Landscape Sketching in Pen and Ink

by Donald Maxwell

  The stones lower down are darker in tone and at the foot of the wall they are considerably stained and toned with moss. We will shade them very irregularly with loose lines to some extent expressing the irregular surface of stone as opposed to the more compact surface of the bricks.

  FIG. 5

  A pencil skeleton rectangle useful as a check on lines that are horizontal or vertical or "vanishing" in perspective. This pencil work can be rubbed out when the sketch is completed in ink.

  It is unnecessary to labour the points mentioned here as it will appear by now that the representation of a complicated mass of masonry with all its fissures and weather stains is really quite easy to draw in pen and ink, although at first sight it looked very difficult.

  It will not be possible, however, to find views in which a wall is so conveniently placed. There will be times when a great deal of a building is seen in perspective, and this, again, at first sight seeming far more complicated than it really is, means mastering fresh problems. I have often found it very useful to have a few sheets of my sketch-book ruled out in pencil as in Fig. 5, on page 7. The outer line here represents the edge of the page in the sketchbook. The line A–B is the position of the horizon. X is the vanishing point.

  In choosing a view, take care that the vanishing point is in the picture. In a street scene, for instance, it would be well to find a position on the left-hand side of the road (assuming that the most interesting part of your projected sketch is to be the right-hand side of the street with its buildings.

  As a rough rule you might say (in spite of certain exceptions caused by uneven ground) all horizontal lines in the architecture of walls fronting the street wherever they come—the tops of windows and doors, steps, pavement, parapets—will be on the radiating lines that converge to X. All horizontal lines of buildings and walls at right angles to the road will be on lines parallel to A–B, and all vertical lines will be parallel to the sides of the frame.

  In Fig. 6 we have a very quickly drawn—it is almost scribble— view of the side of a castle and beyond it a square tower. Because it is placed on this pencil framework as seen in Fig. 5—rough as it is—we are certain of a few facts about it.

  I have purposely drawn the sketch Fig. 7 very badly, but in spite of that fact, it can be seen that there is a castle here, and beyond it a square tower. It would be possible to build up on this and put in more and more detail as in Fig. 4. Such few lines as were in the original pencil scribble and in the beginning of the pen drawing as seen in Fig. 7 are right as far as they go.

  With these diagrams, Figs. 6 and 7, it will be well to expound a method of securing the right position for figures and objects in a view. How often do we see pictures with boats and people in them. The boats are sinking or dancing up in the air, and the people in the distance are too big and in the foreground too small.

  FIG. 6

  A quick pencil note made on such a framework as that shown in Fig. 5

  A good analysis of the problem of placing things is this. The horizon, wherever the sketcher should be, is on the level of his eye. If he is standing up by a boy four feet in height and by a post twelve feet high, and in various parts of the picture are four-foot-high boys and twelve-foot-high posts, the horizon will be always over the heads of the various boys and the posts will always overtop the horizon, wherever they are, by the same proportion of their height.

  In the case of the tin soldiers in Figs. 6 and 7, you will note that the head of the soldier comes always half his height below the horizon. Crude as these diagrams are—they are meant to be crude—you will note that these tin soldiers, wherever they are marching, are in correct position for the distance at which they are supposed to be.

  FIG. 7

  Certain features of this rough sketch, however unsatisfactory they may be in some ways, are "right" in perspective.

  FIG. 8

  FIG. 9

  Now let us take a subject that is a little more ambitious. We will walk down the road and draw the old dovecote. It is shown opposite. For purposes of instruction, we must for the moment imagine that this drawing is the actual thing. We are now to set ourselves the problem of representing it with lines. The level marked Z–Z, in Fig. 9, is the height of the eye of the sketcher. Thus, although the dovecote is round, there is no curved perspective line to worry us here. This course in the masonry (which conveniently coincides with the horizon) can be represented with a straight line.

  FIG. 10

  Let us take the diameter, as it appears at arm's length, and mark it off by the straight vertical lines X and Y. This is near enough at present, although the sides of the tower are not straight. Then we will measure the height of the roof and put it in as in Fig. 8, with two straight lines and a bottom line which is straight.

  As in Fig. 9, however, we must "correct" on this rough outline. We are looking up at the roof, so the line we have made straight (at bottom edge of roof) must curve. It will be nearly straight in the middle and drop a little at each end—in fact, this curve must be part of an ellipse. Also, the sides of the building must be made to bulge.

  We must apply the same methods in sketching this dovecote as we employed before in sketching the old wall, but there are difficulties here of a new kind. The wall was flat and this is round. How are we to show that it is round ?

  In Fig. 10 we have made a rough sketch of the "facts" of the dovecote. This is a first putting down of the joins between stones and tiles and the outlines of things in general. It is obvious, however, that the building does not appear to be round. There is not enough emphasis of light and shade.

