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...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts creativity, and the arts, 2021-11, Vol.15 (4), p.746-757 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 757 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 746 |
| container_title | Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts |
| container_volume | 15 |
| creator | Carson, Linda Siva, Parthipan Danckert, James |
| description | 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. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1037/aca0000345 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2617215009</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2443646836</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a282t-c4d9b77c612555ae0d78fa3f90bdda5697bdcb5dc2efd53a7ab1722542e838793</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90EtLw0AQAOBFFKzVi78g4E2J7vtxlNaqUFCogrdlsruRlDSJuwnSf29qFW_OZYbhY2YYhM4JviaYqRtwgMdgXBygCTGM5Mzgt8PfWht5jE5SWmPMFaNygvQ8wmfVvGfPbewjVH3KoPHZqq_qOltWZUjZIrabjM6_-2yerdohupBO0VEJdQpnP3mKXhd3L7OHfPl0_zi7XeZANe1zx70plHKSUCEEBOyVLoGVBhfeg5BGFd4VwjsaSi8YKCiIolRwGjTTyrAputjP7WL7MYTU2_V4QDOutFSOlAiM_1ecM8mlZnJUl3vlYptSDKXtYrWBuLUE293_7N__Rny1x9CB7dLWQewrV4fkhhhD0--sJcJyq7hkX1EVbzw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2443646836</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Drawing Portraits and Still Lifes From 2D and 3D Sources</title><source>APA PsycARTICLES</source><source>ARTbibliographies Modern</source><creator>Carson, Linda ; Siva, Parthipan ; Danckert, James</creator><contributor>Goldstein, Thalia ; Vartanian, Oshin</contributor><creatorcontrib>Carson, Linda ; Siva, Parthipan ; Danckert, James ; Goldstein, Thalia ; Vartanian, Oshin</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1931-3896</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1931-390X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/aca0000345</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Educational Publishing Foundation</publisher><subject>Aesthetics ; Direct Observation ; Female ; Human ; Male ; Portraits ; Semantics ; Stereoscopic Presentation ; Still life painting</subject><ispartof>Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts, 2021-11, Vol.15 (4), p.746-757</ispartof><rights>2020 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2020, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Nov 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0002-0816-7302</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,30972</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Goldstein, Thalia</contributor><contributor>Vartanian, Oshin</contributor><creatorcontrib>Carson, Linda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siva, Parthipan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Danckert, James</creatorcontrib><title>Drawing Portraits and Still Lifes From 2D and 3D Sources</title><title>Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts</title><description>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.</description><subject>Aesthetics</subject><subject>Direct Observation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Portraits</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Stereoscopic Presentation</subject><subject>Still life painting</subject><issn>1931-3896</issn><issn>1931-390X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QI</sourceid><recordid>eNp90EtLw0AQAOBFFKzVi78g4E2J7vtxlNaqUFCogrdlsruRlDSJuwnSf29qFW_OZYbhY2YYhM4JviaYqRtwgMdgXBygCTGM5Mzgt8PfWht5jE5SWmPMFaNygvQ8wmfVvGfPbewjVH3KoPHZqq_qOltWZUjZIrabjM6_-2yerdohupBO0VEJdQpnP3mKXhd3L7OHfPl0_zi7XeZANe1zx70plHKSUCEEBOyVLoGVBhfeg5BGFd4VwjsaSi8YKCiIolRwGjTTyrAputjP7WL7MYTU2_V4QDOutFSOlAiM_1ecM8mlZnJUl3vlYptSDKXtYrWBuLUE293_7N__Rny1x9CB7dLWQewrV4fkhhhD0--sJcJyq7hkX1EVbzw</recordid><startdate>20211101</startdate><enddate>20211101</enddate><creator>Carson, Linda</creator><creator>Siva, Parthipan</creator><creator>Danckert, James</creator><general>Educational Publishing Foundation</general><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7QI</scope><scope>8XN</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0816-7302</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20211101</creationdate><title>Drawing Portraits and Still Lifes From 2D and 3D Sources</title><author>Carson, Linda ; Siva, Parthipan ; Danckert, James</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a282t-c4d9b77c612555ae0d78fa3f90bdda5697bdcb5dc2efd53a7ab1722542e838793</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Aesthetics</topic><topic>Direct Observation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Portraits</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Stereoscopic Presentation</topic><topic>Still life painting</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carson, Linda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siva, Parthipan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Danckert, James</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ARTbibliographies Modern</collection><collection>International Bibliography of Art (IBA)</collection><jtitle>Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carson, Linda</au><au>Siva, Parthipan</au><au>Danckert, James</au><au>Goldstein, Thalia</au><au>Vartanian, Oshin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Drawing Portraits and Still Lifes From 2D and 3D Sources</atitle><jtitle>Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts</jtitle><date>2021-11-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>746</spage><epage>757</epage><pages>746-757</pages><issn>1931-3896</issn><eissn>1931-390X</eissn><abstract>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.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Educational Publishing Foundation</pub><doi>10.1037/aca0000345</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0816-7302</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1931-3896 |
| ispartof | Psychology of aesthetics, creativity, and the arts, 2021-11, Vol.15 (4), p.746-757 |
| issn | 1931-3896 1931-390X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2617215009 |
| source | APA PsycARTICLES; ARTbibliographies Modern |
| subjects | Aesthetics Direct Observation Female Human Male Portraits Semantics Stereoscopic Presentation Still life painting |
| title | Drawing Portraits and Still Lifes From 2D and 3D Sources |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T09%3A55%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Drawing%20Portraits%20and%20Still%20Lifes%20From%202D%20and%203D%20Sources&rft.jtitle=Psychology%20of%20aesthetics,%20creativity,%20and%20the%20arts&rft.au=Carson,%20Linda&rft.date=2021-11-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=746&rft.epage=757&rft.pages=746-757&rft.issn=1931-3896&rft.eissn=1931-390X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/aca0000345&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2443646836%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2443646836&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |