Learning Spencerian...

[thang1thang2]

  On 9/16/2013 at 5:36 PM, mvarela said:

 

I hadn't heard that bit about Madarasz's loops... I've always had issues with those long upstrokes (they tend to get a bit jiggly), but at the size I normally write, I have the impression that transitioning twice between arm movement and finger movement would probably result in visible "joins". That's of course just an impression (I haven't tested it, and with any new thing, practice would probably make for better results). I'll do some in my next practice, and see if and how it works for me.

 

In my opinion, the transition should be rather smooth. At most x-heights for spencerian (or any normal writing) your arm movement will be combined movement (e.g. all from the forearm, not the shoulder). Thus, you should be able to smoothly stop moving the forearm and focus solely on the fingers until you need to move the forearm slightly down to finish the stroke for the l letter. Another possibility would be, in moving the whole arm, you slow down just a bit and switch to finger movement, speeding up as the arm takes over.

 

This would, coincidentally, explain why many Spencerian guidebooks seem to illustrate that one should be fast on the upstroke of an l, then very slow, then speed up as you go down again. I'm guessing this is just something that was taught "by intuition" due to having teachers around you, and is something that gets lost in the moving of an era from one to the next.

[Mickey]

  On 9/16/2013 at 5:36 PM, mvarela said:

 

I hadn't heard that bit about Madarasz's loops... I've always had issues with those long upstrokes (they tend to get a bit jiggly), but at the size I normally write, I have the impression that transitioning twice between arm movement and finger movement would probably result in visible "joins". That's of course just an impression (I haven't tested it, and with any new thing, practice would probably make for better results). I'll do some in my next practice, and see if and how it works for me.

It's not a matter of making transitions, as if these were separate activities, but rather allowing time, a beat, as it were, for the transition to occur naturally, smoothly, virtually unconsciously. The hand stops, the fingers continue till the arm can move again. You can't avoid that fact that the top of the l-loop has a 180 degree change of direction. The question is whether you allow enough time for it to be properly rounded.

 

Think about it. Essentially, the arm moves up and down the slant axis. (Admittedly, the upward movements are slightly arced; it is, in a way, a horizontal stroke gradually turned upward.) The fingers and hand are responsible for everything not accounted for in the arm's movement. There are no discrete transitions. The top of the loop, being neither up nor down stroke will naturally be dominated by movement of the fingers.(Flourishing is a different business.)

 

This again, I believe, gets us back to the importance of thinking about the movement of the point rather than the marks it produces. What we see on the page after we write is strictly a means of critiquing the movement of the point.

[mvarela]

  On 9/16/2013 at 8:31 PM, Mickey said:

It's not a matter of making transitions, as if these were separate activities, but rather allowing time, a beat, as it were, for the transition to occur naturally, smoothly, virtually unconsciously. The hand stops, the fingers continue till the arm can move again. You can't avoid that fact that the top of the l-loop has a 180 degree change of direction. The question is whether you allow enough time for it to be properly rounded.

 

Think about it. Essentially, the arm moves up and down the slant axis. (Admittedly, the upward movements are slightly arced; it is, in a way, a horizontal stroke gradually turned upward.) The fingers and hand are responsible for everything not accounted for in the arm's movement. There are no discrete transitions. The top of the loop, being neither up nor down stroke will naturally be dominated by movement of the fingers.(Flourishing is a different business.)

 

This again, I believe, gets us back to the importance of thinking about the movement of the point rather than the marks it produces. What we see on the page after we write is strictly a means of critiquing the movement of the point.

 

I'll give it a try next time I have some practice time (unnfortunately not so easy these days), and report back...

[Mickey]

  On 9/16/2013 at 8:39 PM, mvarela said:

 

I'll give it a try next time I have some practice time (unfortunately not so easy these days), and report back...

 

Let me see if I can make that practice session a bit more productive.

 

I spent most of my morning practice filling a couple of pages with words containing the letters l and k in close proximity, trying to get the loops to match. (Easier said than done, for me.) After a page of ilk, elk, well, wall, and walk (the worst of the lot), I tried a few other words to loosen up my brain, e.g., like, lake, and utility. It was in the last word, utility, that I may have stumbled on a better way of explaining the 'Madarasz secret' that spawned this sub-thread.

 

Write the first three letters, uti, and listen to the strokes (use a pencil or standard FP for this experiment). Write them fully joined, no pen lift for the t. The sound will be something like 'scratch scratch scratch scratch,' all four upstrokes taking about the same amount of time, the t stroke simply being more energetic and louder. Repeat this a few times to get the sound, timing, and feel embedded. Now add the 'l' and 'i': scratch scratch scratch scratch scraaatcch scratch. Repeat this a few times and notice that the 'l' takes a little longer to execute, but otherwise feels a lot like the 't', The big difference being the reach by the fingers to complete the loop. The l is nothing but a loud 'i' with a reach on the top. (The reach accounts for the extra time.) This may be the Madarasz secret, which is not really a secret at all, just the simplest, most reliable way to execute the top of the loop.

