[Juhani]

How do you decide or design the overall composition of a bird/animal carving. I have read a few books which describe something of a circular flow to the overall composition. What makes the circular flow happen or what makes the eye follow the composition in a way that helps the carver show what he wants to be seen?

[mark yundt]

Boy,,this could be a whole book in itself,,and a very good question.These are elements I look for when I view a piece.This is exactly what I refer to when I say "flow" "lines" "form" etc. It's easy to just make a piece,,but to get it to harmonize is very important.These basic elements I think,,rather than just detail ,,are what makes pieces more visually interesting,and create something artistic.These are the things you notice at a distance before the intricasies of the piece get in the way,,this is what brings you to a piece,,THEN the details give you more to look at,,it's an evolutionary process that too few take into account or may not even realize.You could take one carving of a bird,,place it on two different branches and besides having two different compositions,,one might be very relaxing to look at and one might end up being completly disjointed ,,,no harmony.You can stick that bird on a branch for the simple sake of having a base or something for it to sit on,,,but does it enhance the piece at all? A circular movement keeps your eyes moving,,and keeps them within the framework of the piece,,not really settling on one given area. The swan on another post is a terrific example of this. Nothing else is added, but it all happens within the bird itself.The "S" curve of its neck ( an S is just two circles stuck together) keeps flowing back and forth within itself,,the line is broken at it's bill,,but if you extend that line it points directly back to the breast area,,if you moved its head up more,,the line would go off into space,,.The cardinal I posted uses the branch ,in a very literal sense to complete the circle.If you look at the base block itself I used the grain in the wood to start the flow,,the branch coming out of the base parallels this grain pattern.The base too parallels the same shape as the crest on top of the bird,,so the base shape and the birds head are really one and the same. But , since a piece like this is viewed from all angles,,the branch continues in a circular shape to lead your eye up towards the bird,,and since looking at a bird from the back isn't as interesting ,,I used a flower here to add to the interest as well as being a compliment to the birds coloring ( a white dogwood with the hint of red in the center) the continues spiraling up to terminate in another flower you can see when the bird is facing you.Too many carvings look good from only one perspective,,these I feel have to look good from all angles, as they are not paintings stuck to a wall to be seen from only one view point. In architectural carvings or most any other design for that matter,,these lines are just as important to bring your eye to an intended detail or to support other features of a piece.So these lines can appear in the piece itself or by adding elements to complete the circular movement. One other design element also very useful and used quite often is triangulation.Here the lines lead your eye to the point of intersection of the legs of the triangle.Imagine ,,a large triangle,,put something in the middle of one of the legs vs. one at the top,,which do you really notice and keep looking at ,,the one at the top..look at the "all seeing eye" on the dollar bill sitting on a pyramid,,and probably the most famous,Da Vinci's last supper,,that is nothing short of triangulation in all aspects,,that's what he used to build that painting,,it is brilliant,,subtle,,but it's a great use of a vanishing point,,keeps taking your eye to that point.I used this in the composition of a hawk,,the triangulation runs between the viewer,,the base,,the lines of the base to the bird,the base itself is triangular,,,within the bird itself,,the number of pieces involved ( 3),,the shape of the overlapping wings,,the fan shape of the tail feathers,,it just keeps repeating itself the more you look at it,,but it is very subtly done,,and no-one realizes it till you look for it,,but by doing it this way,,the piece is always enjoyable to look at and I think these elements are the reason why. That's also why some pieces aren't what they could be,in my estimation,,because these elements are missing,,it's a good carving,,but an uninspired presentation. It's a great painting in a lousy frame.For carvers ,,the frame is these very elements,,that's how we frame stuff.A good painting in a lousy frame hurts it,,a fair painting in a good frame helps it tremendously.Don't know if my description answered your question or not,,but it is worth studying these features of carving and art to produce good pieces that some people might not be able to put their finger on,,but like a piece because of them.

[whitecree]

Took awhile to go through all that, but Mark is right; you could right books about this. I'll avoid confusing you, and say I agree with most of what Mark says. The various elements that go into your work will either flow one into the other, or it will look like something is missing.

To get to that flow, you just have to keep working at it, try different techniques and so forth.

[Juhani]

I have heard a time or two with a song bird for example that you would want the song bird to be looking at the viewer. For some reason I would like to have the song bird looking at something else in the composition to try and create the "flow" of the piece. Do we really need the bird or animal to be acknowledging us or would we rather that the bird or animal be showing some other sort of feeling "within" the piece. I realize that a lot of this is personal taste but what draws someone to look at a piece and then look again rather than look and then move on. I may be thinking a little too hard about this but it seems to me that I dont really want the "flow" of the piece to be pointing to the next room. I dont know if I make any sense at all with this rambling but I have all kinds of questions that I havent yet figured out how to ask or really exactly what it is that I am looking for. The most consistent thought that I have is that there should be some sort of spatial movement within the composition but that I dont really know how to create it. I will most definately enjoy any thoughts that any of you have on this and I thank mark and whitecree for the ideas you have already given.

[Eddy Smiles]

Obviously Mark and Whitecree have many more years carving experience than I but when I do a carving of an animal I study that animal a lot longer than it takes to carve it. If I haven't a live specimen to look at I'll get a book or go on line and download pictures. I'm still learning and what I carver doesn't always turn out exactly as I planned but the preparation does go a long way in making sure that my carving isn't a complete bust. It might help if you first made a couple of sketches of what you're trying to accomplish. That might help your visualization of it.

