On the “How to Draw Something” Approach

In my introductory post, I described two methods commonly used to teach drawing. These were the “How to Draw Something” approach, and the “Practice Drawing This Something” approach. Today, I want to briefly examine the former in more depth.

In that post, I was rather brief with my description of the “How to Draw Something” approach. It is important to note that the word “Something” in that title is necessary to separate this approach from a much more general, often long-running “How to Draw” series of tutorials, that focus (as I did in the previous four posts) on the technical basics of drawing. This distinction is important, because I am really only addressing the specific, one-off tutorials that are often published by websites or popular artists. They focus on a singular, specific subject and ultimately demonstrate a single way of drawing it. To make this approach simpler to examine, I am separating this approach into two archetypes: Step-by-Step, and Annotated Demonstration. However, due to this simplification, I would like to emphasize that these are generalizations.

Step-by-Step

The Step-by-Step Method

I am sure you have seen this before. This method of tutorial is more popular for cartoon styles. Simple shapes are used to rough out the basic shape of the subject, and then the details are cut into these shapes. In creating the above image, I found it easier to work backward from reference than to begin the process by messing around with basic shapes.

This was the original.  I broke up his shape into circles, lines, and trapezoids.

What is interesting about this method, is that it very quickly approximates the first step of drawing that I showed in my first “Using Values and Gradients” post. The difference, however, is that the work of actually making these approximate shapes is already completed — your shapes, lines, and circles are all supposed to resemble those in the tutorial. I might make the argument that this is a bad habit for an artist, because they should learn how to do this on their own. But I suppose most of the people seriously attempting to learn something through these tutorials would have already figured that part out, so what do I know?

It seems logical to assume that this method of tutorial would only ever teach someone to draw a very specific subject in a very specific way. That was the point I made in my introductory post, and I believe it has some merit. I won’t say that this logic is completely reflective of reality, though, as it seems people have been able to use this kind of tutorial to draw many different subjects — at least, that is how it appears, because I can’t find any major criticisms of the method.

Other than this obvious point, I have two other criticisms regarding this method. First, I feel that this approach is intended for an audience that has little experience with drawing, yet it fails to provide an avenue for further learning; there isn’t much for someone following one of these tutorials to use as a basis for really exploring the things they want to draw. Instead, they are left to aimlessly play with the details added in the final step, because they do not know how to create the basic form of what they want to draw. The second problem with this method is that it enforces shape over value — instead of teaching a person to draw as they see, they are taught to draw as they think.

Annotated Demonstration

I wasn't sure how to draw this as a single, still image.

The annotated demonstration is a broader method than the “step-by-step” method, but its subject is still very specific. The tutorial essentially consists of an artist drawing something — using their own process — while they provide advice to the person watching. My “Using Values and Gradients” posts are an example in written form, though I like to think they could be applied more broadly than most of the tutorials that employ this method.

There are couple problems that I have with this method. First, I feel that it suffers from the same specificity of the “step-by-step” approach; the advice offered is usually only applicable to the same, or similar subjects. Second, there is usually a large gap in skill between the student and the teacher. While this is not always an issue, the student may find themselves either not understanding the advice being offered, or lacking the skill to employ it anyway.

Studying the Approach

Though I believe that there are problems with either of these methods, I feel that each has its place: no approach is perfect and universally applicable, or there would be no need for the vast quantity of learning material available today. Perhaps it can even be said that these approaches are hardly worth examining as an already skilled artist. But I like to look at these things as opportunities for learning — if not about the subject, then about the approaches themselves.

I have found a few useful “things” from the “How to Draw Something” approach, though I feel that I have personally outgrown its usefulness as it was intended:

First, from the “Step-by-Step” method, I believe there is something to be said about how this tutorial can impact an artist’s understanding of proportion. The simplicity of the first stages demonstrate a strong focus on making sure that the elements of an image line up properly. In the much more advanced study of things such as human anatomy, a preexisting understanding of the importance of proportion is definitely beneficial. Further, the basic shapes used in the first stages of these tutorials could also help an artist learn to block in more complicated shapes, if they are willing to experiment. And finally, the “step-by-step” method appears to work best in “reverse.” That is, working from a visible reference to make a drawing — instead of creating entirely new things from the mind.

Second, from the “Annotated Demonstration,” I feel that this method offers a potential wealth of information to a student artist provided they study the artist’s process instead of focusing on their advice. That is not to say that the advice should be disregarded, but rather that an eye for the unmentioned details may boost the helpfulness of these kinds of tutorial. In contrast to the “step-by-step” method, I feel that these types of tutorial may be better at helping artists create images from their minds.

 I have to say that this post is a little rougher than I was hoping, because I really generalized this approach to teaching. I may return to this topic some day to do it more justice. What is important is that it demonstrates a bit of what I am trying to accomplish with this place: I want to learn about art, and how to improve my skill, by examining the aspects of various subjects. In other words, I am not trying to be the person that follows these tutorials, but instead the person who looks at how artists do what they do — including those that made these tutorials.