[doris]

i am watching too, since it is a very demanding project, and a very unique approach to carve in the round...
i dont think actually, that michelangelo carved this way. yes, from the sculptures he not finished, we can see that he carved probably from front to back until it is a carving in the round. but, no of these carvings i know, ever showed traces of the outlining you started with... he roughed out, and narrowed in more and more to the subject... also, michelangelo loved to finish one part, even up to polishing, and then moved to a different part, often not connected to the first one. he seemed to have a very safe view where the parts were lying in the stone.....
i am very interested to see how this approach works out for you, and listen to your commenting about it...i see the benefit of it can be that the outlining gives you all the time a good orientation of where you are going, but it might add difficulties, when you cut accidentially to far left or right somewhere, since you then have no chance to move the part a tad bit without loosing proportions...but maybe the benefit is much bigger than this potential difficulty...
anyway, so far it looks really great. thanks for letting us look wip stages.

[Ashbys]

Thanks all .

Since I have not had a lot of time I am working on this in strange steps.

Doris , you know since he used lead pencils , we will never know how he did it. But when you work fron to back you can make things happen, that can not be done from working back to front.

When you work back to front , your saying everything has to fit in the area, now because of tricks you have already learned, the use of undercuts, can give the effect of depth, but if you have to adjust you have restricted the room to adjust . In most relief carving , the last thing considered in the subject. And the first is whats behind it. For me I worry about the subject and the background can take care of it's self . I would rather make sure there is room for the theme than to worry I can not put in the mountians behind it.

But that is just me . But even this piece, if I am short on the depth, I will lose part of the blanket, so it would be shorten, do you think , anyone would really notice? But if I flatten his leg , everyone would notice. It is just an adjustment in concept. The work is done the same , but background is considered waste , to be placed if possible but can be done without.

Only a short time today , but a lot of changes , the arm is now located , and in place , the wrist shifted into place and it would be turned into the horse to hole the reins. The waist line located and the uper shoulder to the out side has been located, the back arm is now being moved back , the face is being released to get ready to move. The jacket is now finished, and the thighs are located , the outer blanket has been opened , and the horses flank , has been given the muscle structure.

Suggestions always welcomed

Ash

[doris]

yes, ash, that is the reason for carving from front to back, as you look my wips, i do that too...my only comment, what i find very much different how you carve is, that you outlined the figure, i mean you cut the outside boundary of everything first. and this can potentially give too less room for the side width of an arm say, as you described, carving from front to back might end in having not enough for the blanket, but hey thats fine the blanket is not focal anyway, but if it were the leg when carving from back to front it were a problem... looks really good, coming along nicely, you have all well in control...thanks for sharing

[Ashbys]

Doris,

It is possible , for that to happen, but in a in the round carving you cut the outline. One other thing that you noticed , I gave the finished sizes of the completed piece.

These we not just numbers, they were very defined references. I also gave very defined sizes of Napoleon as he would appear on the mount. So perhaps I should give some background. So understanding of the process I used to define the size.

The painting was done by Jacques - Louis - David in 1806 Here is a picture of the painting.

The horse in an Napoleon. These horse have very set sizes and Napoleon to the bred . Because of the way Napoleon was painted , I could not use him to establish the size. But the mount is correct .

Using the horses head , and a anatomy book describing the horses structure , it established the length , size and width of the horse. Thanks to Susan who gave me the clue when I did the Indian women , about how large a person would be measured from head size. I wondered in a horse would have the same restrictions, it does.

By establishing the height of the horse , the carving instantly gained depth. Since Napoleon was given an established size in relation to the horse, It gave the location and size that he would have to be, for the painting to become 3- D. To maintain this relationship , the carving has to be consistent in the lines of the object.
As a photo , or painting the outer edges we see are the largest point of mass. We do not see round , we see flat, so if a leg has a set height, and we can place that it is round it will give the depth of that leg. Here Napoleons leg at the calf is 1 inch , if you elongate your leg and and press your toes the calf muscle will slightly bulge , but it will be almost the same size front to back as it across. This established the width of the leg. Adding both of these widths ( two legs) to the girth of the horse , it gave the size of Napoleon mounted.

The girth of a horse is one head length , in this case 4 and 1/2 inches.

So the depth of the carving , the size of the blocks and the locations all became into place.

Hope that makes sense.

Ash

[A Willburger]

Thanks for showing the picture. I can see the difficulty of this project now. The movement is amazing you picked a wonderful painting to carve.

Andy

[Mottles]

Hi Ask, your carving is beginning to show depth and looking good. At this point I don't really have any questions for you, but I'm sure following along. Sorry I haven't commented sooner, I hope you will continue to update so I can learn.
Kathy

[doris]

hi ash, sorry for being so late to react to your post...i was for a short travel studying riemenschneider work in situ, so beautiful, so humbling...

yes, this painting i know, i have seen it in books, and if i remember correctly i have it seen in berlin in real too, about 30 years ago though. i always liked that, and i recogniszed from the first images of your carving that you might be base on that painting... nice to know you do... thanks for indepth explanation on how you determined necessary depth. it goes nothing over a little math, when fixed proportions are to be applied. :-) thanks again, and i am looking forward for progress pics :-)

[Ashbys]

Been a while so I thought you might like an update.

