I like to draw manga and most of the people I draw end up...just kind of...on the paper:heh:... I'd like to add some scenery behind them or something but...not exactly one of my specialties-_-...I have trouble with trees, rivers, grass...it makes me mad that I have trouble even with the simplest of things:(... any suggestions or drawing tips:sweat:?

By Scenery, I assume you specifically mean landscapes. I'd suggest you draw your landscapes independently of anything your draw in the foreground, and use any image editing programme to layer your foreground with your background.

As for more specific help on these issue, I wouldn't know where to start as I have not seen any of your drawings.

You can go to my album to see some of my pictures. I have a few up... This one's a good example...

The things further away have to be lighter and the things closer have to be darker.
Grass? Just shade in green and you'll get it!Don't forget to do clumps here and there!
Trees... draw the trunk and then shade in the leaves with different colours and shades.
Rivers, rivers, rivers,rivers... as they get further into the distance thin them out, make them smaller and make them sparkle!:kfreaked:
Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm...

The things further away have to be lighter and the things closer have to be darker.
Grass? Just shade in green and you'll get it!Don't forget to do clumps here and there!
Trees... draw the trunk and then shade in the leaves with different colours and shades.
Rivers, rivers, rivers,rivers... as they get further into the distance thin them out, make them smaller and make them sparkle!:kfreaked:
Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm Hmmm...

-__-...what if you're just sketching? You know, no color?

You know, I think I'm pretty okay at drawing anime people 'n stuff, but I just can't draw scenery either! I have a lot of trouble with trees and grass and water! :heh:

You know, I think I'm pretty okay at drawing anime people 'n stuff, but I just can't draw scenery either! I have a lot of trouble with trees and grass and water! :heh:

:D Good to know I'm not alone on this one.

drawing tree's can be a bit diffecult depending on how you draw them some people only draw the branchs and colour the leaves which gives it more sense of reality

I have absolutely no idea how to properly do landscape on paper. What I do digitally is usually just taking dabs of colors and make really rough lines for stuff, then refine it from there by adding thinner lines, high opacity lines, highlights, shadows and... more blobs of color... I can't do landscape either, really.

Hm...-_-, well, for now I have to keep practicing...a lot of practicing...Does anyone know how to do black and white/grayscale scenery drawings? Like...pencil sketches?...or something like that...

:mellow:...Well, I'm working on some new stuff and am adding scenery(natural and man-made), and need help with it, when I suddenly remembered this thread :lol:. So rather than technique, I'm more of a visual learner, so if there are people out there that are good at drawing any type of scenery from any angle(realistic or animated), please post her :). What I'd like to see the most of though, are sketch/pencil drawings, please.

Well, I took a shu miao (chinese pencil drawings, though there's nothing chinese to it) class once, but I don't have a scanner, and my camera sucks, so...


One of the things you need to know is to add layering - first draw the basics for a landscape (e.g. draw some triangles for mountains, and nothing for grass), and then shade them in, lightly with a light B pencil. Then do the details with HB or H's. That was sorta off-topic, but (meh)

I'm sure you'll find something if you search t3h intarw3bs :D

:/ True, but I'm looking for sketches of scenery, but most people use paints and stuff...when you say layering, are you talking about for the computer or for actual sketching? Because I don't really "layer" when I draw with pencil...>< Maybe I should?

Eh, I actually did a few pencil scenery drawings awhile back. They're not really finished pieces, since they were for learning, but I can post them here if you want to check them out.
Really, though, the best way to learn to draw something is to go outside and draw it. If you want to learn to draw scenery, where are your scenery drawings? ;P

And drawing from real, 3d objects is gonna be better for your drawing brain than copying other people's sketches any day. So you should really get outside before everything freezes. It's hard to draw when your fingers are numb, hahah!

Also, I've never used anything more than a mechanical pencil for my stuff. If you're going to try something photorealistic or anything like that, you'll probably need a few different pencils like Mushy said, but I don't think you're going to need to worry about what sort of pencil's you're using for awhile.
I mean, you can definitely get a good value range with just a regular old mechanical pencil: http://fc07.deviantart.com/fs47/f/2009/186/3/2/Old_Man___Small_Version___by_HopelessComposer.png

I forget what the formula for art is, but I think it's something like...95% skill and 5% what you're using? So until you're in the top 5% of the artists in the world, don't worry about what kind of pencils you're using? That's how I feel about it, anyway. XP

>< I'd love to go outside and draw some scenery(which I have kind of done in the summer) but there's not much to draw in my neighborhood. And where there is something to draw(during the summer), it's usually covered by nature's favorite "anti-human" products such as geese waste, mosquitoes, bees, and other insects that are repellent-resistant that love to climb into your clothes, suck your blood, and leave wonderfully allergic itchy reactions. XD So if I ever get the chance, I'll take a picture and run like there's no tomorrow and hopefully survive long enough to practice some scenery. But until then, I'll look forward to practicing stuff that other people post on this thread for me :D.