 

Do you see how this might erase any issue of transitioning from arm to finger?

Edited September 17, 2013 by Mickey

[mvarela]

  On 9/17/2013 at 4:11 PM, Mickey said:

 

Let me see if I can make that practice session a bit more productive.

 

I spent most of my morning practice filling a couple of pages with words containing the letters l and k in close proximity, trying to get the loops to match. (Easier said than done, for me.) After a page of ilk, elk, well, wall, and walk (the worst of the lot), I tried a few other words to loosen up my brain, e.g., like, lake, and utility. It was in the last word, utility, that I may have stumbled on a better way of explaining the 'Madarasz secret' that spawned this sub-thread.

 

Write the first three letters, uti, and listen to the strokes (use a pencil or standard FP for this experiment). Write them fully joined, no pen lift for the t. The sound will be something like 'scratch scratch scratch scratch,' all four upstrokes taking about the same amount of time, the t stroke simply being more energetic and louder. Repeat this a few times to get the sound, timing, and feel embedded. Now add the 'l' and 'i': scratch scratch scratch scratch scraaatcch scratch. Repeat this a few times and notice that the 'l' takes a little longer to execute, but otherwise feels a lot like the 't', The big difference being the reach by the fingers to complete the loop. The l is nothing but a loud 'i' with a reach on the top. (The reach accounts for the extra time.) This may be the Madarasz secret, which is not really a secret at all, just the simplest, most reliable way to execute the top of the loop.

 

Do you see how this might erase any issue of transitioning from arm to finger?

 

I managed to get a short session done, and tried your approach (first in pencil, then with a normal pointed nib). I think I see what you mean, and I was probably doing something like that without actually noticing it. Still, I have jiggly upstrokes and sometimes my loops look like a knife blade (I assume that's what you mean with "spiky", like the k in "quick" and the b in "member", in lines 1 and 4 respectively, in post #397, first picture). I'll do some more sheets of loopy letters and see if I can get the hang of it.

 

Regarding the slant of the wedge shades, I think I'm starting to get a hand on it, although not 100%.

Edited September 17, 2013 by mvarela

[Mickey]

  On 9/17/2013 at 9:03 PM, mvarela said:

 

I managed to get a short session done, and tried your approach (first in pencil, then with a normal pointed nib). I think I see what you mean, and I was probably doing something like that without actually noticing it. Still, I have jiggly upstrokes and sometimes my loops look like a knife blade (I assume that's what you mean with "spiky", like the k in "quick" and the b in "member", in lines 1 and 4 respectively, in post #397, first picture). I'll do some more sheets of loopy letters and see if I can get the hang of it.

 

Spiky is a relative term. The loop is asymmetrical, but not blatantly so. The right side of the l-loop is gently arched, the left side is nearly straight and on the slant angle. The change of direction at the top of the stroke is nearly a semi-circle. The key is getting its diameter correct. Too big and the loop is a balloon, too small and you get a spike. For me diameter = duration. If I'm too slow, I get a balloon. If I rush, the loop is too narrow, spiky.

 

Here's something to help with the shaky upstroke. Perform the stroke rapidly, more rapidly than you would the down-stroke. At first, don't try to limit upstroke height to the x-line. That's what practice is for. Learn how hard to push your arm (hand) to reach the x-line.* Stroke, critique, stroke, critique, repeat until it becomes an automatic connection between arm and eye. The t-height is then nothing more than a slightly hard x-height and the l-height is nothing more than a t-height plus a finger reach. If you need to write at a different x-height, simply warm up a bit and recalibrate your x-height. (n.b., I speaking here of handwriting, not OP.)

 

Practicing counter-clockwise spirals helped me smooth out the up strokes. (Hint, the fastest part of the stroke is the bottom of the curve; the upstroke begins at speed and slows gradually as it rises. At the top of the spiral the pen nearly stops.)

 

* If, as I do, you rest the pad of muscle near your elbow on the desk, the resistance it supplies help to control the stroke length, kind of like a rubber band. The longer the stroke, the greater the resistance. For flourishes (which I do rarely), spiral exercises, and large capitals, I make a point of reducing the amount of weight on this pad of muscle, so that the arm can slide freely on the desk.

[MusinkMan]

A night's practice. Just some scribble...did this till about 3:00 a.m. this morning! Man, I wish I were one of these naturally talented writers. I have to scrape and work for every little bit of improvement. And it's a big big mountain, brothers! I guess I won't look down, and keep on sweatin' away. LOL!

