Genuine question here: is copying master's drawings actually

>>2818960
>drawing from like
life.

>I just don't see how it differs from drawing from like

Assuming you mean life, you'll notice the old masters aren't human photocopiers. They make decisions on where to add detail and where to leave it out, they make decisions on colour choice and value, they make decisions on brush economy, on composition, etc.

A book will probably teach you theory better than a master painting, and generally it's most useful for you to know the theory/basic fundamentals before you're studying master paintings because once you know that, you know what you're looking for. And that said: copying a master drawing isn't very helpful, studying one is. A good approach is to take a painting you already like and try to figure out what you like about it in concrete terms, then identify how the artist evoked that response. From there try to replicate it (usually with a study of the painting) and once you think you've got it, apply it to something new. Sometimes it also helps you 'discover' little tricks and shorthands they used which you didn't notice when just looking at the painting (like "oh that detailed looking reflection is actually just a squiggled line, and it's actually beige not pure white!"). There is nothing about a "master study" that means you need to replicate the painting brainlessly, if you like Rembrandt's values you can just do value studies of him.

>>2818960
the point of the master study is about colour theory, brush mileage and also the belief that some of their style will rub off on you if you do enough of them.

You're not just re painting for the sake of it. You're supposed to be analysing the piece as you paint it. Teaching yourself to identify colors that aren't that obvious to see and learning how to use them in your own art.

>>2818960
Merely copying won't do shit. You have to extensively study the picture as you draw and try to comprehend exactly why something was drawn the way it is and how you can replicate it.

>>2818960
>Very curious about this since people make it out to be a big deal.
99% of /ic/ is still learning the technical skill to draw. As long as one isn't out of that phase, master studies don't do anything for you.

>>2819027
>>2818973
>>2818971
Shit, niggers, I meant studying, of course just copying it wouldn't do anything.

>>2818960

It's one of the most fundamental way people learn skill in general, not just in painting. We copy and imitate those who are better than us the skill we are pursuing.
Also a "master" isnt't necessarily one of the old masters, it can be ANY art that has a quality you would like in your own work.
The more you do studies of a certain artist, the more his style rubs off on your own art provided your fundies are solid enough.

Yes, but not as much if you're doing Bargue method to study them.