Drawing Portraits and Still Lifes From 2D and 3D Sources

Drawing is hard, and portraits especially so. To characterize what is hard or easy about it, 258 charcoal drawings, completed in real-world conditions from photographs (two-dimensional, 2D) and from direct observation of the same subjects (three-dimensional, 3D), were assessed both subjectively and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts creativity, and the arts, 2021-11, Vol.15 (4), p.746-757
Hauptverfasser: Carson, Linda, Siva, Parthipan, Danckert, James
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Drawing is hard, and portraits especially so. To characterize what is hard or easy about it, 258 charcoal drawings, completed in real-world conditions from photographs (two-dimensional, 2D) and from direct observation of the same subjects (three-dimensional, 3D), were assessed both subjectively and objectively. There was no difference between drawings made from 2D and 3D in their subjectively rated accuracy or quality, or their objectively measured geometric accuracy. However, the semantic content-portraits versus still lifes-had a significant impact: By most objective measures, portraits were more accurately drawn than still lifes but viewers rated them as less accurate and of lower quality.
ISSN:1931-3896
1931-390X
DOI:10.1037/aca0000345