Ehhhhhhh? T_T
You're gonna blame bugs for your lack of practicing!? *Gets out his paper fan*
You think there aren't bugs around here? Buy something with DEET in it; nothing is resistant to that crap. And it's Fall right now. No bugs outside, but a lot of trees should still have leaves on them. And if you're gonna take pictures and run away, you might as well just use google. And if you do get bit, who cares? You wanna be an artist, don't you!? XP

Drawing from real life is harder than drawing from a picture; there's a lot more thinking involved when you're converting 3d to 2d. When you draw from a picture, half the work is already done for you, so you're going to learn a lot less. When you draw from life, your brain is working twice as hard to get what you're looking at down on paper, so you're gonna learn a lot more. And besides, it's a lot more fun to sit under the pretty blue sky, drawing random stuff around you than it is sitting in your room drawing sterilized, low-quality photos off of google, right? =D

Totally agreed.

And it's also a lot more awkward sitting outside, but that shouldn't matter!

Did you just say "there's not much to draw in my neighborhood"? Holy crap, unless you live in space, there's definitely something to draw. Don't think something big, or important, just draw anything! Draw a tree, for god's sake. Or a bush. Or a goalpost. Just because they're "uneventful" doesn't mean you shouldn't draw.

And buy some bug spray.


(Well, I for one haven't drawn a picture for a long time, so I have no idea what to do :/)

Ehhhhhhh? T_T
You're gonna blame bugs for your lack of practicing!? *Gets out his paper fan*
You think there aren't bugs around here? Buy something with DEET in it; nothing is resistant to that crap. And it's Fall right now. No bugs outside, but a lot of trees should still have leaves on them. And if you're gonna take pictures and run away, you might as well just use google. And if you do get bit, who cares? You wanna be an artist, don't you!? XP

Drawing from real life is harder than drawing from a picture; there's a lot more thinking involved when you're converting 3d to 2d. When you draw from a picture, half the work is already done for you, so you're going to learn a lot less. When you draw from life, your brain is working twice as hard to get what you're looking at down on paper, so you're gonna learn a lot more. And besides, it's a lot more fun to sit under the pretty blue sky, drawing random stuff around you than it is sitting in your room drawing sterilized, low-quality photos off of google, right? =D

Depends what you are trying to draw, and in what style. If you want something from real life, then yes, go outside. But if you are trying to Paul Klee a scenery, no real need to actually be in the real life scene. A dark closet would suffice.

Depends what you are trying to draw, and in what style. If you want something from real life, then yes, go outside. But if you are trying to Paul Klee a scenery, no real need to actually be in the real life scene. A dark closet would suffice.
Heh, true. =D
I give all my crits assuming the artist wants people to be able to tell what their drawing is supposed to be when they're done, though. XD

Haha, maybe my appreciation for realism plummeted when I realized how hard it is to actually make something look real, let alone copy something from real life.

Dada 4 lyfe!

Ehhhhhhh? T_T
You're gonna blame bugs for your lack of practicing!? *Gets out his paper fan*
You think there aren't bugs around here? Buy something with DEET in it; nothing is resistant to that crap. And it's Fall right now. No bugs outside, but a lot of trees should still have leaves on them. And if you're gonna take pictures and run away, you might as well just use google. And if you do get bit, who cares? You wanna be an artist, don't you!? XP

Drawing from real life is harder than drawing from a picture; there's a lot more thinking involved when you're converting 3d to 2d. When you draw from a picture, half the work is already done for you, so you're going to learn a lot less. When you draw from life, your brain is working twice as hard to get what you're looking at down on paper, so you're gonna learn a lot more. And besides, it's a lot more fun to sit under the pretty blue sky, drawing random stuff around you than it is sitting in your room drawing sterilized, low-quality photos off of google, right? =D

O_O;; Paper fan!!!! RUN!!!! XD
>< I hate to let you down Hopeless, but yes, I'm going to blame bugs for my lack of practicing. I'm allergic to most bug bites and most bug bites I'm allergic to last for about a month(or more) and the bitten area swells up to about 4x its original size and the itching spreads. Not fun. Especially when you get about 5 of them at a time.

As for learning more...:/...I do like going outside to draw, (I have done it before), and I have to agree, you do learn a lot more. But sometimes it's better to get some tips and see other people's work to get a feel for it before you go outside and waste ten sheets of paper XD. (I'll post something I did over the summer...as soon as my scanner starts working again....maybe I'll just take a picture of it....)

