The people in the title are the ones who I am mainly after, but I welcome all other replies.
sorry to call you guys out like this, I hope it doesn't become a trend where it may become bothersome.
I wanted to gather your opinions on drawing and/or painting landscapes, cityscapes. My thoughts aren't organised, there will be typos.
I've recently dived into painting with W&N Griffin Alkyd oils which gives me the nice midway of a paint that doesn't dry while I'm using it on the palette and Canvas, but also doesn't take 'forever' to dry. Happy as can be.
Anyway, right now I am having the issue of tackling Scenes via painting. I once heard "any issue in painting is usual a issue in drawing". When I think about it, makes sense. I have only focused my extreme efforts on people, ranging from quick sketches, to line studies, to value renderings. rarely tackling landscapes, despite the fact I love nature, lol perhaps it intimidates me.
given the fact my studies mostly consist of people, when it comes to painting them, they come out far better than my landscapes. Here are two examples both done in a single sitting (alla prima?)
noticeably the portrait looks far better than the study of my living room. there are even worse studies that I try to do that I end up quitting on and try to palm them off as colour studies.
I sometimes ponder on the difference, why do they vary between one another despite that as a whole I rarely practice landscapes in drawing let alone painting.
a while ago I suprised myself with this one which made me recall that I spend quite a while (more than a single page, don't let the single post fool you) on doing really small value renders with pencil on similar scenes.
and also on a side note, I rarely draw animals either but have a desire to begin studies into them soon enough. but yet, I was able to produce this from a photo.
which brings me back to the quote "issue with painting=issue with drawing" and leads me to what I probably should have just asked right out from the start instead of spamming these images. In your opinion, should I tackle the problem of bad landscape paintings as a whole, basically shutting up, and deal with the problems of value, colour, drawing, and painting process simultaneously in doing these studies. Or should I eliminate the problems/ isolate them, focusing on just big scale (a4) value renderings with pencil/charcoal (and also sketches)? once I get confident in those like doing people then I can jump back into painting them.
and as for books, I've just finished "The New Munsell Student Color Set 3rd Edition 3rd Edition" which is a mindfuck of information, I need to re read it again eventually as the information is just too much to completely absorb. as opposed to James gurneys "colour and light" which is a good read and nice introduction, and without it I probably would be lost in that Munsell book. probably similar in mindfuck to when I looked at Briggsy's site when I first challenged a serious study into colour theory. (I will go back there eventually and challenge the information again Briggsy xD)
Now about to dive into Jack Hamm's "Drawing scenery". I've also studied up on perspective drawing from David chelsea's "Perspective! For comic book artists" so I wont be running into drawing blind when doing studies. I will have things to pay attention to like vanishing points. will need a re read though.
I also wish to go through at some point "alla prima: everything I know" by Richard Schmid. see if there is anything I can gain, lightyears before I would reach that information in studies. if anyone has read it, how is it?
again sorry for calling you guys out like that and the ensuing bombardment of text and images. In the end though, I will do what I feel I will benefit most from, but your Opinions matter, hence I wouldn't ask. Thank you for your time reading and hopeful reply!