Drawing Flies 52 – 05_Flashback PT
Drawing Flies 52 Flashback PT. Really pressed for time today, so drew in mechanical pencil (50s-style sleek), and went after it with detail brush, crayon, and some down-and-dirty washing and spattering.
Tech info: 6″ x 9″ Academie sketch pad. Mechanical pencil with watercolor crayon. Had one idea in my head all week, and I flat ran out of time today, which meant “scrap it all and wing it.” I ran with my trusty mechanical pencil, and quickly laid down some lines, including the hook sweep and the body wire. If you look closely, you can see how few primary lines there really are, with some fast cross-hatching and scribbles to get texture.
I grabbed my watercolor crayons and detail brush next and got into the color. The watercolor crayons provide juicy color quickly (dab a few times with a wet brush and you’re good), but also come out of the brush very fast with little more than a swirl in water and a fingertip squeeze.
I ended up going faster than I thought, and went back over some of the areas with deeper color (like the legs). The hook eye and bend were successful with a minimal amount of fussing (dark gray, followed by the final white highlights a couple of minutes later). The white was used to pop the highlights, and I almost stopped, but felt a washy look might be good to add some visual interest. I grabbed a larger, softer brush, hit some water, hit a crayon, and thrashed down the washes. Another few reloads of the brush (and a few quick flicks later) and the spatters were down.
In at 12:34, out at 12:47.
Available for purchase? Yes, yes it is (use the Contact JB link in the header).
Jeff’s PT is here. The best yet, Jeff (I think)! I really like it! The 3-D sense of shadow also adds something very involving in the piece.
Update 1: Just read Jeff’s concerns over his piece. No way, Jeff. I think you pulled it out, and I like the off-centered weighting. I totally understand the feeling of something not being what you want (today for both us, actually), but to my eye, you made it work.
Update 2: Muddler Minnow is next (a childhood fave).
![[join the e-list]](http://fishfliesandwater.com/wp-content/themes/plainscapeffw/images/join_the_elist.png)
I really like this one. It has a gentle quality to it, maybe even quiet. I like the washing…
Thanks, luv. It seems that both Jeff and I are dissatisfied with our work on #5, but it’s certainly nice to hear that you like it. I see bits in this drawing that I like, too, but it was “the whole” that eluded me today…
Jason-I am really digging this one! I really like the treatment at the bottom of the hook and the shadow at the hook bend under the tail. Lots of great color and it looks like it is going 560 mph through the water column. Quick simple and effective, just like the pattern itself.
Jeff—Funny, I liked the hook, too, and few other little bits that I thought worked okay. I appreciate the kind words. We’ll have to figure out the next fly!
Hi J!
Asolutely stunning – no less!!!
Lars
Jason,
To my unprofessional eye, your drawings are beautiful.
May we assume that we are looking at digital photography of your drawings? If so, that in itself is a true artform and quite appealing–another artform that I have not mastered, I might add. Any insights as to how you do it? I have tried to post a few photos of flies and they leave a lot to be desired.
Blessings,
Dan
Lars—Thanks for very nice compliment. I truly appreciate it, my friend.
Dan—Thank you, as well. I am coming around to liking this one more and more now that I have had a night to sleep on it. I see some successful things to use going forward.
The drawings are all scanned, not photographed, thus the mystery of how I manage to photograph them so well ;-) . I scan them at 600 to 900dpi (so I have plenty of data to work with if I need to make them larger for eventual print work), and then downsize to Web resolution for posting here.
hi Jason !
Jeff’s point of 560 mph (that’s 901 kph !) is spot on.
what i really like is the dynamic, ‘living’ aspect of this image. très cool.
cheers,
marc
Marc—Not quite Mach1, but 560 is still fast enough… ;-)