[AlArchie]

I can't name all the particular carvers, but I have seen many bird carvings with the birds looking at other objects in the carving. Songbirds looking at a lady bug, a bird looking at a caterpillar (bug, not a tractor), raptors with birds and mice in their talons, and looking at them very hungrilly, a pair of doves billing, etc. I've done a rainbow trout just passing a minnow, and that last bass I did had a hungry look toward an escaping crawdad. All kinds of things you can do besides directing the gaze at the observer.

In fact we just had a small hawk come hovering across our back yard, then dip his head down and dive toward our neighbors bird feeder. That guy sure wasn't looking at me. And there is a pose for a carving I have never seen....wings extended for slow flight and the head angled down.....pretty neat sight, it was!

Al

[mark yundt]

Seeing that you are relatively new to carving,,you are asking some great questions and giving them alot of careful and considerate thought,,that is something to be continued. I understand your frustration in not being able to put into words ,,or ask exactly ,,what it is you want to know.And that's O.K. because in the searching,,many other things can be discovered along the way.All of this process will only add to your bag of tricks and depth of knowledge.As far as your question goes,,it can be posed either way,,looking at the viewer or at something else in the composition.My personal feelings are that it shouldn't necessarily be looking at the viewer. The reason I say this is if you look at most birding books ,,or if you yourself watch birds for any length of time,,they are not looking back at you.They almost seem to care less that you're there,even when you get too close. And don't forget,,birds can see in a binocular or monocular way,,depends what they're looking at.The don't have to have their beak pointing in your direction to be looking at you.I feel that a carving of a bird looks best when it isn't posed as a portrait but more as a snapshot of it doing it's thing. A moment in time I feel has a more natural look to it since birds never pose as you could get a dog for example to pose for you but capture the bird in its daily life.They tend to hop around so quickly that a photo or a carving gives you a chance to really spend time looking at the bird that you couldn't normally do, and see just how it interacts with it's environment.This I feel gives a natural look to a carving without it being contrived.You're right,,sometimes they are posed interacting with other elements in the piece,,sometimes this works sometimes it doesn't.The caution here I think is overdoing it.Some pieces are done for the cute factor,,it works initially but can get old fairly quickly once the novelty wears off .The same holds true as well I think for pieces where too much is going on in an effort to show too many things,,or an odd pose that might very well happen,,but if you freeze that action for eternity,,it too grows old and becomes unsettling to look at repeatedly. Some try for the wow factor in a piece where wings are flapping all over,,heads twisted all around,,other things going on in the piece,,,initially as I said it looks dramatic,,but like a joke told one too many times,,looses it's impact and becomes tired.A lot of comotion in a piece is very difficult to pull off well.Many do it ,,but few do it convincingly.A bird might very well be looking off in the distance,,that's fine,,that's how we usually get to see them,,they are more interested in something else besides looking back at us,,but within the composition ,,the elements and design will keep your eye focused on the main attraction ,,looking at the piece and the bird.

[William]

I have learned a lot in this thread, thank you Juhani for asking this question.

I think most predator's like owl's, cat's and people have eyes on the front of the head to assist in depth perception for hunting, so it would be natural for an Owl standing on a post to have it's head pointed directly at you but a rabbit, deer or cow with eyes on the side of the head would be natural in profile and may still be looking at you.

Bill
^v^

[brian bailey]

One of the best books that I have ever read on composition and its fundamentals is "Drawing Scenery: Landscapes and Seascapes, by Jack Hamm".

He shows and explains with many examples the fundamentals of good composition. Using these fundamentals it doesn't matter whether your work is in 2D or 3D.

Here's a link to an excellent online site that explains the fundamentals of composition in scenery that can be applied to any form of art.

http://www.wetcanvas.com/Articles2/135/120/

[Paul_Guraedy]

This thread is extremely well named and incredibly important to woodcarving at this stage of development. A few years ago, I was in a session with an artist who lamented the acceptance of a “monolith” as the current standard for woodcarvers. I believe this to be true of most genre in our field.

It is represented by bird carvers as simply a “bird on a limb” or on a base. Total reliance on the carving as a close approximation of the subject species.

It is also true of caricature carvers. Many of these pieces would not be nearly as effective or meaningful without an explanation through the title.

Santa carvers are not immune. Look at the comments made of many of these carvings. They generally revolve around the ability of the carver to represent robes, beards, faces or to execute intricate painting schemes.

I think there are two basic reasons. First is our over reliance on roughouts and patterns. Secondarily is our shackles to the past. This is the way we have been taught to carve.

Most of us concentrate on our abilities as woodcarvers and fail to realize that we have sufficient skills to do wonderful work. We need to move beyond this and start allowing the carvings to speak for themselves. It should not simply be an excellent representation or a well executed and intricate carving; but to be a complete work within itself. Titles can help, but the viewer should look to this only after becoming involved with the carving. They should only be used as further explanation. They should be used to put the carving into a broader perspective, a world that is “fleshed out” by the mind of the observer.

To do this we must start using the principals being listed here. Techniques that are represented in all good works of art.