O_O;; Paper fan!!!! RUN!!!!
GOOD IDEA! >=D

I hate to let you down Hopeless, but yes, I'm going to blame bugs for my lack of practicing. I'm allergic to most bug bites and most bug bites I'm allergic to last for about a month(or more) and the bitten area swells up to about 4x its original size and the itching spreads. Not fun. Especially when you get about 5 of them at a time.
Ehhhhh. If they're that much trouble for you, I can kind of understand, I guess. =P

As for learning more...:/...I do like going outside to draw, (I have done it before), and I have to agree, you do learn a lot more. But sometimes it's better to get some tips and see other people's work to get a feel for it before you go outside and waste ten sheets of paper .
It's not wasting ten sheets of paper, cuz you're learning more!
Just kidding. It's good to look at other people's work once in awhile too. It's just that you should draw from like most of the time, and only copy from other people periodically. That's how I learn the fastest, anyway!

I agree with HC, a combination of both original creations and recreations is needed for learning. You also need to understand the history of art, the expansion and movements of art and art theory, how new concepts and new ways of portraying what you want people to understand come about, before you are a good artist. Someone may have immense talent, being able to recreate flesh tones, all the same in multiple sittings, from only primaries, but it means nothing if you don't understand the history and theory behind art. You can tell when someone knows little or nothing about what art truly is, because there is no emotional depth or meaning to it. You can argue that you don't feel anything when looking at modernist abstractions, but say that again when you look at the abstract painting after looking at a painting by Bob Ross: where splashes of paints are put deliberately in place with the movement of the arm because your mind tells you it rightfully belongs there, another puts a pretty little tree because it just looks nice.

It's the idea of well executed art, over well executed kitsch. You've got to know where you are coming from, or you might just be producing kitsch.

>< I kinda get it....(<--sucks at history)....



GOOD IDEA! >=D

Ehhhhh. If they're that much trouble for you, I can kind of understand, I guess. =P

It's not wasting ten sheets of paper, cuz you're learning more!
Just kidding. It's good to look at other people's work once in awhile too. It's just that you should draw from like most of the time, and only copy from other people periodically. That's how I learn the fastest, anyway!

O_O;; *running*

I'll try to go outside and get something done(as soon as it stops raining and everything dries up) and maybe I'll figure out how to draw autumn leaves gracefully falling onto the grass without making them look like knives rocketing down from the sky trying to kill pedestrians XD.

Heh, you should totally draw knives rocketing down from the sky (like, real knives).

One question: How the heck do you go outside and draw pictures? Sit on the grass? D:

One question: How the heck do you go outside and draw pictures? Sit on the grass? D:
Yeah....it won't hurt you, you know. =P
Or find a rock, or wall, or fence, or stump, or whatever.
Also, I can't stand the whole "you're making a drawing, because you never took art history, but my piece is art because I took classes" thing, but I won't get into that here. I think me and RD already had a similar argument before, hahah. Still clinging to those views, I see!
I'd recommend a novel called The Cheese Monkey's to anyone thinks like that. It's a funny book, and it totally shits all over that kind of attitude. And it was written by one of the most influential modern artists out there.

I'm not saying art is better with actual formal training, not true. But art is better when there is a purpose and a reason behind it, rather then blatant drawings for the sake of drawing. It's why individual, preliminary sketches of the Sistine frescos are not regarded with the same praise as the final work as a whole composition.

...so...one question....what does knowing the history have to do with the drawing and the reason for it? A whole bunch of information on the history of the type of art in your head doesn't create passion, reason, purpose, or anything really. :/ In my opinion anyways. XD And if you ask me, all that information just gives me a headache.

Knowing of art history simply gives you a basis of from where you are coming, not from a personal stance but from the community of artists. It's for the same reason that knowing about music history makes you a better musician, knowing the history of government and politics makes you a better politician, knowing the history of economics makes you a better economist.

Vague, yes, but it does help, because not all of us can be a genius, so we might as well take the impressionist's stroke of genius and not use blacks for shadows.

...Why would you not want a personal stance? Isn't it better to make something you draw, paint, etc., more personal as an individual from the community of artists? (I don't mean draw random stuff or put random stuff into a drawing because you feel like it, unless the drawing is based on what you're feeling at that particular time.)

Yes, art should be in most cases an individual endeavor. But you obviously aren't understanding what I'm trying to get at.

There is thousands of years of art behind us, hundreds upon hundreds of great history in our history, hundreds living right now. To not understand what art is beyond yourself is a crime against yourself, as there is so much you are missing out on. It's the same way how music, books, science, school, films and television enrich our lives to levels that can only be reached through them, and though being a composer or author is a personal journey on the most part, reading books and listening to music serves as an dynamite spring board that will get you into realms of your own creations that you wouldn't be able to reach otherwise, most likely.