  THE OLD DOVECOTE, EAST FARLEIGH

  (Cavendish)

  Now, in Fig. 9 the different zones of light and shade are shown. The full light is along the zone A–B–C, and as we get round to the left, which is the shadow side, our tone must get darker and darker. In Fig. 9, too, we have put in shading lines which give some idea of the roundness. They are purposely put in "unintelligently," i.e. although we can see now that the dovecote is round, the shading lines do not tell us anything else about it. However, by making our shading also represent the marks of tiles or stones as well as degrees of shadow we can, as in sketch on page 13, approach to some better likeness of the thing represented.

  We cannot afford to say much about the tiles and stones on the zone A–B–C because any elaborate system of lines will give us too much tone. A few dots, but nothing untrue, will have to suffice. We must put in more and more detail as we get into the shadows so that our lines are doing two things—

  1. Expressing nature of the material.

  2. Giving light and shade to show the shape of the object depicted.

  Now that we have acquired some experience with these exercises, let us use what we know in the way of technique on another subject—the old abbey ruin on page 17—which gives a problem that we have not tackled before. What are we to do with a very uninteresting and ugly garage mixed up with a romantic ruin.

  It cannot be left out because if we leave it out we shall have to invent something in its place, and in the present state of our experience we shall not be able to do this.

  Here is the answer. Drawing is like talking. You can talk a great deal about a thing or you can be silent. In this case, of the garage, we will say very little about it, but we will not make any statement that is not true. With skilful handling, the very plainness of the shed may be made to act as a foil to the richer details of stone walls and tiled roof with which it is contrasted.

  Let us use this subject as a means of testing the value of what we have learned in our previous drawings. First, we will draw a plain but accurate outline of the main objects in the view (Fig. 11). Then we will take note of different surfaces and different "material" within those outlines. All the walls that are in shadow we will mark A. The sunlit walls we will mark B. Roofs facing the sun we will mark C, and this roof in shadow, D. E represents trees.

  (Cavendish)

  YALDING

  A sketch made t
o show the importance of leaving out unnecessary detail where the sense of lightness is to be maintained

  FIG. 11

  Pencil outline and diagram of principal features of sketch opposite

  Make a careful "map" of the masses of foliage and then fill it in with any texture (as we found useful in "Headcorn Mill") that will be broken and open and expressing a tangle of parts. The sunlit surfaces marked B we will draw as we drew the old wall, and the shadow surfaces A we will put in with an open crossed line. The garage, however, we will indicate with a firmer and straighter line because it is new. Of the roof of the garage we will say nothing—we will leave it blank, and there must be an economy of detail in the lighted part of the old roof, but more linear work on the shadow side. The little sketch of Yalding on page 15 is another example of this method of treatment.

  When the shadow of a large building is seen at some distance there is probably little or no detail visible within it. By this absence of detail, the idea of distance is often conveyed. On page 18 we have fragments of the drawing of Winchester. They are reproduced the same size as the original work. Perhaps these will give hints to those experimenting with various problems of representation.

  ("Church Times ")

  FRAGMENT OF AN ABBEY AT ROBERTSBRIDGE

  I have purposely said nothing about pens or paper used, because in starting out I argued that the veriest beginner has nothing to learn in the way of equipment. I assume that you are using the same pen with which you would write a letter, and similar paper.

  However, now that we are getting more ambitious and going farther afield for subjects a few notes may be of use. Do not use a paper that is rough. A smooth cream or white paper that will take quick strokes without " kicking up "will suffice. People will often tell beginners to work on Bristol board, smooth and dead white. Personally, I hate any very hard white surface. It stares the artist out of countenance. Any paper that is not very strongly grey or deep yellow will reproduce effectively at the engravers.

  FIG. 12

  FIG. 13

  Fragments of the Winchester sketch on opposite page, reproduced exactly the same size as in original work

  (Cavendish)

  WINCHESTER

  The sketch of Winchester reproduced above is from an original about 17 in. in diameter. It is reduced in size far more than desirable, but owing to this open nature of the pen work its details stand this reduction fairly well. On the page opposite are two fragments from this drawing, and they are reproduced in facsimile. The comparison is instructive, and shows the nature of the modification that reduction in size renders.

  As to pens, when you gain confidence and speed you may find a necessity for a pen a little more "fluid" and pliable than the one with which you are accustomed to write.

  I, myself, am doing these with a moderately fine Waterman fountain pen. The choice of nib should be a matter of experiment. Any good maker of fountain pens will help you in choosing, and many will go so far as to lend you one for experiment. The nuisance of carrying ink about, to say nothing of spilling it, is a strong argument for a fountain pen. A great deal of time is saved, too, with a fountain pen, and there are many "jet black" inks to be had. Avoid any sort of purple ink as you would avoid the Evil One. If you make a false stroke leave it until you get home. Work over it and then, with a razor blade or with a touch of Chinese white, obliterate your mistake.

  Well, now you have made a good start. In the next chapter you will become a professional.

  PART II

  PROBLEMS OF TECHNIQUE IN PEN LINE AND THE PLANNING OF A PICTURE

  WE can now assume that we have to some extent mastered the art of representing the things that we see. We can make outlines to show their shape. We can fill in these outlines in such a way that the lines we put down reveal the nature of the substance represented—brick, stone, wooden palings, tiled roofs, woodwork, etc. We have learned to make such lines of representation that we can show the difference between trees and walls, between grass and flagged wall, and between masts of ships and bare winter trees, quite apart from their shapes. And now we want to go farther, become more ambitious, and make our efforts worthy of being regarded as pictures.

