I should give up with Loomis? I don't really feel like

>>2372678
suki ni shiro yo

File: grtrthryh.png (41KB, 632x316px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 632x316px

nigger did you even read the book you have to think in 3d and draw in 3d
it's a sphere not a wobbly circle. the lines go around the form
the jar is a whatever that jar shape is. It's a 3d object connected to the sphere
the nose is a wedge
the eyes are the incave on the skull and the sphere of the eyeball not 2006 runescape eyes

Just keep drawing man do more perspective and simple shape drawings

>>2372678
>Should I give up? I don't feel like I'm getting it

You do realize how stupid that sounds right?
To learn something is to not get it and work until you get it. Sure you can give up, but if you actually want to do it then you need to keep practicing. With drawing you get out what you put in.

>>2372678
nah don't give up

you are at such a beginner stage you have a lot of options to pick from. It seems you want to draw a head?

Don't worry about Loomis and guidelines right now. >>2372701 as this anon suggests. Just draw objects in space. Don't even worry about grids and guides. Just get comfortable with line and line weight. Whatever program you're using. Opt for paper and pen/pencil

>>2373037
>Opt for Paper and pen/pencil

Please this, whatever program/device you're using is not cutting it. Looks like Paint+Mouse.

>>2372678

Fuck Loomis.

1. Do this every day
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgDNDOKnArk

2. Here how to draw head:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EPNYWeEf1U

3. "Keys to Drawing" by Dodson

No bullshit, no babbling like in "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" or in other Loomis book. You read 2 pages and you have to pick something and draw it.

No bullshit and handy information. Don't go Loomis (at least in the beginning), there's a reason why his books aren't published anywhere and being made for dead industry is only one of the reasons.

4. Connected with 1 and 3 - http://drawabox.com/lesson/1

Do exercises from here.

Afterword: Be smart, be analytical (not critical, analytical), experiment, do life drawings.

And most important - draw. Draw, draw, draw.

>>2373050
>Fuck Loomis.
>2. Here how to draw head: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EPNYWeEf1U [Embed]

that's spoonfed loomis

>>2373057

It sure as hell is better to get all the information in 5 minutes and then learn2draw than to get through pages of sad bullshit Loomis is telling in Head and Hands or going "wtf?!" for hours over drawings with no text or even minimal explanaition in "Fun with Pencil".

Fuck Loomis, seriously.

>>2373057
This, use a 100 year old teaching method from a time before backspaces existed rather than an edited video. (And it's before proko started all those shitty annoying skits, I swear I'd be more prone to purchase premium if those were removed.)

>>2373118
>>2373092
im not for or against either way

im laughing cause the dude said fuck loomis, then the proko video is basically loomis method.

>>2373057
better to eat soup with a spoon than a fork. -_-

you see: loomis... for all of his technical skill - merely wasnt a good teacher nor writer.

>>2373129
I can understand that, best way would use proko for an overview then hit loomis. More perspective and thought processes the better imo.

>>2373141
>>2373134
hahaaa i think my comment got out of hand... just disregard !

Guys... does that mean that I'm wasting my time over the overcomplicating verbose Loomis prose?

If I go through Proko's videos from the oldest order. Would it be enough to master figure drawing without needing to read any other book(are Bridgman and Hamm needed at this point)?

>>2373152

You don't understand - you don't get one source. You should pick up from different places and make a habit of synthesising that info for your work.

First start with basics - drawing straight lines. Drawing arcs and waves. Drawing ellipses. Controlling lineweight. Learning basics of perspective. Understanding basic shapes and how they intersect - cube, sphere, cyllinder.

And you do the life drawings. Seriously, go with "Keys to Drawing" at first since the guy has really straightforward approach to drawing and learning.

Studies should supplement you copying/referencing what you see. It should be half and half, maybe even more life drawing.

>>2373147
Don't worry, this thread is already doomed.

>>2373050
Nice tips, I will definitly give it a try even thought im not a beginner
Also do you know if Peter Han is drawing like Kim Jung Gi, without using any construction lines? I've watched 2 of his videos and he is drawing freehand everything without reference or guide lines... or at least it seems so.. He also use sick perspectives like Kim Jung Gi. I always wanted to draw like this but I have absolutly no mental imagery.

>>2373152
Honestly Loomis only helps if you have a modicum of drawing capability. He is at his best when talking about composition and illustrative storytelling. I would look towards other sources if you question is "how does i draw"

>>2373206

He can draw without construction lines because he already broke his drawing into figures and construction lines in his mind. If you did so many drawings as him and have a process broken down and excellent control over your lines, you don't really need construction lines.

