I’ve come to realize that trees do not lend themselves well to accurate sketches (without spending an undue amount of time on them, that is). For even if you’re looking straight at the thing during the moments when you’re not bent over your sketch pad, the only mental notes you can ever take back to your drawing hand are things like: “The edge kind of gets really wiggly about here… and then there’s that lumpy darkish bit below the squiggly mottled lightish bit just to the right of that extension with the blots of leafiness at odd intervals.”
And so you sort of improvise within the confines of that general description, until you end up with something that does, in fact, look like a tree, and would probably even have a similar shape as the subject. Though if the tree ever managed to get a good look at its supposed portrait, it would probably give you a fairly condescending bit of glowering and stomp off in a huff.
Leaving you to wonder how in the world it had just done that.
Dead and/or leafless trees are easier and more interesting.
I agree with Rachel–dead and/or leafless rabbits are easier to draw and more interesting.
the trees like a laand
I LOVE YOUR tree. I love trees. I love to draw trees. And whoever left those negative comments don’t know what they are talking about. They are jealous; don’t believe them. Have confidence in yourself. They are ignorant.
That is a beautifully drawn and interesting tree with its own special personality. The only reason I happened onto your tree is because I googled tree sketches, and was looking for INTERESTING ones. Yours caught me, and here I am. Claim your fame and don’t listen to those annoying fools. They wouldn’t know an interesting tree if they slammed into it.