以下是著名CG大师spooge demon关于绘画定义的一段比较精辟的论述。
——————————————————————————————————————————
I really don’t know what good drawing is, I cannot define it absolutely. Traditionally, it is an academic idea, and the guys at art renewal would say that naturalism is good drawing. But there are people who have expanded the definition of what is good drawing. Take for instance Elliot’s girl at the top of this page. It is excellent! Everyone seems to like it. All those French dudes draw like a fish swims. But the proportions are funny and the arm is too short and the head is strange and the hip is missing, etc. So in the eyes of an academic purist this is bad drawing. So I would say that drawing is as subjective as any aspect of art, and has more to do with the emotional expression of form. If it looks wrong to you, it is wrong… to you. There is an old painting I did of a gladiator crouching. I was very happy with the gesture of it. But so many people says it looks messed up to them. So who is right? If you go with the expanded idea of what drawing can be, to include more expressive ideas, it becomes very subjective.

But the art renewal people and dim witted people in general, think they know what good drawing/art is. Even by their own definitions, some of the “living masters” in their “approved” gallery don’t know much, and it is pretty embarrassing in my eyes. I have watched them work first hand and listened to their narrations. I cannot prove that it is “bad,” because I do believe in my own conviction about how subjective things are. I can only say that I get cross-eyed looking at some of them. And if academic skill is the only thing you are selling, it is grim.

So as far as worrying about anatomy in these speed things, that is an involved question. But to make it simpler, if there is something that bothers the viewer, it is wrong to them. Others could like it. But usually these images are thoughts that have one or two goals in mind, like lighting or composition or even anatomy (maybe pay more attention then). I guess the shortest answer I could give is spending enough thought so that it does not stick out painfully.

Flushy, I am going to say something pretty harsh, so the rest of you go away for a minute I am roughly 15 years older than you, and I see a lot of the same strengths and weaknesses in your work and mine. You and I have a good handle on setting up a solid value structure and then playing with paint and light effects to keep the eye entertained. But you, like me, need more drawing. I just started about 3-4 years ago.. Don’t make the same mistakes I made, hiding behind piles of pretty paint, start now and learn more about drawing. Any painterly illustrative style depends on this more than anything. Your work will be better, faster, more flexible, and more profitable. You will learn faster as time goes on and the emergence of your own artistic personality will be much stronger. I had a teacher at AC that said plainly that in all the students he had seen, income was based on the ability to draw more than any other factor.

But you protest “you just said you did not know what drawing is!” That’s right I don’t, but I think that it has something to do with your own personal understanding the form and structure of the things around us, and figuring out how to express that on a 2-d surface. And to further explain my obnoxious comments about academic artists above, be very very careful of whom you listen to, and that includes me. I have seen way too many young artists get caught in the academic thing and never emerge. I can see them sitting before the feet of the robed master, as he tells tales of the greatness that they should all strive for, to immolate themselves on the pyre of 19th century masters, there is only one true path and all else lead to the dark side. So try to find people you can learn from, but a variety, not one (or one institution) who claims to Know, and says if you don’t listen you are Damned.

I went to ACCD and took some classes at Art Institute of California. Both are wonderful in their own way, both take themselves way too seriously. But that could be for marketing purposes. Nobody likes a wishy washy. “Pay us 100 grand and we will give you a fragmented idea of what we think art might be partially about” Not very good. Lets just say they have started to believe their own PR.

I don’t think this will happen to you, you are a little older, and maybe have a stronger personality and could tell them to shove it.

If you find yourself on your own, go to museums often, carry a sketchbook at all times (and even draw in it) and draw from life as much as you can. Learn about art history too. Draw and think while you are drawing. Spending 2 hours filling a background behind a head drawing with a 4H pencil is not the best use of time. I said all this before.

Ok if I slobber this much I have to post something.

pl send me the brush to dongmei@shaw.ca
thanks

真的很辛苦，这么LONG的英文
文章试图阐述什么是好坏的绘画，不过好象没说清。但一些话还是有启发性的。
个人认为，其实根本就没好坏，世界就不存在这个属性，好坏只是人的心理想法。
艺术，是带有主观性的，因此艺术反映人们的内心世界。
每个人的好坏标准都不同，无法统一，也没必要统一。社会这个由亿万人群组成的团体，也形成了自己的好坏标准。也许社会的标准是主要的，而个体的是次要的，所以人的好坏标准也许是个个体与社会的综合体。
社会是在不断变化，人也在不断变化，所以美的标准也在不断变化。

也许，你想找一个永恒的标准，或最好的境界，那么你只有最后失望。因为根本就没有永恒的，最高与最低也只是你看的角度不同，位置不同。就象宇宙中的每颗星，你的高低想法是因为站在这个地球上。

艺术是为人类服务的，所以按自己的想法，如何去体现这一点。好坏都是人们执着的想法，不是一成不变的。

有种一语质地 的感觉
心理顿然开朗了许多
...————

sonic112在上个帖子中说

引用:

---

zhuzhu拜托下回不要发英文帖子，请多照顾照顾我这样的“农民”谢谢了。

---

第2楼就是译文，以后发贴之前看明白了再说，不要出这样的【农民洋相】……

画画呀……
常常越画越觉得自己画的很烂……心情郁闷啊
努力吧，努力吧。该学的东西好多……

西梅在上个帖子中说

引用:

---

我一直在想一个问题，画画需要讲天份吗？
我一直认为，单从画画这个行为来说，我相信每个人都有"会画"的一天，只要付之努力；
但是真正把"画"画到一个高度，一种境界，那就需要一点天份了。
不知道我的理解是否正确。

---

画画是一种理解，一种观察。每个人都有画画的潜力和天赋。学习画画的过程就是释放你体内潜在的那股力量。

fantasye：

谢谢指正，怪就怪那个zhalimuto，我以为他在加拿大混了几年，英语阅读能力应该没有问题。