I mean, it's at least what I tell myself. I haven't taken his dynamic sketching classes (would like to some day), but it seems that it's what he teaches his students - to break down everything you can see or imagine into basic shapes. If you master fundamentals, you can do fast and accurate sketches. Or something like that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzBmmU24ssg

>>2373185
I know that already. I finished that one already but I want to know for FIGURE DRAWINGS in specific. Like I'm onto figure drawings right now, reading Loomis. But I've found Prokofiev far more effective and I want to know if his videos also cover every single important information for figure drawing. Due to ic giving so many book recommendations I have wasted far more time reading from books whose information overlap. I mean, is there something that Proko doesn't cover in terms of figure drawing and which book should I read for that?

>>2372678
Oldfags keep telling you Loomis is a meme but you refuse to listen.

>>2373353

Well, there's also Vilppu "Drawing Manual" that goes with figure drawing. It overlaps with Proko lectures, but I would suggest getting it nonetheless at least as a supplement. It's filled with drawings, overlapping shapes etc. and it's really recommended for figure drawing by lots of anons.

I myself see it also as very accessible. Vilppu has a ton of video lectures supplementing it, but I haven't watched them yet (over 1h long each one, x12 videos just for the figure drawing + 10 videos on anatomy and + 3 on the head), though what's good about them is that he draws step by step and you can really see whole process. Personally when I'll be watching them, I'll be skipping over them.

Though yeah, I think that at least "Drawing Manual" of Vilppu would help you since to every chapter/lesson he gives tons of sketches.

>>2372678
Draw on paper first man, it looks like you have no idea how to use a tablet.

File: autismospheres.jpg (296KB, 960x1280px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 960x1280px

>>2372678

Jesus it took me so long to understand those fucking spheres and I still can't get them right.

If you want to draw the same spheres and handle the tilt and what not better, you'll need to understand perspective first. At least the bit about ellipses and their minor axis.

>>2373050
Lol. Can you even draw? Loomis is an incredibly respected artist and his method is used by countless artists.

>>2373794

Name few.

>>2373808
h-how

>>2373745
"Loomis is a meme" is a meme, invented by frustrated beginners like yourself.

File: 234525656.jpg (517KB, 1560x1250px) Image search: [Google]

517KB, 1560x1250px

>>2373814
Not him, but Loomis is very popular among japanese artists and western comic artists. You can see his construction methods and breakdown of anatomy used by countless of comic artists like Jim Lee, John Buscema, Steve Rude, Butch Guice, Alex Ross etc.

Ross has even worked on Loomis' last, unfinished book, wrote the foreword and added his own instructions where they were missing.

File: 282.png (177KB, 480x368px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 480x368px

>>2373791
Stop drawing these shit spheres

Those could all be portraits of people/characters
You would rather spend time learning how to draw a SPHERE than to draw a head or a face.

>>2373919

Not going to shit up the thread with my work but I do more than spheres anon. Also, if you think they're shit why don't you try some yourself.

A4. Ballpoint, go.

>>2373919
Learning how to take control of objects is vital for accurate work. But you're someone who posts spongebob instead of examples, so whatever.

>>2373936
I've been percieving ellipses to be the ends of cylinders, I just need something solid to attach them to.

>>2373057

Spoonfed Loomis is what most beginners need.

Proko synthesizes Loomis' method in such a way that any but the most hopeless cause can understand.

>>2373919

>stop putting down concrete foundations, those could all be big tall buildings! You would rather spend time learning how to SUPPORT a building than to build a tower!

Petition to remove Loomis from the sticky.

What does Keys to Drawing, and drawing on the right side of brain actually teach?

>>2374212
How to draw what you see rather than symbols

>>2374219

Thanks, then I guess I'll be fine if I skip those. I'm going through Loomis atm

File: Poop5.jpg (443KB, 1500x1071px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 1500x1071px

>>2373936
I was already in photoshop, so not traditional.
I started doing spheres and realized it's not worth my time doing your exercises. So I started drawing heads.
It's better to understand how ellipses work, and learning how to create two perpendicular ellipses at the angle that you want THEN put the sphere around it. Not the other way around. It's much easier to visualize by starting with ellipses.
Though, there comes a point that you have to realize that doing seemingly-endless spheres and ellipses is worthless anyway, so why not make them all heads or characters or even vehicles or objects. Actually apply knowledge to these spheres. I had this problem when I was learning to draw the head as well. Lots of "Loomis-Hampton head guidelines" with nothing in them. Utterly worthless.
The reason I called you out is because you seem to have a good understanding of ellipses and how spheres work, so why waste your own time filling up pages with that shit instead of cooler shit.

