>>2344616 My first two posts were drawn in real-time I even started the first page several minutes after I made the thread and had time to spare at the end of the second image too, despite diddling around a little bit (the third one doesn't count because of the post, I sat on it for a while too besides). Ten minutes is longer than it seems. It's noteworthy that there are far more complex drawings in the book alongside many more quick, gestural "typical Bridgman" ones.
I said intermediate artist in the image but really I wouldn't assert that I'm even there yet, myself. However I can move my hand fairly quickly if nothing else. I think this challenge is worth trying for anybody that's able to do even that.
If your observational drawing skills are adequate but you just find yourself drawing very slow and methodically, maybe spend part of this week working on the exercises Peter Han suggests in his dynamic sketching videos; get your line confidence up and join us next Sunday as we walk in the youthful shadow of one of the greats.
>>2344629 I don't have the book so it's hard for me to gauge this, it's just that I'm assuming the book has drawings in it that took more than 10 minutes for Bridgman to draw, so I'm thinking not just that 10 minutes a page is impractical for the number of drawings but also that you might not get as much benefit from doing a one-two minute sketch of one of those drawings as you would from a longer study. It's not that I don't think I could do a quick sketch of everything in the book, it just doesn't sound practical or beneficial, but again I would have to see the actual book to get a better idea.
>>2344662 >I'm assuming the book has drawings in it that took more than 10 minutes for Bridgman to draw, so I'm thinking not just that 10 minutes a page is impractical
Bridgman worked primarily in a very loose, gestural style that almost demands foreknowledge of refined anatomy to understand, however with how loose it is it doesn't take very long to duplicate or even add-to if I'd so choose, as I've demonstrated.
There are certainly more detailed images in the book than the ones I've drawn thus far, but many of them have less total images on the page itself so I think it will even out for the most part. I believe it's achievable and I look forward to hopefully proving that this upcoming Sunday.
Here's the book. It's in the public domain I believe so no worries, it's 96 years old.
>>2344683 Probably both. I wasn't planning on streaming because I don't even know how that works, but I realized after you mentioned it that there'd be no way to prove that I didn't just draw everything beforehand otherwise.
I'll have to figure out how to use Twitch by then (1-17-16) as much as I rue the idea. If anyone has any suggestions about how to go about this let me know. Obviously no one's going to watch a stream of a guy failing miserably at copying the contents of a 100 year old drawing book-but I would like to stream and also have a raw recording done I can edit later just for proof of concept.
This sounds like a great exercise, but forcing an arbitrary time limit seems a bit counter-productive. I imagine after several hours, anyone's brain will shut off and just copy shit on auto pilot. Seems like a much better idea would be to copy the entire book on your own terms, to the best of your ability and always while you are sharp and fresh, so you actually analyze and memorize what it is you are drawing.
>>2345126 The idea is to test yourself against a bold claim made by Frazetta-one that many people are skeptical of to this day. What you're describing on the other hand is fine, but it's also how everyone should typically treat any worthy art book they can get their hands on.
For what it's worth, I will also be drawing and reading the entire book throughout the week leading up to the challenge day so I'm not going in blind.
>Is there some kind of forum hosting this or is it just a date the OP is setting?
It's just me, the date you start is arbitrary, I just figured giving people at least a solid week to prepare was the right thing to do, this also gives people whom are considering it but are otherwise undecided a bit more time to make up their mind.
The reason I decided on next sunday in particular is because few people work that day. I feel that knowing other people are doing it along with you at the same time (with all due considerations for time zones, of course) may make it less intimidating as well.
I'm an advocate for studying when you're well rested and generally stuff like 'cramming' isn't that beneficial for retention, but I also think there's an argument for occasional marathons even if your brain goes on autopilot. There's a muscle memory element of art that would probably gain a fair bit from something like that. If you can rote memorize Bridgman's gestures and poses to the point where you can do it on autopilot, that's not necessarily a bad thing. You'd definitely be familiar with his stuff by the end, even if you might not have internalized much of the theory underlying it.
>>2345126 ...Also the way I see it, if I were to truly go "on my own terms" or at my own pace, I would probably draw worse than Jazza by the time I was Vilppu's age. I think trying somebody else's pace might be a good change...of pace.
>>2345362 A fair point. Rumor has it he bought the book one day and returned it the next, I guess there are multiple ways to interpret that. He could have purchased the book in the early morning and brought it back late the following evening, for example.
The challenge as-written isn't far departed from my usual schedule. I wake up at 8:30-45am for work and stay up until around 2:00am, sometimes later. I guess people will have to figure out how they want to go about it. It's not the minutiae of the schedule that's important, what's important is our plan.
>>2345395 Well done, if you don't want to participate in the challenge itself drawing through the book over a period of time certainly couldn't hurt.
>>2345420 >Just because he did it once, doesn't mean it magically made him better
I feel that all of the academic drawing you do probably makes you just a little bit better. It's not magic, but it's the closest thing available in this context. Will copying the book once turn you into Frazetta? Of course not, but it couldn't hurt either. There are worse ways to spend a single day, I'm sure.
>His teacher, who recommend him to study Bridgman, thought it was fucking hilarious when Frank told him what he did.
I'd like to hear more on your insights into this subject-preferably with third party sources, because I can't even find the original quote/interview, let alone that kind of intimate outsider commentary.
>Frazetta was also notoriously full of shit and liked to embellish his own ability.
A big part of this challenge/experiment is discovering just how full of shit he may have been, and to try and live a day in the life supposing he wasn't.
>How about you take the book, and tackle it analytically at your own pace. Patience is the fastest way.
Personally I will be doing just that both before and after participating in the challenge. I'm confident the book will still be there for a more in-depth analysis when I'm done.
>>2345466 Not that anon but I was the one who initially was concerned about how effective this exercise is. I still had my doubts about it, but I realized that even if you don't pick up any in depth knowledge of anatomy or anything by forcing it all into such a short time frame, the mileage alone is probably worth it. Personally I think I'm past the point where just mileage alone would be that valuable to me so I should probably do longer studies, but for anyone who's been having trouble loosening up while they draw and learning to draw through the figure, this is probably the best thing for them.
>>2345749 >ignores Bridgman's hatching or lack thereof and inserts his own He doesn't ignore it, he interprets it. Sure, starting out you'd likely make some wrong interpretations, but that's what the application through photo studies is for. It should help you understand what Bridgman was actually showing the whole time.
Bridgman isn't beginner friendly. When I started out I couldn't follow his material at all, but now I like it. You need to find and understand the forms and landmarks through the scratchy drawings, which is why a 2D-centric copying of Bridgman's marks isn't as helpful as understanding and translating the material.
That said, you certainly don't need decades of experience in order to approach and learn from Bridgman. I say give his material a shot, but if it doesn't click for you that's perfectly fine as we have tons of anatomy resources to pick and choose from.
>>2345789 I mean, you have to admit Gist (who is a very good artist himself) takes exceptional liberties with Bridgman's material to a degree that almost any other artist would be unable to. To tell me that I have to look up a ton of photographs to make any use of Bridgman's book is to tell me that, rather than reading his book, I should be drawing from high resolution photographs and life drawing instead.
I'm going to do the challenge but only so I can say that, for one glorious day, I lived like Frazetta may have, assuming he wasn't a lying liar with pants constantly on fire anyway.
I think the idea of elaborating on Bridgman is more to make sure you understand completely what his lines are depicting. Bridgman's lines are well chosen to suggest certain anatomical features. You can copy his lines all day but if you don't understand the underlying anatomy and form you won't be able to replicate his work on a different subject.
>>2345859 Wouldn't be the first time Frazetta lied, apparently. Supposedly he said in an interview once that he never uses reference and anyone who does is a cheater. But there are accounts of him using references. Hell, he probably referenced his own rockin' bod all the time.
>>2345871 >Supposedly he said in an interview once that he never uses reference and anyone who does is a cheater.
I'd be interested to see a citation on that because one of his own art books features him posing this bodybuilder guy that literally looked like He-man (down to the blonde mop-top) and it's common knowledge that both him and his wife modeled for his paintings.
I wouldn't be surprised if he believed these things early in his career (when he certainly wouldn't have been able to afford an in-house model) and may have doubled-back on that later on when he could.
Anyway, at the pace you were going you would have finished the entire book in 5 hours or less (probably) and the drawings themselves are great (even if you skipped a few, think I wouldn't notice, nigga?). I'm kind of bummed you quit, you did a great job with what you did do.
>>2345885 Yeah I dunno it's just something I've heard several times. First heard it in art school when a bunch of students brought it up and the teacher (George Pratt) seemed to be aware of the claim and said he didn't know why Frazetta said that.
Searching around online I see lots of people claiming he never used refs but little quotes from the man himself. A recount of it from Louise Simonson, comic book writer and Jeff Jones' ex wife: http://raggedclaws.com/2012/02/17/louise-simonson-on-frank-frazetta-jeffrey-jones-and-photo-reference/
Also, found the attached pic, from later in his life. http://fritzfrazetta.blogspot.com/2011/09/frazetta-on-frazetta.html
Obviously Frazetta could draw great stuff from his mind. But I guess he embellished the truth sometimes.
>>2346001 The bottom right picture has no real resemblance to the photo, though the bottom left certainly does.
>all that banter
Typical Italian. Still, with what that anon had produced earlier I'm confident that his claim to have drawn the entirety of Bridgman's book could have easily been true and I'd scarcely call it controversial at this point.
>>2346006 I really appreciate the suggestion but after looking into that program and downloading it earlier today I'd run into a problem with it. It doesn't capture the stage itself for whatever reason.
Even if I try and just capture from the monitor it goes to a black screen. I'm not sure how to progress from here. I don't know, it's probably not that important that I actually stream this anyway.
>>2346023 I wasn't able to work OBS either when I tried, so I downloaded xsplit. I would also recommend setting up at Picarto first because they actually have a great quick walkthrough on how to set the program up for streaming. Adding Twitch afterward is a breeze.
I'm still not really sure if Bridgeman is a good resource for anatomy. I went with it on /ic/ recommendation and I got really confused about how some of the hands didn't match hands I see IRL until I understood they were slightly exagerated/stylized/dynamic/whatever. Wanting to go for realism first I switched to other resources.
But then again I'm not a good artist and lots of good artists seem to love Bridgeman, so what do I know.
Honestly it's cool what Frazetta did for his time but now that we have other options maybe it would be best to try something else while retaining that spirit. I still want to try Constructive Anatomy just for the hell of it but the idea of speed-running an entire anatomy book sounds like it might be fun to try more than once-and to that end a more modern alternative might be something to consider, though I don't know what that book would be.
Loomis whom isn't much less "archaic" than Bridgman is a bit too top heavy on perspective, relating the figure to its environment and things like that which would make his books tough to copy in that same manner I feel. Hampton's book-while it's more like Birdgman's in the sense that it focuses on "disembodied anatomy" and figures not necessarily related to perspective, is, in stark contrast to Bridgman's gestural style, perhaps too detailed to expect to be able to get through the whole thing in a similar time-frame, too. FDDaI has many, sometimes dozens of highly detailed images on each of its 200+ pages. It might be possible to do in a weekend, but not a single day.
>>2344600 it not completely impossible but it is pointless. Doing all of this in a day you CAN NOT stay focused on what you're doing, You'll just be copying lines on paper.And that won't be of any benefit of you whatsoever other than saying you did it.It's like those losers that brag they know the latin name of every muscle but they can't draw it to save their life. What's the point ? With all that said it has to be noted that Frazetta had a holier-than-thou attitude.He straight up lied about ALOT of the mysticism that was created about him. One of his most famous ones that in all interviews he claimed he never used references for anything. Yet a close friend of his posted some photos of Frazetta obviously posing for reference for his pieces. There's always 2 sides of a coin ,and accepting facts based on nothing but verbal statements is leading to stupid threads like this. Work smart, not hard.
>>2348357 Infact i''ll be watching this thread, and i want you to post all the copies from the book. And then post an illustration showing off what you've learned from copying the book. Prove me that you're not just a dweller fan boy too offended to see his messiah criticised.
>The problem is that what Frank does is SO unique, that it is almost unbelievable. Yes, Frank did borrow images/poses from Foster in his early years. Yes, he did use swipes in about a dozen drawings and oils. Yes, he did glance in the mirror to grab a facial expression. Yes, he did use photo reference in his movie poster work. In those jobs everything had to be perfectly “on model” so the studios would send portrait photos of all the main stars. I knew EVERY instance where Frank borrowed an image or pose. They can be traced to Wyeth, to Pyle, to Burian, to Booth, to Foster, and a couple others. ALL THE ABOVE constitutes about 5% of Frank’s output-----THAT’S IT!!!!!!!!!!!!! Everything else is straight from the soul, right out of his creative imagination. I have seen him draw, watercolor, and paint many images right from scratch. Nothing there…no models…no photos...nothing, just that gargantuan treasure trove of memory and magic that defines Frazetta as the creative force he is.
>>2344600 This is a cool idea. I've sorta been doing something similar but instead its copying each bridgeman drawing about 9 times and redrawing 9 times without the reference. Doing that has helped me understand his drawings way better (doing that with master studies in general has been helpful).
This makes me want to try and get through the whole book that way in a week as a challenge though...
>>2348707 What I'm doing is slow-rolling it over the week and then going for the gold this sunday. I have to admit I'm pretty intimidated, a lot of Bridgman's drawings are so loose that it's hard for a novice like myself to follow along.
To be clear, he admits using photo reference in several works.
Also, it seems like he only skimmed through Bridgeman's book rather than being critical about every drawing.
And there was actually a second book he went through on that infamous night.
It's an over exaggeration and misinterpretation that he did his paintings in one night. He would do the finished full size painting in one night after having comp sketches and color already laid out, which he could transfer with a projector onto the final board. It's quite believable that he worked from imagination and did many paintings in one night, after all his painting style consists of using lots washes, leaving out a lot of detail, and not necessarily being always anatomically correct.
And after all of this people don't realize He only started doing his oil paintings when he was 35. FUCKING 35!! By the time he started doing those he had a third of a century's worth of experience drawing, a score in cartooning.
He did have a huge camera collection. And he probably used them, or just checked himself out in the mirror to see a pose or lighting. But he accomplished what he accomplished.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.