in “the grand odalisque” by ingres the artist used which techniques
Ingres portrays a concubine in languid pose as seen from behind with distorted proportions. The small head, elongated limbs, and cool color scheme all reveal influences from Mannerists such as Parmigianino,  whose Madonna with the Long Neck was also famous for anatomical distortion.
This eclectic mix of styles, combining classical form with Romantic themes, prompted harsh criticism when it was first shown in 1814. Critics viewed Ingres as a rebel against the contemporary style of form and content. When the painting was first shown in the Salon of 1819, one critic remarked that the work had “neither bones nor muscle, neither blood, nor life, nor relief, indeed nothing that constitutes imitation”.  This echoed the general view that Ingres had disregarded anatomical realism.  Ingres instead favored long lines to convey curvature and sensuality, as well as abundant, even light to tone down the volume.  Ingres continued to be criticized for his work until the mid-1820s. 
The man in the drawing raises a curved cutting tool to lop off a branch to make a straight stick that can more easily tied into a bundle. A hat shrouds the man’s face, and because the light comes from behind him, darkness veils his features. Light and dark areas alternate across the surface. As he worked up his drawing, Millet manipulated his crayon to mimic the texture of the materials he depicted. Broad, rugged strokes catch the coarse knotted bark of the branches. The blended modeling of his pants’ leg reflects the stiff material of its cloth. Faint smudges define the embankment behind him. And over the thick darkness across the top of the sheet, he drew repeated vertical lines to define a dense forest. Millet’s control of form and light gave the poor man’s endless labor a feeling of time standing still.
6-6 Eugène Delacroix, Crouching Lion, a Hare between his Paws, 1851. Red chalk, 19.8 x 30.6. Bremen, Kunsthalle.
“It takes 25 years to learn to draw, one hour to learn to paint.”
“You have to observe flowers to find the right tones for the folds of clothes.”
Clearly, many sculptors have responded to Rodin’s Walking Man. Giacometti’s statue of a figure in a chariot distorts the scale of the figure by making it pencil thin, distorts the surface so that it no longer appears to be the flesh of a human being. There is something of a sketch to these figures, which are denied substance, but there is another sense in which the lack of substance becomes a deliberate challenge to the belief that it is possible to represent the human body in sculpture in any way but this. Gonzales, in contrast, relates more to the cubist sculpture of Archipenko and to a different implication of Rodin: a redefinition of the “skin” of the sculpture.
Boccioni’s figure extends into space and this act of extension becomes palpable, as real as the object itself. The area which surrounds the object is invaded by the object but this space likewise invades the object-hence the phrase “militarized zone.” Neither Rodin’s Man Walking nor Boccioni’s Unique Forms is a complete figure: they are fragments or torsos with legs. The use of the fragment as a unitary whole is part of two changes in sculpture: the tendency to replace the human figure with the object and when this is not done, a move away from the monumental heroic figure, as we saw in the example by Lehmbruck (The Fallen Man). But this move may take the form of subjects which represent the lower class, the ordinary, the depraved, the infirm, and eventually, the unreal man as machine. Consider the works by Kiki Smith with their reference to the depraved body and Matthew Ritchie’s “unreal” bodies which look like diagrams of chaos (see the Artstor images in unit 27 for examples).
It’s the battle between antique and modern genius. M. Ingres belongs in many respects to the heroic age of the Greeks; he is perhaps more of a sculptor than a painter; he occupies himself exclusively with line and form, purposefully neglecting animation and colour […] M. Delacroix, in contrast, willfully sacrifices the rigours of drawing to the demands of the drama he depicts; his manner, less chaste and reserved, more ardent and animated, emphasizes the brilliance of colour over the purity of line.
Left: Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres | Self Portrait, 1858 | Galleria degli Uffizi Image and original data provided by SCALA, Florence/ART RESOURCE, N.Y. artres.com | (c) 2006, SCALA, Florence / ART RESOURCE, N.Y. Right: Eugène Delacroix | Self-Portrait, c. 1837 | Musée du Louvre | Image and original data provided by Erich Lessing Culture and Fine Arts Archives/ART RESOURCE, N.Y. artres.com