There is thousands of years of art behind us, hundreds upon hundreds of great history in our history, hundreds living right now. To not understand what art is beyond yourself is a crime against yourself, as there is so much you are missing out on. It's the same way how music, books, science, school, films and television enrich our lives to levels that can only be reached through them, and though being a composer or author is a personal journey on the most part, reading books and listening to music serves as an dynamite spring board that will get you into realms of your own creations that you wouldn't be able to reach otherwise, most likely.
I can agree with that, for sure. But this is a totally different tune than you were singing a few posts back:

Someone may have immense talent, being able to recreate flesh tones, all the same in multiple sittings, from only primaries, but it means nothing if you don't understand the history and theory behind art. You can tell when someone knows little or nothing about what art truly is, because there is no emotional depth or meaning to it. You can argue that you don't feel anything when looking at modernist abstractions, but say that again when you look at the abstract painting after looking at a painting by Bob Ross: where splashes of paints are put deliberately in place with the movement of the arm because your mind tells you it rightfully belongs there, another puts a pretty little tree because it just looks nice.
Which is complete BS, in my opinion. If you don't take art history classes, your art is meaningless? Wtf? What about the first artists ever? One person puts a tree there because it looks good, while Bob Ross's god damned magic arms do it for him? Really? And you can tell the difference between magic arm paintings, and people that actually have to use their brains to move their muscles? What?

I really can't stand that whole mystic "art is MAGICCCC, WoooOOOoooOOoOooo" stuff. If I gave people who said things like that a few paintings to critique, and they didn't know who painted them, they'd have just as much chance as saying it was genius as they did saying it was complete shit. After I give them a name to put along with a painting - presto! They know EXACTLY what the piece of art is worth without even LOOKING at it. It's completely ridiculous. Which is hilarious. Because if I took all the *good* artists I know and stuck them in a room with a bunch of nameless paintings, they'd all come to the same consensus about how good each of the paintings were, using COMMON SENSE and artistic SKILL, instead of...name recognition and other crap those art mystics use. Bleh.

You guys should look the artist's shit.

You guys should look the artist's shit.
Huh? What do you mean?

I love how visual arts always get a bashing, then musical and literary arts always has firm distinction between "good and bad."

I love how visual arts always get a bashing, then musical and literary arts always has firm distinction between "good and bad."
Well that's what I'm saying. With any common sense, you can tell good from bad, no matter what form of art is it. I really can't understand why some people are so ambiguous with how they judge visual arts.

Huh? What do you mean?

http://www.tate.org.uk/servlet/ViewWork?cgroupid=999999961&workid=27330&tabview=text&texttype=10 This :>

I love how visual arts always get a bashing, then musical and literary arts always has firm distinction between "good and bad."

That's because Literature and Music have metrics on quality, but visual art seems to lack a form of standard measurement.

That's because Literature and Music have metrics on quality, but visual art seems to lack a form of standard measurement.
They do have a standard form of measurement though, to any normal person. The only kind of people who can't seem to judge art with predictable results are the Artistes, and the people who follow them around.

@Nyu: I lol'd. That's just the sort of shit I'm talking about. XD

....T_T....I hate it when I leave a post, and not check Ichigos for a few hours, and when I come back, a whole new page of posts have been added and I can't even find mine. XD But it's also a good thing, because that means people are involved.
:/....As for this this argument about knowing art history and stuff.....:heh: Because everyone here has officially lost me, I'll let Hopeless be my spokesman :lol:.

That's because Literature and Music have metrics on quality, but visual art seems to lack a form of standard measurement.

They do have a standard form of measurement though, to any normal person.

Wait, wait, wait. How do any of them have standard forms of measurement? Critics exist because there's no standard form!

Or there is one, and I am very low in my education (which is true).

Wait, wait, wait. How do any of them have standard forms of measurement? Critics exist because there's no standard form!
I only meant to say that most people could decide whether a drawing was good or bad simply by looking at it. You shouldn't need a degree in art to know whether or not a painting sucks. Either something is beautiful to you, or it isn't. Nobody walks out of a movie theater not knowing whether or not they liked a movie simply because they haven't taken Film History 101, after all.

We should implement an argument panel to see what we're all discussing -_-

Anyways, that's all opinion - you don't say this art sucks, you say you think this art sucks. One man's epic fail could be another man's eighth wonder of the world. Taking art history wouldn't really matter, cause all that would happen is your opinion is influenced by some other miscellaneous factors.


What was the main argument anyways? I'm confused. Something about taking art history and will that effect your artwork?