First featured here, Seattle based artist Olivia Knapp creates cross-hatched pen and ink drawings influenced by old European woodblock engravings. Specifically, Knapp pulls her inspiration from 16th through 18th century blocks, which were in all genres including religion, art, history, science and medicine. She borrows ideas from medical illustrations for her current exhibit at Hellion Gallery in Portland, "Prehensility". The title refers to the quality of an appendage adapted for grasping, for example, as a monkey's tail has adapted to grasping to a branch. The show is an extension of Knapp's previous works in both style and theme, where she explores a relationship between psychology and biology in the context of one's environment.

My related posts: 1400s-1700s drawing treatises online Painting materials of Rubens; bibliography Copying a Rubens drawing (materials, techniques) Copying a Rubens painting (materials, techniques) Inspired by Rubens (Getty Museum page) English translations of drawing treatises (Goeree, de Piles, Jombert) Renaissance woodcut tools Image gallery: copies and reconstructions (for the readers in L.A. - there is an interesting show called Hatched! at the Getty, see it if you can!) Cross-hatching is a complex skill to master, but not taught in today's "standard" art schools. I have always wondered how different types of hatching were taught in 1400-1700s so I looked at these treatises: Cennini early 1400s Leonardo 1510s Vasari 1550 Armenini 1587 Hilliard 1598-1602 Peacham 1606 Norgate 1620s and 1648 Bates 1634 Bosse 1645 Sanderson 1658 Goeree 1668 de Piles 1684 Salmon 1701 de Lairesse 1701 Jombert 1740 1755 Here is the result: I A comparison of drawing instruction from the treatises (and with modern instruction in small print), 1) How do I learn cross-hatching? 2) At what point in the drawing process should I start shading? 3) How do I put down the shadow? 4) What should the quality and character of the hatch-marks be? 5) What should be the direction and curve of my marks? 6) How many times can I cross my hatch-marks? 7) How do I distribute shadows in a drawing? II Links to larger excerpts from the treatises themselves (my translations), III Bibliography For preparatory procedures such as setting up the model and lighting, how and where to sit, hand position when holding the pencil, drawing supplies (1400s-1700s) see this post. Please contact me if you have any comments, corrections or suggestions. Three pages from a drawing book by Fialetti 1608, e-book HERE (Getty) I Advice on shading and cross-hatching 1) How do I learn cross-hatching? Since not too many books have detailed instructions on the theory of hatching, even though they are detailed in other respects, I'm assuming copying was how most of the students learned the skill. Every instruction book I have read speaks about copying works on paper by good artists. Most authors mention copying prints in addition to drawings: for beginners the "drawing book" types of prints - examples with simpler line-work and examples with parts of face and body separated; and for more advanced artists more serious and complex prints by the masters. * Hilliard (p.80) advises to copy the hatch marks from prints of Dürer; Norgate suggests Goltzius prints and Fialetti's drawing book (Norgate 106), Sanderson suggests prints after Raphael, Armenini (239) advises drawing books and prints in general. Armenini and the Englishmen note that you should copy so well that the print and your drawing become indistinguishable, but Armenini also cautions not to get carried away in the minuteness and prettiness of the lines. * Both Goeree and de Lairesse say drawings are more natural to copy for a draughtsman than prints (though both books contain prints to be copied by the student). Goeree also cautions that precise copying of prints with pen and ink can tire a student (and is good only for future printmakers). * Jombert suggests reading Bosse's treatise on intaglio printmaking to those who want to learn more about how to apply cross-hatching lines in drawing, and he borrows some parts of that book in his treatise, even though Bosse wrote it specifically for the burin. This is different in modern representational art classes where only a few teachers suggest copying drawings and none I know suggest copying prints. Images of good drawings can be easily accessed nowadays, so in a way you don't need prints, yet some part of the aesthetic influence gets lost by omitting them from drawing instruction. Plate from Odoardo Fialetti drawing book, 1608 digitised version HERE (Getty Research Institute) 2) At what point in the drawing process should I start shading? The general drawing process of 1400s-1700s: first the outlines are lightly sketched (often with willow charcoal because of its erasability), then incompletely brushed off and then retraced again, this time with black or red chalk or with pen. Then shadows are added and built up by degrees. This process is described with little variation in most treatises from Cennini (Chapter CXXII) in early 1400s to Jombert (1700s). In modern instruction the so called "construction lines" or preparatory lines to mark the positions of the parts of the figure take on a life of their own and are drawn so strongly that they are as visible among the final lines unless the eraser is used extensively (which it often is). The old method suggested erasers (soft bread middle or pumice powder) for mistakes rather than for such "clean-up". My own recreation of the process (copy after Rubens) 1: willow charcoal sketch, 2 and 3: final outline with black chalk, hatching Here is the process shown in a drawing book prints: Ciamberlano after Carracci, British Museum Ciamberlano after Carracci 1600-1630 (British Museum) 3) How do I put down the shadow? * Shading should be done top to bottom (de Lairesse, Goeree). For me as an artist the reason would be that you don't smudge with your hand what you have already shaded. Current professors advise shading all parts of the drawing at the same time. I've seen advice to work from top to bottom only in