  "It is all very well," said a pupil to me, "to sit down and draw a wheelbarrow or an object in view, but I get completely baffled with the choice of a picture. I don't know where to leave off and where to put the four boundaries of my work."

  Many other artists, artists who are by no means beginners, are often baffled by this problem. It is necessary to have some sort of rule as to what is your picture-frame in this view. Each one must fix this for himself.

  I think a good limit, one I use roughly myself, is to include in your composition all that is covered by your sketch-book held in front of you at arm's length and no more. Thus, everything you see comes within the compass of what you can measure and check easily in starting your work. I am assuming, however, that your book or block is of decent size—say, 16 in. by 10 in.

  It is a good plan to think out your composition slightly smaller than this size of the paper. Rule a rectangle 14 in. by 8 in., thus leaving one inch all round. Let this margin appear as a mount. You will then learn to build up your drawing on a definite shape. Also it gives you a liberal margin of error, for we all make mistakes, and if some important object is edging out of the picture the matter can be rectified by moving the margin which we have been cautious enough to rule in pencil.

  We will take a fairly simple subject and a very interesting and picturesque one, so we will go to Aylesford and draw the old bridge. Not a very simple subject, you say, yet the easiest things to manage in pen and ink are often those that appear complicated. For one thing there are plenty of points to measure. The more difficult subject is one of a rolling skyline of gentle undulation. In this there is very little that can be measured with ease and it is difficult when it goes wrong to see quite what is the matter. Not so with this bridge: each arch and each buttress can be checked and catalogued and put in its place.

  Let me suggest a method of attack. It is a good idea to have a cut out mount or small frame to hold up and fix in your mind the exact boundaries of your view. Then put in a pencil line to show the horizon—in this case it is about an inch and a quarter from the bottom of picture. Now find the top of the parapet over the big arch which is 1½ in. from the bottom and 2 in. from the left-hand side. From this point measure off the depth to the top of the arch and put in the two buttresses on each side. Since we are making an exact drawing of this scene, without any licence, we can put in this bit completely and finish it in ink. The water is still. We can measure off the reflection. Then measure off the next buttress to the right and put in the arch and its reflection. This is not difficult. So at last the bridge is quite finished.

  Having now put the bridge down—and, of course, quite correctly—we have definite points from which we can measure. If we measure upwards from the top of third buttress from the central arch we find the parapet at one inch and a quarter. Thus, with no more art than that required to make a good map we can get outlined all the principal features of the scene.

  In a drawing of this kind with a good deal in it, there is no possibility of doing much with small details within the outlines of different objects. In the bridge you will see the markings of stonework and also in the church tower, but you must resist the temptation to put these in your drawing or the surfaces of these things will become too dark. The difference between a hard slate roof, as in the next drawing, and a piece of crumbling brickwork can be to some extent expressed by means of the outline.

  (Cavendish)

  AYLESFORD

  In the subject "The Bridge at Good Easter," I hope you can guess that the bridge is built of brick and that the roof of the cottage is slate. If you cannot it does not matter—mine is the blame; but take note of the principle and make a practice of outlining objects in such a way that the outline by its nature tells something of the material. The trees, for instance, can be expressed with a
broken and dotted line for the boundary of masses of foliage and in the case of the water in the stream, a difficult thing to draw well, it can be expressed by leaving blank paper within a very carefully drawn outline and in this blank space putting a few touches showing reflections. There is no doubt, I think, which is the road and which is the stream, yet by an economy of line one is expressed entirely by its edge and the other by a few touches that anybody could do.

  ("Church Times")

  THE BRIDGE AT GOOD EASTER

  (Cavendish)

  ST. MARGARET'S AND THE CASTLE, ROCHESTER

  The sketch of St. Margaret's Church, Rochester, is one that I had to make for a newspaper during the Rochester Pageant. One of the scenes, St. Augustine meeting the Priests of Wodin outside the city, is an incident that took place on a slope by the Medway, almost exactly at the spot where stands St. Margaret's Church to-day. The path across the fields towards the castle is more or less the track of the old road into Rochester. Here is a case where the whole merit of the drawing is in the composition. The Tower of St. Margaret's can be placed on the extreme right. We won't bother about the nave—it is very ugly. We can just get in the castle on the left and by an eighth of an inch within the margin include Frindsbury Church across the Medway, and we have the history of the place in a nutshell. The central spire showing through the trees is the cathedral.

  Now for further exercise in "getting things down" in sketching and the device of expressing things by omission let us attack two subjects of somewhat similar feeling—both bits of old Kent. The buildings in these drawings are very much the same in their treatment. The great difference to be expressed is the nature of the ground. One has a foreground which is a farmyard. The other is a corner, well known to motorists, around which they come often, I fear, at a speed that is not always expressive of caution.