Nature and Art, August 1, 1866.] 
ON SKETCHING FROM NATURE. 
81 
ON SKETCHING FROM NATURE. 
By Aaron Penley, Professor of Landscape Painting at the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich. 
No. III. 
I T is my intention to vary my scenes from month 
to month, so that I may present to your 
readers — at any rate to that portion of them to 
whom drawing is a delight — every class of object 
with which they are familiar. 
The two previous drawings were strictly moun- 
tainous in character. I have now introduced 
one with trees of some size, and continued, in’ a 
slight degree, the practice of the former distances. 
I have also had regard to the singleness of subject, 
if I may use the term, in the hope of inducing 
many to seek out the like during the season for 
working out of doors. There are so many failures, 
attended by perplexity and disappointment, in the 
attempt to portray scenes of a difficult descrip- 
tion, that I am desirous of leading the beginner to 
those of a simple kind ; so that, when he has had 
practice in such, he may exercise his pencil upon 
subjects of greater combinations and importance. 
Success is always encouraging ; failures invariably 
depressing. The former can only be attained 
when the ability is equal to the task ; the latter is 
a sure evidence of incompetent skill. It is much 
more prudent to undertake too little than too much ; 
because there is real pleasure in the pursuit of any 
accomplishment where the powers are not over- 
taxed, and where we are influenced by confidence in 
the place of fear. To the sketcher, Confidence is 
truly necessary ; for, with this feeling, there will 
be both freedom and decision of touch, a clear and 
well-formed outline, a judicious arrangement of 
light and shade, and a perception of colour that 
will be in accordance with the landscape under 
treatment. Where the mind can fully compre- 
hend the matter, a little patience and care will 
most assuredly carry out the work most satisfac- 
torily. But if the matter is beyond the mind, 
then it is advisable never to hazard subjecting the 
latter to perplexity and disappointment. I have 
dwelt upon this at some length, knowing the folly 
of aiming at difficult subjects ; and shall make a 
point, from time to time, of repeating the caution. 
The present drawing is of simple materials ; — 
sky, mountain, water, a hill-side, a flat tract of 
middle distance and foreground, with a group of 
trees to the left, and a few stones bounding the 
water-course to the right. In making the sketch, 
the water-line should be the first drawn ; then the 
line for the middle distance below it, and the 
particular rising angle of the hill-side. After these, 
draw the central mountain, carefully noticing its 
incidence upon the hill-side, and the precise position 
of its greatest elevation. This must be found by 
an imaginary perpendicular line from it to the 
water ; which line, in this instance, falls just upon 
hi. 
the point whence the hill-side rises from the valley. 
This practice is the only true method of finding 
the relative points of the several objects, and will 
prevent their being placed too far on either side. 
Of course, comparing by means of imaginary 
horizontal lines will insure the relative height of 
each object. The dark line at the further end of 
the foreground is now to be given : and the curva- 
tures of the road, pathway, and water-course on 
the right. Now, raise the stem of the nearest tree, 
and the exact position of its neighbours. In groups 
of this kind, the most perpendicular stem should 
always be drawn first ; and then the direction of 
those near to it can easily be settled by the indica- 
tion of a dot below, and another at the proper 
distance above, and also at any part where there is 
a change of angle. This done, the outline can 
readily be filled in without hesitation. Attention 
in this respect will save much time. The stems 
being sketched in, the foliage can be placed rvith 
great truthfulness, and will appear to have a 
proper support. 
Trees are felt to be very difficult to the amateur. 
“ I cannot draw a tree,” is constantly sounding in 
my ears ; and this arises from a want of apprecia- 
tion of the construction of stems, limbs, and foliage. 
There is considerable arrangement in the clusters 
of branches, not only as affecting the outside of the 
tree, but also its interior; and it is upon a just 
perception of the chief of them that the general 
character of form will depend. When trees occupy 
a conspicuous position, it is imperative that their 
forms should be gracefully drawn, so that they may 
recommend themselves to the spectator. Otherwise, 
they fail to give interest or excite pleasure. It is, 
therefore, to the outside foliage and to the graceful 
curvature of lines — noting whence the foliage 
proceeds — that we must direct especial attention; 
afterwards filling in the clusters of hanging boughs 
in front of the stems. If this be well done, 
an agreeable effect will be produced; but if not, 
clusters or solid masses of impossible forms are very 
likely to present themselves. Of course, every tree 
has a peculiar growth of its own, a knowledge of 
which can only be gained by drawing it from nature, 
with the full determination to study its individual 
character, both of stem and foliage. 
In the treatment of Grass there is also a general 
failure, and this I attribute to the same non- 
appreciation of form that we find in regard to 
foliage. Nothing conduces more to the effect of a 
picture than a pleasing distribution of patches of 
grass in the foreground. The colour they bear, in 
contrast to the ground whence they spring, naturally 
gives very decided features of form, and as these 
G 