books on scientific illustration, where clarity of the drawing really matters. * For pen and ink: "In the double and treble shadows, let your first strokes be very dry for fear of blotting, ere you cross them" (Peacham, 26, same advice in a Norgate-related manuscript (Norgate, 240)) * Shading can be started by "reuselen" in Goeree -- (Grainer/ grener / reuselen/ röselen/ тушевать is to smoothly rub the chalk on the grain of the paper to get a textured tone without visible hatch marks, L.R.). A shadow done this way can then be strengthened in places by regular hatching (Goeree, repeated in Jombert). Stomping and washes can also serve as a base for hatching. "Reuselen" and stomping are not advised to be used on their own because they are devoid of the liveliness that the hatch-marks bring. A mix of all four techniques is can be used. (Goeree repeated in Salmon and Jombert). Jombert also suggests that black chalk can be used to deepen a red chalk drawing. Salmon suggests livening up a drawing of a face with final "hard touches" with pen and ink where the shadows are darkest. *De Lairesse suggests to avoid "reuselen" or stomping except in the darkest shadows combined with hatching. He advises the hatch marks to be first put down rather strongly and evenly, then in half-shadows lighter (and uncrossed) and then added with all force in the darkest double or triple shadows. These techniques can be seen in many elaborate Rubens portraits: a "grained" or smudged shadow "base" with hatch-marks on top, using red black and white chalk, and finally pen and ink accents for pupils, eyelashes, eyebrows, nostrils, mouths, etc. Rubens, portrait of Isabella Brant (British Museum) (stomping or smudging to the left of the ear; rough "graining" with black chalk to the right of the ear and with red chalk on the side of the nose; parts of the eye accented with ink) 4) What should the quality and character of the hatch-marks be? * Armenini speaking about chalk drawings suggests to "hatch in several directions, but with such skill that you don't see any rawness or hardness, and you go over it finely until it's finished". * Goeree: "When making hatch-marks with a pen make sure that they are not scratchy or thin but rather wide and fat, and you must also draw them from above downwards, that is from fine or sharp to wide; uniform and flat shadows must be made evenly wide and similar overall." De Lairesse emphasises the neat, distinct and even quality of hatch-marks even more than Goeree. * de Piles: Because drawing lacks colour one compensates by "une expression spirituelle des traits" (a spirited expression of lines) that should differ according to the differences in nature. Flesh should be hatched or "grained" smoothly, but draperies should have more hatching and a firmer look. Hair, feathers and fur of animals should be drawn with the tip of the chalk. (this might show some Leonardo influence) * Jombert: "Flowers and plants should be shaded with delicate and careful hatch-marks in the direction of the growth of their leaves" (Jombert, 122) Bloemaert, detail of a plate from his "Tekenboek", 1650s shows lozenge-shaped spaces between hatch-marks in a simplified illustration of working up a shadow (I have put this in queue to be digitised at the Getty, will insert the link when they do it) 5) What should be the direction and curve of my marks? * Peacham 1606: "All circular and round bodies that receive a concentration of the light,, when it dooth gather it selfe into a small center, must bee shadowed in circular manner ". Peacham also separately instructs for cheeks of frontal faces and for breasts of the female nudes to be shaded with circular marks. * The shapes between hatching lines should look like lozenges and not squares (Bosse, Jombert). Square shapes fit stone better, but for flesh something between a lozenge and a square shape is best (Bosse) * Hatch marks should follow the curve of the object (Peacham, de Lairesse) From de Lairesse (my translation from a French edition): p 34 "look at the hatch-marks that pass on the front of the head D and then E. The latter turn to form an arch, the former turn downwards. One sees this difference better when looking at a shaded column placed above or below the horizon line. It will suffice for now to know in what circumstances one should vary the hatch-marks, to get your hand used to it, because the beautiful style (la belle-manière) consists of that." Gérard de Lairesse, 1701 download here (Getty Research Institute) 6) How many times can I cross my hatch-marks? (How many directions can be used in cross-hatching?) * As many as necessary (Armenini, and the same is implied by Cennini and Jombert) * No more than three directions of hatch marks are used (Peacham, de Lairesse, Bosse). * Half shadows should not be cross-hatched (Peacham, de Lairesse) Peacham (1606) specifies that one layer is used for planes, two for core shadows, and three for crevices and other very dark places: A "single shadow" is used for flat surfaces that are not in full light, a "double shadow" for surfaces that "begin to forsake your eyes as you may perceive best in a column", a "treble shadow" is used "farthest from the light as in gulffes, chinks of the earth, wells, caves within houses under the bellies and flanks of beastes" etc. "Your treble shaddowe is made by crossing over your double shadow againe, which darkeneth by third part" Peacham specifies the use of each in shading a portrait and a nude: "first a single shadowe in the temples, then a double shadow in the corner of the eies" or "the shinbone from the knee to the insteppe, is made by shadowing one halfe of the leg with a single shadow" - the directions are very formulaic, but at the same time if beginners follow them, they can get a plausible face and figure without forgetting the main landmarks. Anyone who in a standard modern art department would dare say that you shouldn't cross lines more than three times in a drawing would risk ridicule. And yet if you examine old master drawings you will see that the majority followed it. Peacham 1606, single and double