Anyone who's had a look through my gallery has probably noticed that almost all of my drawings -- and about one of my paintings -- have been assigned a "Cycle #" and wondered what they're supposed to represent. Well, to make it as clear as possible, most of my pieces belong to different cycles of my artistic development, each with their own distinctive characteristics. It's my hope that this guide will help to clarify each and every one of the different cycles.
This is the where all the drawings I made prior to 2009 -- when I really started trying hard to develop my drawing skills -- go. Cycle 0 art is easily distinguishible from art of later cycles by how crude and sketchy it all is. As pretty much all of the artwork I made prior to 2004 has been lost or destroyed ( ), there aren't many pieces belonging to this cycle in my gallery.
This cycle consists of the drawings I started to make in mid-to-late '09, when I really started putting effort into my drawings. I'd started using photo references on a regular basis with these pieces, and I worked on perfecting my ability to capture accurate likenesses, but I wasn't all too hung up on physical anatomy from the neck down or on shading; a lot of these pieces are simply rendered, psychedelically coloured headshots placed against abstract backgrounds.
These drawings were all made alongside the Cycle 1 pieces, but as they're all digital instead of traditional -- with pixel-borne qualities setting them apart aesthetically -- I separated them.
I don't know precisely when Cycle 2 began, but it was probably in-and-around 2010 or '11. This is when I took heavily to pencils and began elaborately shading the figures I drew. I still mostly went with headshots against abstact backgrounds, but I began drawing more full or partially full bodies along with adding the aforementioned shading.
There is no clear dividing line between Cycles 2 and 2.5 as the final pieces of the former and the first pieces of the latter were made pretty close together in time and are virtually aesthetically identical. I stopped using pencils as much, though, and starting relying primarily on markers and pens instead; when I did use pencils, I tended to shade the figures in a much more naturalistic fashion than the more abstact "layered" way I had when I began. So, over time, the pieces of the two cycles evolved apart. Not counting Cycle 0, this was the longest of the cycles, as it came to a close only last year.
There isn't any real aesthetic difference between Cycles 2.5 and 3. Cycle 3 is distinguished, though, by the presence of Heather Langenkamp as a subject in many of the pieces. This cycle came to a close when my fascination with Heather died down and she stopped being my muse.
Cycle 4 has only just begun and has yet to develop any real distinctions of its own.