• blandfordforever@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    Not being flippant here: If you can actually see it, why not just see it on the paper and essentially trace what you see?

    • can@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      4 days ago

      I can’t speak for others, but it’s not overlaid like that. It’s like a separate visual part of my brain.

    • Lumidaub@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Because that’s not how drawing works.

      edit: Thinking about it, it might be good to expand on that a bit. Unfortunately I can’t. It really is “it doesn’t work like that” and I am unable to explain how it does work. I draw, I don’t write, sorry.

      • blandfordforever@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        I understand that drawing doesn’t work that way. What I’m suggesting is that drawing doesn’t work that way because visualizing something in your mind is so far removed from actually seeing it.

        For example, you could imagine that you want to paint a lake with mountains. You can get an idea of how you’ll compose the image, what the colors are, how the strokes might make textures on the canvas, all the details. It’s more than just knowing the facts of each object, color, line. It’s an understanding of how it will look visually and you “picturre it” but it’s nowhere close to the sensory experience of actually looking at the finished painting.

        This is my experience, at least.