shadow illustrations (in queue to be digitised at the Getty) 7) How do I distribute shadows in a drawing? The part closest to you should be lightest and the parts further away should lose themselves in a light shadow (Armenini 83, Vasari 218, Sanderson 48) Cennini has similar advice - to go many times over the extremities (either periphery or depth) and less over the relief (Capitolo VIII) "nelle stremità vuoi fare più scure, tanto vi torna più volte; e così, per lo contrario, in su e rilievi tornavi poche volte." Personally I have seen this concept more at work in paintings and large finished compositions than in sketches or studies. Leonardo (repeated and elaborated by Goeree) says that the perspective of lights and darks should be studied very carefully from life. Current teachers simply say that less contrast should be used for objects further away. Probably the advice to make everything further from you darker may sound formulaic to modern art professors' ears. A Raphael drawing illustrating the concept (see above), Uffizi _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ II Excerpts from treatises 1) de Piles "Les premiers élémens de la peinture pratique" has many pages on drawing technique. See my translation of them HERE 2) Jombert: see my translation of some parts of his drawing treatise HERE 3) de Lairesse (my translation from this French translation of his 1701 drawing treatise): "Lesson 7: After you finish the contours you place the shadows, which requires getting used to drawing with sanguine to hatch neatly and distinctly without stomping or "grainer" like some masters teach. ( Grainer / grener/ rauselen / röselen / тушевать is to rub the chalk on the grain of the paper in a way to get a textured tone without visible hatch marks, L.R.) Lesson 8: Hatch-marks should cross no more than two or three times (in the strongest shadows) as seen in figures 10-16. For relief only one layer of hatch marks should be used, and for deepest hollows you can blend with a stomp or with the crayon (estomper ou grainer). Contours should be lighter on the light side and more pronounced on shadow side. Shading is done from top to bottom with simple, but rather strong hatching with as equal a distance (between lines) as possible. Afterwards hatch the lighter half-shadows with simple, more or less light lines according to the object because half-shadows should never be cross-hatched. To finish and give all the force to the shadows you need to double the hatch marks and even triple them if needed. for hatching with sanguine (red chalk), it's likely that students will find it more difficult to do than "grainer" (shading with smooth tone), but it will make them develop a firmer hand to make sure that all the hatch marks are of the same thickness and are equidistant it demands more judgement and exactness, then one needs to know what effect is produced by two or three or four lines that cross each other, which can't be learned by simply stomping or "grener" (rubbing the chalk on paper, L.R.). (de Lairesse, 33) p 34 look at the hatch-marks that pass on the front of the head D and then E. The latter turn to form an ark, the former turn downwards. One sees this difference better when one looks at a shaded column placed above or below the horizon line. It will suffice for now to know in what circumstances one should vary the hatch-marks, to get your hand used to it, because the beautiful style (la belle-manière) consists of that." _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ III Bibliography (for more links to digitised versions of drawing treatises see this page) Armenini, Giovanni Battista. De veri precetti della pittura. Ravenna, 1587 Bates, John. The Mysteryes of Nature and Art. London, 1634. Bosse, Abraham (1602-1676). Traicté des manieres de graver en taille douce sur l'airin. Par le Moyen des Eauxs Fortes, & des Vernix Durs & Mols. Ensemble de la façon d'en Imprimer les Planches, & d'en Construire la Presse, & autres choses concernans lesdits Arts. Par A. Bosse, Graveur en Taille Douce. Paris, 1645 Cennini, Cennino. Il libro dell'arte. Late 1300s to ealry 1400s, Italian and English translation Goeree, Willem Inleydinge tot de Algemeene Teyken-Konst. 1668, 1670 (this German edition scan is readable quality) Hilliard, Nicholas (1537 (ca.)-1619). A Treatise Concerning the Arte of Limning, by Nicholas Hilliard, together with, A More Compendious Discourse Concerning ye Art of Liming, by Edward Norgate, with a paralel modernized text. Ed. R.K.R. Thornton and T.G.S. Cain. Manchester, 1981. The original manuscript written c. 1598-1602 Jenner, Thomas (fl.1631-1656 bio). A Book of Drawing, Limning, Washing or Colouring of Maps and Prints: and the Art of Painting, with the Names and Mixtures of Colours used by the Picture-Drawers. Or, The Young-mans Time well Spent. London, 1652. Jombert, Charles-Antoine. Methode pour apprendre le dessein. Paris, 1755 Leonardo da Vinci. Trattato della pittura. 1510s, first published 1651 treatiseonpainting.org (or html, liberliber.it pdf) Lairesse, Gérard de (1640-1711). Grondlegginge ter teekenkonst : zynde een korte en zeekere weg om door middel van de geometrie of meetkunde, de teeken-konst volkomen te leeren. Amsterdam, 1701 in Dutch or its later translation to French HERE. Norgate, Edward (1580/1 - 1650). Miniatura or the Art of Limning. Ed. J. Muller and J. Murrel. New Haven and London, 1997. The original manuscripts date c. 1626-8 and c. 1648. Peacham, Henry (1576?-1643?). The art of drawing with the pen, and limming in water colours, more exactlie then heretofore taught and englarged: with the true manner of Painting upon glasse, the order of making your furnace, Annealing, etc. London, 1606 De Piles, Roger (1635-1709) Les premiers élémens de la peinture pratique. Paris, 1684. Ratcliffe, Thomas; Daniel, Thomas (printers); Newman, Dorman; Jones, Richard (booksellers) The excellency of the pen and pencil... London, 1668, 1688 Sanderson, William 1586?-1676. Graphice, the use of the pen and pensil, or, The most excellent art of painting : in two parts 1658 © Lala Ragimov

What are the critical principles underpinning great art? Like all broad generalisations there will always be exceptions, but if I were to reduce all the factors that come together in the most memorable artworks then three principles are essential: projection (to arrest a viewer’s attention and to invite the viewer to look at the featured subject); visual dialogue (to express meaning by comparison of the centre of interest with another pictorial element); and, alluding to subject material outside of the field of view (to conceptually expand the range of projected meanings beyond the featured subject material). In the following discussion I will address each of these principles and explain how Hendrick Goltzius and Giovanni Battista Piranesi have applied them. My choice to use Hendrick Goltzius’ Apostle Simon (shown below) as an example of the first principle—projection—is simple; I love the print. Moreover, I find myself drawn to keep looking at it. For me, the attraction has nothing to do with the physical beauty of the subject as I am sure that there are few viewers who would see Saint Simon as eye candy. I am, nevertheless, attracted by the finely engraved lines rendering the image (see details further below) but this is only a small part of the reason I love the print. The primary attraction lies with Saint Simon’s hands. This is especially true with regard to the saint’s left hand and more specifically with his third finger so emphatically pressing on the ground as if the saint is making a ideological point. This arrangement of the forward projected finger is the element that both arrests my eye and draws me into the image. After this pictorial “introduction” into the image my eye then follows a gently spiralling course. First stop is the saint’s left hand. Next, my eye moves to traverse across the book (bible?) the saint is holding to arrive at his right hand. After pondering the odd way that Saint Simon holds the book—mindful that the saint’s hands is undoubtedly modelled on Goltziius’ own deformed right hand (see drawing in Teylers Museum Haarlem)—my eye is then lead along his right arm to finally “rest” on his face (see diagram of the rhythm below) before making visual forays to examine other pictorial features like the saw of his martyrdom. Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617) Apostle Simon, 1589 From the suite Christ, The Twelve Apostles and St. Paul 15 x 10.3 cm (plate) with margins on fine laid paper with watermark “Crowned Arms” Marvellous lifetime impression of lll (of Vl). From collection R.S. (not at Lugt) Bartsch 53; Hollstein, Hirschmann 44 lll (of VI) Condition: perfect I am selling this print for $560 AUD including postage and handling to anywhere in the world. Please contact me using the email link at the top of the page if you have any queries or click the “Buy Now” button below. This print has been sold (Detail) Apostle Simon, 1589 (Detail) Apostle Simon, 1589 (Detail) Apostle Simon, 1589 Diagram of inward rhythm, Apostle Simon, 1589 Although the middle-finger of Saint Simon’s left hand is the point of introduction into the image, there are other elements in the print contributing to an invitation to look. For example the spine of the open book also draws attention inward as do the converging lines of the saint’s arms. To make the point of this discussion clearer in terms of how the eye is invited to engage with the act of looking and thinking, compare the difference in how the eye is not so welcomed by the arrangement of hands and arms in Golzius’ Apostle Bartholomew. This is true even though there are many other pictorial devices inviting the viewer’s eye to gaze into the print’s pictorial depth, such as the flaying knife of the saint’s martyrdom and the saint’s backward tilt of his head. Hendrick Goltzius (1558–1617) Apostle Bartholomew, 1589 From the suite Christ, The Twelve Apostles and St. Paul 14.4 x 10.4 cm (plate) right and left with small margins, cut on the platemark at the top, cut slightly inside the platemark at the bottom, on fine laid paper with watermark “Double Eagle” Marvellous lifetime impression of lll (of Vl) Bartsch 49; Hirschmann 40 lll (of VI) Condition: traces of use, otherwise in good condition I am selling this print for $360 AUD including postage and handling to anywhere in the world. Please contact me using the email link at the top of the page if you have any queries or click the “Buy Now” button below. This print has been sold (Detail) Apostle Bartholomew, 1589 (Detail) Apostle Bartholomew, 1589 Regarding the second principle—visual dialogue—I will return to Goltizius’ Apostle Simon as this print is so cleverly composed and rich in subtle use of visual devices. To begin at a very fundamental level, even the most cursory look at the image will show a connection between the saint and his book. This relationship between the centre-of-interest—the saint’s head—and the book he is examining is a fine example of visual dialogue. On a more reflective examination of the image, however, there is more to this visual dialogue than just the saint reading his book. He is also responding to what he is reading and this is signified by the gesture of the middle-finger of his left hand. This hand gesture that I proposed earlier as Saint Simon making an “ideological point” (i.e. a body-language gesture of clear emphatic certainty) does more than depict Saint Simon fully engaged in his reading. This gesture is the punctum point (discussed in an earlier post focused on Dujardin and Dietricy) of the whole image. In short, this single finger is the pivotal feature in the composition that shows the intensity of the saint’s reading of the book. Even more subtle than the triangulation between the saint’s head, book and finger is the visual dialogue between the saint’s central lock of hair and the tuff or grass in the centre foreground (see diagram below). To my eyes, this visual connection created by the similarity of form between the hair and grass is important to the expression of a decisive moment in the saint’s reading. From my viewpoint, I see the link as establishing a line of separation between the related dual gestures of the saint’s hands. Diagram of visual dialogue, Apostle Simon, 1589 For the final principle—alluding to a subject outside of the field of view— Piranesi’s etching, The Tomb of the Plautii near Ponte Lucano (shown below) is an excellent example. Here the shadow cast by an unseen structure lying beyond what can be viewed in the image creates a theatrical dimension of an unknown presence. This shadow not only hints at the form of the structure casting it but the shadow’s shape—especially the “extension” of the shadow’s shape into the cloud pattern—creates a window-like effect by framing the far distance. This principle is a very useful device for giving an artwork pictorial breadth). To illustrate what the print would be like without the shadow, compare the original etching with a view of the same tomb without a shadow (see the digitally manipulated image below). Beyond the use of shadows, another way to connote subject material beyond what is visible is the simple device of cropping the portrayed subject at the framing edge of the artwork. Again, Piranesi’s print is a good example of this approach as the portrayed tomb is not a panoramic view where the whole building can be seen but is cropped by the left and top edges of the format. This cropping ensures that a viewer understands that the image is only a section of a much broader view and this projects the notion and feeling of breadth. Giovanni Battista Piranesi (1720–78) Tomb of the Plautii near Ponte Lucano, 1761 From the Vedute di Roma [Views of Rome] series Etching, 46.6 x 63.2 cm Hind 83 IV (of IV) with the number 801 at upper right; Focillon 783; Wilton-Ely 216. Cartouche with the Italian inscription “Veduta degl’ avanzi del sepolcro della famiglia Plauzia sulla via Tiburtina vicino al ponte Lugano due miglia lontano da Tivoli”. With fecit note “Cavalier Piranesi F. (ecit)” Condition: excellent impression on wove paper without watermark, with margin around the platemark, minimal traces of use, browned and foxed with the blind stamp of the Calcografia di Roma I am selling this print for $960 AUD including postage and handling to anywhere in the world. Please contact me using the email link at the top of the page if you have any queries or click the “Buy Now” button below. Altered image of Tomb of the Plautii near Ponte Lucano, 1761