 

[Mickey]

  On 9/18/2013 at 6:34 PM, MusinkMan said:

A night's practice. Just some scribble...did this till about 3:00 a.m. this morning! Man, I wish I were one of these naturally talented writers. I have to scrape and work for every little bit of improvement. And it's a big big mountain, brothers! I guess I won't look down, and keep on sweatin' away. LOL!

 

The letter forms aren't really all that bad, kemo sabe. In fact, a lot of them are pretty darned good. The big problem, as I see it, is too much ink on the page. Think 'much less shade and much, much later' and your penmanship could take a quantum leap forward in appearance. Even http://www.iampeth.com/artwork/Enriquez%20Ornamental%200001.jpg which has some pretty heavy-handed shading, still exhibits a lot of air.

 

I admit I prefer stems where the shades start late, but if your ink addiction can't be curbed entirely, at least bend the (capital) shades more. MI/NMC: More ink, needs more curve. Look at these capitals http://www.iampeth.com/artwork/champion_01.jpg to see what I mean. (Straight sided shades say Copperplate to my eye.)

Edited September 18, 2013 by Mickey

[mvarela]

  On 9/18/2013 at 6:34 PM, MusinkMan said:

A night's practice. Just some scribble...did this till about 3:00 a.m. this morning! Man, I wish I were one of these naturally talented writers. I have to scrape and work for every little bit of improvement. And it's a big big mountain, brothers! I guess I won't look down, and keep on sweatin' away. LOL!

 

 

That looks like a good stretch of writing, Brian! Reading through, I couldn't help but thinking the same I think every time I read my practice sheets... Should a psychiatrist find this, they'd have us committed!

"Serendipity dipity dipity Sick Again"

 

Keep it up, dude!

 

ps: still no news from the mailman

[MusinkMan]

  On 9/19/2013 at 5:29 AM, mvarela said:

That looks like a good stretch of writing, Brian! Reading through, I couldn't help but thinking the same I think every time I read my practice sheets... Should a psychiatrist find this, they'd have us committed!

"Serendipity dipity dipity Sick Again"

 

Keep it up, dude!

 

ps: still no news from the mailman

Oh man, I kind of wasn't thinking that anyone would actually read some of those ramblings. That's just stuff that comes off the top of my head when I experiment with letters. Sick Again...I was listening to some Zeppelin while practicing. The rest of it, please just disregard. LOL! You are right, some of that would definitely get me committed. I probably belong in a mental institution anyway. heh!

 

No mail from me yet??? Dang man, I even passed along some little spencerian tips to you...I hope it arrives soon. I'll write you another if it doesn't show up in a couple of days. Let me know if it gets there.

[Estefa]

  On 9/18/2013 at 6:34 PM, MusinkMan said:

A night's practice. Just some scribble...did this till about 3:00 a.m. this morning! Man, I wish I were one of these naturally talented writers. I have to scrape and work for every little bit of improvement. And it's a big big mountain, brothers! I guess I won't look down, and keep on sweatin' away. LOL!

 

Brian, as you know I am very much a newbie in this forum and also regarding Spencerian (just trying to learn the basic principles) – but I like this very much, these capitals have both beautiful momentum and control – compliment!

 

Stefanie

[Scribe_Not]

Wow... after seeing some of your guys work, my learning curve just went vertical.

 

For a "destination kind of guy" like me, delayed gratification many times resembles a slow beating. But I remain grateful for your examples of diligence... it continues to inspire.

[hlyuqi]

It's been a long time I haven't been on this forum, seems everybody is doing well here.

I want to share with you my recent efforts on this style, but somehow I just can't add image into my post, I hope someone can help me out.

Thanks in advances.

the link is:http://i1295.photobucket.com/albums/b628/lovely997959/360624B673A52A9624B622A56FE0921_00_30_01_zpseb3077f1.png

[MusinkMan]

Mickey, I was looking at this fellow's stuff that you referred to. http://www.iampeth.com/artwork/Enriquez%20Ornamental%200001.jpg I love his writing a great deal, I love everything about it.

 

What I wanted to ask you (and everyone else)...on this sample in the referenced link...notice his uber-cool signature writing. I notice that a lot of card writing and signature writing has these characteristics...a hybrid mix of Spence and Copperplate. It looks very attractive and I do like that look...probably why I tend to be so heavy handed (but I am working on that). The "question" is...I see a lot of this hybrid-type mixed writing, even in the old Golden Era American Penmen's work. It appears that those guys took all sorts of liberties with Spencerian...mixing it with English Roundhand, Copperplate, and various Engrosser's Scripts. Was this a common practice? I like it because it gives such an individuality to each person's hand. I know that Copperplate and Spencerian both require hours of tedious practice over very strict exemplars. I'm learning that now...but at some point these guys just said "eff it, we're going to embellish the way we want to." I mean, look at Madarasz himself...that guy was the best of the best...but he broke every rule in the book at some point. I guess maybe you have to know the rules backwards and forwards before you know "how" to break them "correctly". Now there's a paradox for ya. LOL

[Mickey]

  On 9/21/2013 at 8:13 AM, MusinkMan said:

Mickey, I was looking at this fellow's stuff that you referred to. http://www.iampeth.com/artwork/Enriquez%20Ornamental%200001.jpg I love his writing a great deal, I love everything about it.

 

What I wanted to ask you (and everyone else)...on this sample in the referenced link...notice his uber-cool signature writing. I notice that a lot of card writing and signature writing has these characteristics...a hybrid mix of Spence and Copperplate. It looks very attractive and I do like that look...probably why I tend to be so heavy handed (but I am working on that). The "question" is...I see a lot of this hybrid-type mixed writing, even in the old Golden Era American Penmen's work. It appears that those guys took all sorts of liberties with Spencerian...mixing it with English Roundhand, Copperplate, and various Engrosser's Scripts. Was this a common practice? I like it because it gives such an individuality to each person's hand. I know that Copperplate and Spencerian both require hours of tedious practice over very strict exemplars. I'm learning that now...but at some point these guys just said "eff it, we're going to embellish the way we want to." I mean, look at Madarasz himself...that guy was the best of the best...but he broke every rule in the book at some point. I guess maybe you have to know the rules backwards and forwards before you know "how" to break them "correctly". Now there's a paradox for ya. LOL

Many of best examples from the 'Golden Age' that I've seen are audition pieces, (job solicitations), like the one to which you linked. As such, they often included examples from various styles and pure flights of invention (novel scripts). To keep the body of the letter coherent (and not defeat the letter's purpose) elements like the salutation and signature were often the most fanciful. I don't believe such were typical of real production work, which tended to be more 'disciplined.'

[Inkysloth]

  On 9/20/2013 at 3:13 AM, Scribe_Not said:

Wow... after seeing some of your guys work, my learning curve just went vertical.

 

Which means you just learned everything in one amazing, mind-expanding moment!

 

The learning curve is a graph of skills acquired over time.

 

Time is on the horizontal axis and skills on the vertical. The slower you learn, the more gentle the upward curve, a "steep learning curve" is a good thing - it means rapid acquisition of skills / knowledge. It seems to get used to mean "man, that was difficult", but gradient here is nothing to do with difficulty.

 

/rant

Edited September 21, 2013 by Inkysloth

[Mickey]

  On 9/21/2013 at 5:00 PM, Inkysloth said:

 

Which means you just learned everything in one amazing, mind-expanding moment!

 

The learning curve is a graph of skills acquired over time.

 

Time is on the horizontal axis and skills on the vertical. The slower you learn, the more gentle the upward curve, a "steep learning curve" is a good thing - it means rapid acquisition of skills / knowledge. It seems to get used to mean "man, that was difficult", but gradient here is nothing to do with difficulty.

 

/rant

I suspect the poster meant that his/her assessment of the difficulty ahead had changed. I believe it was clear enough. You might consider that English is not the first language of many posters, even those who profess to come from English speaking countries. In any event, nit picking is something best confined to the chimp enclosure.

[Inkysloth]

  On 9/21/2013 at 5:44 PM, Mickey said:

I suspect the poster meant that his/her assessment of the difficulty ahead had changed. I believe it was clear enough. You might consider that English is not the first language of many posters, even those who profess to come from English speaking countries. In any event, nit picking is something best confined to the chimp enclosure.

 

That's true, and I do generally bear in mind the mix of first languages on this forum. On the other hand, explaining the meaning of a phrase isn't an unfair thing to do, and I didn't include anything snarky or mean in the explanation. If I'm using a term incorrectly I'd rather know the correct meaning that carry on using it wrongly.

[Mickey]

  On 9/21/2013 at 5:49 PM, Inkysloth said:

 

That's true, and I do generally bear in mind the mix of first languages on this forum. On the other hand, explaining the meaning of a phrase isn't an unfair thing to do...

No, merely in poor taste.

[mvarela]

  On 9/21/2013 at 5:00 PM, Inkysloth said:

 

Which means you just learned everything in one amazing, mind-expanding moment!

 

The learning curve is a graph of skills acquired over time.

 

Time is on the horizontal axis and skills on the vertical. The slower you learn, the more gentle the upward curve, a "steep learning curve" is a good thing - it means rapid acquisition of skills / knowledge. It seems to get used to mean "man, that was difficult", but gradient here is nothing to do with difficulty.

 

/rant

Actually, in colloquial use it is often used with the opposite meaning, implying the effort required to achieve a certain proficiency on a topic. This is even the case for native speakers.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_curve#.22Steep_learning_curve.22