>>2374193
I don't disagree. But when you're drawing that many spheres, you're gonna end up killing yourself.

>>2374200
Foundations are important. But a lot of self-taught beginners stay in this foundation area, or as I like to call, the "safe zone"
I'm not talking never-have-drawn-before beginners, rather artists who CAN draw heads with some amount of confidence. Everything is super rigid and emotionless because they are worrying about perspective, construction, values, etc etc. And when they see that their art is shit, they go back to grinding fundamentals. Ultimately and sadly getting stuck in the cycle of the safe zone.
Nice dubs btw.

The more I write the more I also begin to realize how worthless it is replying to anyone anymore.

>>2374433
Not anyone you talked to, but any tips on drawing perpendicular ellipses? Do the major axes have to be perpendicular and the rest sorts itself out? Doing it like that sounds like a pretty good approach, thanks for putting it out there!

>The more I write the more I also begin to realize how worthless it is replying to anyone anymore.

I actually appreciate hearing your point of view, somethings to think about.

I did the sphere stuff for a little bit, and like all other shapes I often thought, "What can I do with this shape?" And end up getting sidetracked half the time. Because after so long it's all the same. Might as well make a basketball, Sliced watermelon, or whatever with it.

I've been think lately everyone's so hung up on the sphere/cranium all the time Never do I see anyone pull the jaw out and give it some attention, it's an entirely separate structure that has some independent movement, and requires a different method of construction especially at weird angle. Nor do I see people challenge themselves to draw from directly below or up high, a lot of information can be absorbed from looking at an object in ways we rarely see it.

>>2372678
Not sure if you gave a read to all of these "git gud at drawing" guidelines/schedules. There is a reason they start with perspective drawing, and that is so you can perceive 3d figures.
This is what you lack, this is why you can't draw your heads properly.


Would love to give you some redlines of your heads but I am lazy and you have your originals there (by the way, stop copying and try to understand what you're doing)

First one isn't that bad outside of the fact that you clearly didn't understand what that half circle in the top of the head is for.
Second one is the worst one, this is because you don't understand neither the rules nor the logic behind it, same goes for 3rd but atleast in this one the chin isn't as croocked.

See the proko head videos instead, he also teaches the loomis method. I suggest you to watch them first like it was a lecture, take small notes if you want but don't draw anything, that will come later, watch them a second time and now see how much you can get right, and write down everything you didn't get right or don't understand why like: "why does this guideline start here?", "what is this line for?" and etc. Then I will suggest you to try to answer these yourself like "it goes here because that's where the bone landmark is" and look at the video or the book again and see if you're right (this is like a test if you like, it helps you remember). I will then suggest you to look into other books/videos on the head/figure drawing just so you can get more things on this subject (example, I never undertood that the top of the ear is not always on the same line as the eyebrows, but the part where the arc starts is normally on the same line as the eye, think of glasses and the logic behind them, now this makes sense doesn't it?)

Understand first, practice later, reinforce what you learned and repeat.

Oh and once you're done understanding loomis give a read to hampton, or even better try to juggle between them.

>>2374433
Keep in mind that learning bad foundations leads to bad habits, and those are hard to get rid of.
is better to understand what you're doing (no need to perfect it, just get a good idea of "how" and "why")and then learn new things.

I do agree on everything else (or everyone else that has a grasp of what they're doing if you want to say), but the op seems far from being in a comfort zone (or safe zone as you said.)

File: Ellipses.jpg (194KB, 900x643px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 900x643px

>>2374537
You draw your first ellipse.
Then to draw the second ellipse, draw a random bisecting line...This determines the direction the sphere is "facing".
In order for the two ellipses to make a sphere, they both have to have the same radius, so both ellipses must intersect at the two points on the bisecting line.
The rest sorts itself out...as you can see, the major and minor axis on ALL of these ellipses are the same (Minus human freehand error). The second ellipse uses the major axis of the first ellipse as its own minor axis. From there, you can project a major axis and create your ellipse.

To be honest, I draw one ellipse, draw the major and minor axis, draw a bisecting line, then draw another ellipse that intersects both points.
There's a lot of eyeballing and trial and error to get the correct ellipse at the right angle, unfortunately, but I find this way to be much faster as you're not limited to the sphere size you set at the beginning of the other method. But both methods have the same end goal, so whatever works for you.

>>2373791
By analyzing it so heavily you are forcing the drawing into your high consciousness. You need to practice faster and learn with your intuitive mind, merely guided by the high consciousness.