First featured here, Seattle based artist Olivia Knapp creates cross-hatched pen and ink drawings influenced by old European woodblock engravings. Specifically, Knapp pulls her inspiration from 16th through 18th century blocks, which were in all genres including religion, art, history, science and medicine. She borrows ideas from medical illustrations for her current exhibit at Hellion Gallery in Portland, "Prehensility". The title refers to the quality of an appendage adapted for grasping, for example, as a monkey's tail has adapted to grasping to a branch. The show is an extension of Knapp's previous works in both style and theme, where she explores a relationship between psychology and biology in the context of one's environment.

Albrecht Dürer ~ The Temptation of the Idler (The Dream of the Doctor) (detail), c.1498

First featured here, Seattle based artist Olivia Knapp creates cross-hatched pen and ink drawings influenced by old European woodblock engravings. Specifically, Knapp pulls her inspiration from 16th through 18th century blocks, which were in all genres including religion, art, history, science and medicine. She borrows ideas from medical illustrations for her current exhibit at Hellion Gallery in Portland, "Prehensility". The title refers to the quality of an appendage adapted for grasping, for example, as a monkey's tail has adapted to grasping to a branch. The show is an extension of Knapp's previous works in both style and theme, where she explores a relationship between psychology and biology in the context of one's environment.

One of the most important tools as an artist is a strong knowledge of hatching. Learn 6 basic forms of hatching & cross hatching, & their advantages.

Amazing Cross-Hatched Drawings by Olivia Knapp. Olivia Knapp’s intricate hand drawn pen and ink style is influenced by European line ...

First featured here, Seattle based artist Olivia Knapp creates cross-hatched pen and ink drawings influenced by old European woodblock engravings. Specifically, Knapp pulls her inspiration from 16th through 18th century blocks, which were in all genres including religion, art, history, science and medicine. She borrows ideas from medical illustrations for her current exhibit at Hellion Gallery in Portland, "Prehensility". The title refers to the quality of an appendage adapted for grasping, for example, as a monkey's tail has adapted to grasping to a branch. The show is an extension of Knapp's previous works in both style and theme, where she explores a relationship between psychology and biology in the context of one's environment.

Kent Barton is a well-known scratchboard artists. His clients include The New Yorker, Time, WSJ, LA Times, Pepsi, Saatchi & Saatchi, Clorox, and Audi, etc.

Mezzotint is a monochrome printmaking process of the intaglio family. It was the first printing process that yielded half-tones without using line- or dot-based techniques like hatching, cross-hatching or stipple. Mezzotint achieves tonality by roughening a metal plate with thousands of little dots made by a metal tool with small teeth, called a "rocker". In printing, the tiny pits in the plate retain the ink when the face of the plate is wiped clean. This technique can achieve a high level of quality and richness in the print, and produce a furniture print which is large and bold enough to be framed and hung effectively in a room.[2] Mezzotint is often combined with other intaglio techniques, usually etching and engraving, including stipple engraving. The process was especially widely used in England from the eighteenth century, and in France was called la manière anglais (“the English manner”). Until the 20th century it has mostly been used for reproductive prints to reproduce portraits and other paintings, rather than for original compositions.[3] From the mid-18th century it was somewhat in competition with the other main tonal technique of the day, aquatint.

Amazing Cross-Hatched Drawings by Olivia Knapp. Olivia Knapp’s intricate hand drawn pen and ink style is influenced by European line ...

What are some the advantages of the dotted lozenge style of rendering? Detail of Hendrik Goltzius’ Vulcanus (1592), showing the dotted lozenge style of rendering tone There are many drawing styles with long historical pedigrees of use (e.g. the return and hook strokes discussed in the earlier post, Passion in a Line), but one style that has virtually disappeared from use is the dotted lozenge (shown in the detail above). This distinctive style for rendering the effects of light and shade on a subject involves the artist in initially laying down a matrix of cross-hatched strokes (i.e. a set of parallel lines overlaid by another set of parallel lines aligned at an angle to the lines underneath as shown in the diagram below) and then inserting a dot in the centre of the diamond-shapes (lozenges) created in the cross-hatched matrix (see further below). The following discussion traces the evolution of this style and proposes some of the advantages for its use in the hope that the style may be revived with fresh applications for digital illustration. Cross-hatched style of rendering Dotted lozenge style of rendering The artist credited with the development of this rendering style is Hendrik Goltzius (1558–1617). Like all styles, it didn't simply appear one day. Instead, it evolved from the rendering practices of other artists and the Goltzius morphed them into the dotted lozenge manner of shading. For instance, Albrecht Durer (1471–1528) developed the line and dot technique for rending the transition from dark tones to light involving a set of parallel lines to represent shadows that taper off into dots aligned to the end of each line to represent the transition to light (see diagram below with detail of Durer’s famous engraving, Adam and Eve). (left) Durer's line and dot style of rendering (right) Detail of Durer’s Adam and Eve, 1504 Uploaded by ClarkArtInstitute on Nov 11, 2010 Even Durer’s style had it predecessors with engravers like the Master of the Playing Cards (active c.1425–50) who used parallel lines of varying length to represent tonal changes (see detail below of Saint Sebastian by the Master of the Playing Cards). left) Master of the Playing Cards’ parallel lines of varying length style of rendering (right) Detail of Master of the Playing Cards’ Saint Sebastian, c. 1425–50 Regarding the use of dots without any line work to render a tonal transition, Giulio Campagnola (c.1482–after1515) is credited with being the inventor of the “dotted manner” (i.e. stippling as shown below in the diagram and detail from Campagnola’s Venus Reclining in a Landscape) but the use of dots extends back earlier into the fifteenth century with the punched dots in metal-cut prints and far earlier to the first cave paintings. (left) Campagnola’s dotted manner (stippling) of rendering (right) Detail of Campagnola’s Venus Reclining in a Landscape, c.1508–09 The cross-hatching style had its own evolution as well. This style made its first appearance in the prints of Master ES (active c. 1450–67) (see diagram and detail below from The Visitation by Master ES). Here the type of cross-hatching features sets of straight aligned strokes that are multi-layered when dark tones are required and thinned in their layering for the light tones. (left) Master ES’ cross-hatching style (right) Detail of Master ES’ The Visitation, c.1450 This style of cross-hatching then evolved with Martin Schongauer (c.1448–1491) whose prints were the first to feature curved lines lightly delineating the contours of the subject in the cross-hatched strokes (see diagram and detail below of Schongauer’s Christ as the Man of Sorrows between The Virgin Mary and St John). (left) Schongauer’s curved cross-hatching style (right) Detail of Schongauer’s Christ as the Man of Sorrows between The Virgin Mary and St John, c.1471–73 Even the attributes of the lines used in shading had evolved by the time of Goltizius allowing him to build upon Schongauer’s curved cross-hatching. At the time of Master ES and Master of the Playing Cards, for example, the lines employed were the same thickness along the shaft of the strokes reflecting the type of burin used to engrave the lines. With the invention of the échoppe (i.e. an etching needle with a oval-sectioned end) by Jacques Callot (c.1592–1635) the mechanical regularity of the early engravers’ lines used for shading gave way to etched lines of varying thickness that could be manipulated to swell when depicting dark areas of an image and become thin when depicting lit areas (see diagram and detail below of Callot’s The Nobleman with Fur coat). (left) Callot’s swelling style of line (right) Detail of Callot’s The Nobleman with Fur coat, 1624 Subtleties, such as Callot’s phrased swelling of line and Schongauer’s curved cross-hatching, became an important variable in Goltzius’ application of the dotted lozenge style. For instance, in Goltzius’ engraving, Marcurius (shown below), his phrasing and curving of the strokes articulate the surface contours of Mercury’s belly while Campagnola’s "dotted manner" renders the final stage of the tonal transition into light with a gentle merging of the inscribed marks with the white of the paper. Hendrik GOLTZIUS (1558–1617) Marcurius [Mercury], 1592 After Polidoro da Caravaggio (c.1500–1536) From the series: Eight Deities Engraving on laid paper Lettered above “MARCURIUS”; in lower left “Polidorus” and at right “HG. Sculp. 8” 35.9 x 21.7 cm (plate) 45 x 30.8 cm (sheet) Strauss 296; Hirschmannn 303; Hollstein 303.ll; New Hollstein 322 (Hendrick Goltzius); Bartsch lll.77.254 Condition: Very strong impression (most likely a lifetime impression) with wide margins. The sheet is supported on thin Gyokuryu paper because of tears on the edges of the sheet (well away from the image). There are handling marks, damp stains towards the top of the sheet but otherwise the print is in good condition. I am selling this print for $380 AUD including postage and handling to anywhere in the world. This is a large print and will be shipped in a tube. Please contact me using the email link at the top of the page if you are interested or click the Buy it Now button below. This print has been sold Detail of Goltzius’ Marcurius Detail of Goltzius’ Marcurius The flexibility of the dotted lozenge for showing the extremes of tone from the darkest shadows to brilliant light and its flexibility to express vitality by virtue of the swelling lines made the style popular with artists. This was especially true around the time of Goltzius as by 1585 there was strong interest in the expressive potential of theatrical exaggeration typifying the period style of Mannerism. For the Mannerists, such as Bartholomeus (Bartholomaeus) Spranger (1546–1611), whose paintings Goltzius translated into prints, the plasticity of modelling that the swelling line provided and the precision that the placement of the dots permitted lead to a new phrase in the art lexicon for describing the ultimate form of vitality: Sprangerism—a term exemplified by displays of voluminous muscles, contortion of the subject and bravura in laying closely aligned marks to render form. Beyond providing the artists with a very adaptable style, there is another interesting outcome that has important ramifications when using the dotted lozenge: the placement of dots into the matrix of cross-hatching helps to prevent the formation of moiré patterns. These patterns arise when two sets of parallel lines are overlaid but they are most noticeable when the parallel lines in each set are spaced close together and the sets of lines are overlaid at very slight angle to each other. Uploaded by the by ElicaTeam For instance, in Goltzius’ Vulcanus, compare the cross-hatched background beside Vulcan’s left leg (shown below) where no dot features in the matrix of lines with the dotted lozenge treatment of his leg (shown further below). From my observation, the background where there are no dots has moiré patterns, whereas Vulcan’s leg has no, or few, apparent patterns. Arguably, what is happening to the optical illusion is that the dot in the cross-hatched matrix disrupts the patterns from forming. But there is also an alternative explanation that has little to do with the dots causing interference: moiré patterns are minimised when the angle between the sets of parallel lines is close to either 45 or 90 degrees. Hendrik GOLTZIUS (1558–1617) Vulcanus [Vulcan/Hephaistos], 1592 After Polidoro da Caravaggio (c.1500–1536) From the series: Eight Deities Engraving on laid paper Lettered above "VULCANUS". In lower left corner "Polidorus Inue" and at right "HGoltzius. Sculp.". Numbered in lower right corner "4". 35.6 x 21.7 cm (plate) 45.3 x 31 cm (sheet) Strauss 292; Hirschmannn 299; Hollstein 299.ll; New Hollstein 318 (Hendrick Goltzius); Bartsch lll.77.252 Condition: Very strong impression (most likely a lifetime impression) with wide margins. The sheet is supported on thin Gyokuryu paper because of tears on the edges of the sheet (well away from the image). There are handling marks, damp stains towards the top of the sheet but otherwise the print is in good condition. I am selling this print for $380 AUD including postage and handling to anywhere in the world. This is a large print and will be shipped in a tube. Please contact me using the email link at the top of the page if you are interested or click the Buy Now button below. This print has been sold Detail of Goltzius’ Vulcanus showing moiré patterns in the cross-hatched background There are many reasons for the abandonment of this versatile style towards the end of the nineteenth century: fresh ways of making images arose; the process of cross-hatching following by dotting is technically demanding and time consuming; and, the outcome can appear mechanical with resonance of a past era in printmaking. Like a lot of traditional styles, however, there will come a time for their revival when the time is “right.” A few decades ago the time was certainly not right but with the fresh ways of creating images now that the digital age has arrived, this may be the moment to reinvent the dotted lozenge. In the digital experiments below, I have used some of the default filters in Photoshop to add new dimensions to the dotted lozenge in the hope that they may suggest ways to breathe life into this virtually forgotten style. The first pair of images explores the idea of reshaping the matrix of marks into a bas-relief. The second pair of images demonstrates the effectiveness of blur and lens flare filters to create tonal gradations that would not have been possible for the early printmakers. The final set of images explores alternative ways to change the dotted lozenge from negative (white) lines to positive (black) lines—a simple flick of a tool. Dotted lozenge as bas-relief Dotted lozenge with blur (upper image) and lens flare (lower image) Dotted lozenge with transition from negative (white) lines to positive (black) lines

First featured here, Seattle based artist Olivia Knapp creates cross-hatched pen and ink drawings influenced by old European woodblock engravings. Specifically, Knapp pulls her inspiration from 16th through 18th century blocks, which were in all genres including religion, art, history, science and medicine. She borrows ideas from medical illustrations for her current exhibit at Hellion Gallery in Portland, "Prehensility". The title refers to the quality of an appendage adapted for grasping, for example, as a monkey's tail has adapted to grasping to a branch. The show is an extension of Knapp's previous works in both style and theme, where she explores a relationship between psychology and biology in the context of one's environment.

First featured here, Seattle based artist Olivia Knapp creates cross-hatched pen and ink drawings influenced by old European woodblock engravings. Specifically, Knapp pulls her inspiration from 16th through 18th century blocks, which were in all genres including religion, art, history, science and medicine. She borrows ideas from medical illustrations for her current exhibit at Hellion Gallery in Portland, "Prehensility". The title refers to the quality of an appendage adapted for grasping, for example, as a monkey's tail has adapted to grasping to a branch. The show is an extension of Knapp's previous works in both style and theme, where she explores a relationship between psychology and biology in the context of one's environment.

Learn the beautiful art of crosshatching, just in time for Inktober 2019 ✨🖋✨

Another woeful reaction from the group over cross hatching! 'Too hard!' Well, can I just say the results are some of my favourite yet, as you'll see from this endless line-up of favourites. So many to choose from! Bettina Dodson Christina Booth Detta Tea Heidi Cooper Irving, age 6 Jennifer Bell Jess, age 12 Judy Watson Kate Bouman Nicky Johnston Ramona Davey Stephanie Owen Reeder Susan Hall Tanya Hempson Toni Griffiths

A blog exploring the work of all four Getty programs. Learn what's new and get a glimpse behind the scenes.

What are some the advantages of the dotted lozenge style of rendering? Detail of Hendrik Goltzius’ Vulcanus (1592), showing the dotted lozenge style of rendering tone There are many drawing styles with long historical pedigrees of use (e.g. the return and hook strokes discussed in the earlier post, Passion in a Line), but one style that has virtually disappeared from use is the dotted lozenge (shown in the detail above). This distinctive style for rendering the effects of light and shade on a subject involves the artist in initially laying down a matrix of cross-hatched strokes (i.e. a set of parallel lines overlaid by another set of parallel lines aligned at an angle to the lines underneath as shown in the diagram below) and then inserting a dot in the centre of the diamond-shapes (lozenges) created in the cross-hatched matrix (see further below). The following discussion traces the evolution of this style and proposes some of the advantages for its use in the hope that the style may be revived with fresh applications for digital illustration. Cross-hatched style of rendering Dotted lozenge style of rendering The artist credited with the development of this rendering style is Hendrik Goltzius (1558–1617). Like all styles, it didn't simply appear one day. Instead, it evolved from the rendering practices of other artists and the Goltzius morphed them into the dotted lozenge manner of shading. For instance, Albrecht Durer (1471–1528) developed the line and dot technique for rending the transition from dark tones to light involving a set of parallel lines to represent shadows that taper off into dots aligned to the end of each line to represent the transition to light (see diagram below with detail of Durer’s famous engraving, Adam and Eve). (left) Durer's line and dot style of rendering (right) Detail of Durer’s Adam and Eve, 1504 Uploaded by ClarkArtInstitute on Nov 11, 2010 Even Durer’s style had it predecessors with engravers like the Master of the Playing Cards (active c.1425–50) who used parallel lines of varying length to represent tonal changes (see detail below of Saint Sebastian by the Master of the Playing Cards). left) Master of the Playing Cards’ parallel lines of varying length style of rendering (right) Detail of Master of the Playing Cards’ Saint Sebastian, c. 1425–50 Regarding the use of dots without any line work to render a tonal transition, Giulio Campagnola (c.1482–after1515) is credited with being the inventor of the “dotted manner” (i.e. stippling as shown below in the diagram and detail from Campagnola’s Venus Reclining in a Landscape) but the use of dots extends back earlier into the fifteenth century with the punched dots in metal-cut prints and far earlier to the first cave paintings. (left) Campagnola’s dotted manner (stippling) of rendering (right) Detail of Campagnola’s Venus Reclining in a Landscape, c.1508–09 The cross-hatching style had its own evolution as well. This style made its first appearance in the prints of Master ES (active c. 1450–67) (see diagram and detail below from The Visitation by Master ES). Here the type of cross-hatching features sets of straight aligned strokes that are multi-layered when dark tones are required and thinned in their layering for the light tones. (left) Master ES’ cross-hatching style (right) Detail of Master ES’ The Visitation, c.1450 This style of cross-hatching then evolved with Martin Schongauer (c.1448–1491) whose prints were the first to feature curved lines lightly delineating the contours of the subject in the cross-hatched strokes (see diagram and detail below of Schongauer’s Christ as the Man of Sorrows between The Virgin Mary and St John). (left) Schongauer’s curved cross-hatching style (right) Detail of Schongauer’s Christ as the Man of Sorrows between The Virgin Mary and St John, c.1471–73 Even the attributes of the lines used in shading had evolved by the time of Goltizius allowing him to build upon Schongauer’s curved cross-hatching. At the time of Master ES and Master of the Playing Cards, for example, the lines employed were the same thickness along the shaft of the strokes reflecting the type of burin used to engrave the lines. With the invention of the échoppe (i.e. an etching needle with a oval-sectioned end) by Jacques Callot (c.1592–1635) the mechanical regularity of the early engravers’ lines used for shading gave way to etched lines of varying thickness that could be manipulated to swell when depicting dark areas of an image and become thin when depicting lit areas (see diagram and detail below of Callot’s The Nobleman with Fur coat). (left) Callot’s swelling style of line (right) Detail of Callot’s The Nobleman with Fur coat, 1624 Subtleties, such as Callot’s phrased swelling of line and Schongauer’s curved cross-hatching, became an important variable in Goltzius’ application of the dotted lozenge style. For instance, in Goltzius’ engraving, Marcurius (shown below), his phrasing and curving of the strokes articulate the surface contours of Mercury’s belly while Campagnola’s "dotted manner" renders the final stage of the tonal transition into light with a gentle merging of the inscribed marks with the white of the paper. Hendrik GOLTZIUS (1558–1617) Marcurius [Mercury], 1592 After Polidoro da Caravaggio (c.1500–1536) From the series: Eight Deities Engraving on laid paper Lettered above “MARCURIUS”; in lower left “Polidorus” and at right “HG. Sculp. 8” 35.9 x 21.7 cm (plate) 45 x 30.8 cm (sheet) Strauss 296; Hirschmannn 303; Hollstein 303.ll; New Hollstein 322 (Hendrick Goltzius); Bartsch lll.77.254 Condition: Very strong impression (most likely a lifetime impression) with wide margins. The sheet is supported on thin Gyokuryu paper because of tears on the edges of the sheet (well away from the image). There are handling marks, damp stains towards the top of the sheet but otherwise the print is in good condition. I am selling this print for $380 AUD including postage and handling to anywhere in the world. This is a large print and will be shipped in a tube. Please contact me using the email link at the top of the page if you are interested or click the Buy it Now button below. This print has been sold Detail of Goltzius’ Marcurius Detail of Goltzius’ Marcurius The flexibility of the dotted lozenge for showing the extremes of tone from the darkest shadows to brilliant light and its flexibility to express vitality by virtue of the swelling lines made the style popular with artists. This was especially true around the time of Goltzius as by 1585 there was strong interest in the expressive potential of theatrical exaggeration typifying the period style of Mannerism. For the Mannerists, such as Bartholomeus (Bartholomaeus) Spranger (1546–1611), whose paintings Goltzius translated into prints, the plasticity of modelling that the swelling line provided and the precision that the placement of the dots permitted lead to a new phrase in the art lexicon for describing the ultimate form of vitality: Sprangerism—a term exemplified by displays of voluminous muscles, contortion of the subject and bravura in laying closely aligned marks to render form. Beyond providing the artists with a very adaptable style, there is another interesting outcome that has important ramifications when using the dotted lozenge: the placement of dots into the matrix of cross-hatching helps to prevent the formation of moiré patterns. These patterns arise when two sets of parallel lines are overlaid but they are most noticeable when the parallel lines in each set are spaced close together and the sets of lines are overlaid at very slight angle to each other. Uploaded by the by ElicaTeam For instance, in Goltzius’ Vulcanus, compare the cross-hatched background beside Vulcan’s left leg (shown below) where no dot features in the matrix of lines with the dotted lozenge treatment of his leg (shown further below). From my observation, the background where there are no dots has moiré patterns, whereas Vulcan’s leg has no, or few, apparent patterns. Arguably, what is happening to the optical illusion is that the dot in the cross-hatched matrix disrupts the patterns from forming. But there is also an alternative explanation that has little to do with the dots causing interference: moiré patterns are minimised when the angle between the sets of parallel lines is close to either 45 or 90 degrees. Hendrik GOLTZIUS (1558–1617) Vulcanus [Vulcan/Hephaistos], 1592 After Polidoro da Caravaggio (c.1500–1536) From the series: Eight Deities Engraving on laid paper Lettered above "VULCANUS". In lower left corner "Polidorus Inue" and at right "HGoltzius. Sculp.". Numbered in lower right corner "4". 35.6 x 21.7 cm (plate) 45.3 x 31 cm (sheet) Strauss 292; Hirschmannn 299; Hollstein 299.ll; New Hollstein 318 (Hendrick Goltzius); Bartsch lll.77.252 Condition: Very strong impression (most likely a lifetime impression) with wide margins. The sheet is supported on thin Gyokuryu paper because of tears on the edges of the sheet (well away from the image). There are handling marks, damp stains towards the top of the sheet but otherwise the print is in good condition. I am selling this print for $380 AUD including postage and handling to anywhere in the world. This is a large print and will be shipped in a tube. Please contact me using the email link at the top of the page if you are interested or click the Buy Now button below. This print has been sold Detail of Goltzius’ Vulcanus showing moiré patterns in the cross-hatched background There are many reasons for the abandonment of this versatile style towards the end of the nineteenth century: fresh ways of making images arose; the process of cross-hatching following by dotting is technically demanding and time consuming; and, the outcome can appear mechanical with resonance of a past era in printmaking. Like a lot of traditional styles, however, there will come a time for their revival when the time is “right.” A few decades ago the time was certainly not right but with the fresh ways of creating images now that the digital age has arrived, this may be the moment to reinvent the dotted lozenge. In the digital experiments below, I have used some of the default filters in Photoshop to add new dimensions to the dotted lozenge in the hope that they may suggest ways to breathe life into this virtually forgotten style. The first pair of images explores the idea of reshaping the matrix of marks into a bas-relief. The second pair of images demonstrates the effectiveness of blur and lens flare filters to create tonal gradations that would not have been possible for the early printmakers. The final set of images explores alternative ways to change the dotted lozenge from negative (white) lines to positive (black) lines—a simple flick of a tool. Dotted lozenge as bas-relief Dotted lozenge with blur (upper image) and lens flare (lower image) Dotted lozenge with transition from negative (white) lines to positive (black) lines