I have a concern , when I get a bit father , I will ask for some advice. It has to do with the weight.

Anyway , just a bit cut here a bit cut there.... mostly neck head and mane , muscle tone of the legs .... simple stuff .


Ash

[Irish]

Garry,

Thank you for inviting me to post my comments to your thread!

Yes, you are facing a major problem with the thinness of the lower back legs, ankles and foot area which at only 1 1/4" thickness can not support the mass or weight of the work. I don't know that any particular species of wood could ... perhaps maple ...

If I may I want to start with the original painting from which you are working. I have gray scaled the painting to remove the color info ... that way we can work with only the shape, mass and visual weight of each area.

The painting appears to have the horse rearing with his front legs suspended in area - but that really is not the case. Notice the dark gray mass of the lower hill ridge behind the horse and the rock base upon which he stands. These two elements are visually part of the horse and act as the visual counter balancing base that the painter needed to keep Napoleon and that horse from just cracking at the ankles.

If you follow the lower two yellow lines you can see that the artist has mirrored the belly line of the horse to create the top ridge of that hill. This binds or unites these two elements into two parts of one unit. Mirroring anchor or units elements within a design.

Also notice that the front hooves barely clear that hill line and that the gray tone of the hooves is the exact same as the gray tone of the top of the ridge ... again the placement of the hooves and the using the same gray tonal value binds these two areas into one unit.

So, the painter had problems with the mass and position of the horse and it's inability to support it's own weight of those two back ankles!

Your problem with the support on such thin posts (the ankles) comes not from your work but directly from the original artwork.

The original artist solved his problem by anchoring the horse, rocky foreground and small hill into one inseparable unit. You, however, working not in color and tonal values will need to resort to more tangible, direct and invasive means.

Before I go on to the next posting I note that the artist also mirrored the background mountain range to the back bone line of the horse. That one, in my opinion, is a diversionary trick to help disguise the artist's need to anchor the horse to the foreground hill. He had to have the base anchor but he didn't want to scream "see the horse see that he is anchored to the hill". By repeating the mountain lines with the backbone line he is fooling your eye.

Susan

[Irish]

This image shows several problems that translating this painting into a wood sculpture contains.

First notice the vertical red lines. The middle line shows where you central point for the anchors comes in the work. The center weight line runs down through Napoleon's face, the front edge of the upper leg and then into the center of the lower leg.

The reason the center line falls there is because Napoleon's face in the most important feature of the work ... This line also falls at the center point of the angled line of the lower leg. It's not the foot or ankle that will eventually hold all of the weight of the work but that center point of the lower leg.

Following the front edge of the front leg gives us the front weight line with the back weight line determined by the base of the tail and the back leg knee.

In the painting at least two thirds of the weight of your work lies in front and free floating from the center anchor line. The back third is not problem as that is where you have the two supports (the legs) and the angles of the legs for counter balancing strength.

The original painter has balanced the two weight areas (2/3's to the front with 1/3 to the back) by making the front areas of the horse and Napoleon's front hand, hip and leg is bright white tonal values. Whites visually appear lighter in weight then dark tones. Notice that the dark tones fall to the back of the center balance line. Also notice how the painter has made Napoleon's cloak (cape) have no weight at all by painting it in the middle range gray tone!

So the painter has lighten the weight of the front mass by using white tones, added mass and weight to the support area of the horse's hips, legs and tail by using the black tones and then totally negated the cloak (cape) by making it the neutral middle grays.

Wish we carves could pull that one off so easily.

So ... how does the carver compensate for ankles that simply will not support the actual mass of wood in this work.

If it were me ... I'd go get a coping saw, some gorilla glue *** see below *** and some 1/4 rebar! Oh, do you know how to weld? I would cut the carving apart now before I did any more carving. I would cut the horse's legs from the top back through the mass of the hips then down through the center of the legs.

That has removed the two outer sections of legs completely from the carving block. Next I would saw a large section of the horse's back about one third down from the top back line. This would take the cut right through Napoleon's just above the knee to the top of the breast bone of the horse.

Now I would create an armature with the rebar that followed the leg angles, hip angles - one each for each side. I would weld those to one, more likely two supporting bars that would run along the horses back - one bend leg rebar welded to one back support rebar for each side.. You will need a few cross bars welded as well.

Make a gouge trough to receive those Reba supports into the remaining carving. OK .. I am thinking this through and realize you will probably have to weld the back support bars onto the leg bars once the leg bars are into position in the wood.

Glue all of the wood cuts back into place to hide the armature.

You may also want to add leg feathers to the lower ankle areas of the back legs. This will widen the imprint of the foot where it touches the ground line.

Susan

(Back in a minute ... Mike needs a refill on his coffee.)

As I edit this for my horrendous spell Mike is editing the contents He is hollering No Gorilla Glue - Epoxy!!!! Gorilla glue is porous surface use as wood but as we are securing rebar he would suggest epoxy! I note here that Mike does all my glue up work so this area is his expertise.

He is adding another thought of using slow set epoxy to give you plenty of time for working and adjusting the rebar.