trouble with watercolor I suggest they try oils or acrylics which are much more forgiving and easy to correct mistakes. George is right. Teaching requires a lot of preparation and organization of thoughts. If you don’t have a method and you are just “splashing around” and relying on happy accidents, you’re probably not going to be a good teacher. I know a lot good painters who are lousy teachers! | ||
Whitewatercolor Senior Member Username: Whitewatercolor Post Number: 295 Registered: 10-2006 |
I agree with George. "Do you teach?" is one of the most common questions I get, and I think that happens to just about anyone who sells art. My response is to recommend books, videos and DVDs, magazines, and look for art classes from an instructor who is recognized among his or her peers, who may be teaching within a reasonable distance. | ||
Marie Senior Member Username: Marie Post Number: 431 Registered: 8-2006 |
My experience is that most students need to learn about four things: 1) Drawing -- Whether students draw with a pencil or a brush, they need to be able to coordinate their eye and hand. If you are teaching any kind of figure painting, students also need to learn the common pitfalls of figure drawing. 2) Paint handling - At a minimum, students need to learn how to do a basic wash and how to control the consistency of the paint. 3) Composition and page organization - Teach them how to simply value and make interesting shapes on the page. 4) Process - Try to get students to concentrate on the process of painting, not the end result. Teach them how to analyze their paintings and figure out where they want to go in their next painting. Other stuff always comes up, but these are the big things I try to hit in every class. Also (and I think I have said this in previous posts) each student has a unique voice. I try to work with each student do develop his or her natural inclinations instead of trying to get them to paint like me. | ||
George Unregistered guest |
Galen, you may not like my advice, but if you say you “really don't know how to do this”, I would recommend you don’t do it. Today there are many really bad watercolor teachers attempting to teach. They end up misleading students to such an extent that creativity is destroyed, watercolor myths are created, and artistic potential is squandered in a daze of confusion and misinformation. | ||
Galen1artist New member Username: Galen1artist Post Number: 1 Registered: 1-2008 |
I have had a couple of opportunities to teach watercolor. I really don't know how to do this. Everything I do is just intuitive and I haven't a clue how to tell someone else how to do it. And there are sooooooo many ways to do watercolor! Any hints, syllabus, ideas? I attended Chouinard Art Institute and took additional classes at the Academy of Art in San Francisco so you'd think I would have a clue! Any suggestions welcome! You can see my website: www.angeldoggie.com I am in the middle of a redo and don't have all the glitches out yet. |
