What is a good site to get legitimate help/critique that isn't

>>2381562
No one can legitimately help you get better, people can just tell you what you are doing wrong and show you the right direction. In your case, my guess is you are drawing in symbols and to fix it you need to study the basic fundamentals that you can find in many art books, including those written by Andrew Loomis.

It's clear that you don't want to hear this answer, but if you ever want to improve, you have to face the truth sooner or later. Or alternatively you can search the internet for this magical, super helpful art community that will solve all your problems and show you the magic trick how to git gud easily.

>>2381574

but I am not. And I have proved it, but this site is so full of symbol drawing shitposters theres no such thing as legitimate critique here.

Post your work

>>2381576
Are you that guy from the other thread where you were asking how to draw eyes that don't look flat?

>>2381594

maybe

I've watched the proko videos a million times. And I've drawn the eyes as forms. I think my issue is mainly rendering.

>>2381598
Rendering is really just like the skin on an apple. Construction lies at the core of your problems.

>>2381598
try to do some still life studies, those are great when you are trying to understand form

what does drawing in symbols mean? ive never heard that term anywhere else before

>>2381883
see >>2373832

>>2381901
thank you very much!!

>>2381562
We'll critique you right now. Post some work for us to critique.

>>2381576
>>2381598

If it helps, and especially concerning the human features, you can be far past symbol-drawing and still be accused of it for any slight deviation from sound draughtsmanship since it looks like you've drawn something that isn't there - but not for lack of attempted honest observation.

Just keep drawing. If you trust that you're not drawing something the way you think it looks, but are making an actual effort to observe its effects, then disregard the critique and move on.

>>2381562
>he wants legitimate help/criitiques
>for free!

FUCK OFF JEW

>>2381562
There's a Facebook art critique group.

>>2381598

Post your work. I'll critique you.

Not this delusional fuck again. You ARE symbol drawing. It's not a useless meme if it's clear and fucking obvious by your results that are indeed symbol drawing. No amount of tutorials and proko videos is going to change that for you, you need to practice form and construction until the results show that you're past symbol drawing; which your drawings show as undeniable evidence that you clearly fucking haven't.

You aren't looking for critique or direction on what you should be doing, you're only looking for someone to tell you what you want to hear because there were an absolute myriad of anons giving sound advice, instruction and direction on what you need to work on to get where you wanna be but for whatever reason you outright ignored them and instead got hung up on wording that you didn't like. There isn't a shortcut or secret technique that's being withheld from you, even if you did go somewhere else anyone else worth their salt are going to say the exact same thing as you've been told multiple times and ignoring that is just going to impede you in the long run.

You already know what you need to do, you just don't want to do it.

File: nmnegger.gif (1MB, 280x200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 280x200px

>>2382632
screw you memelord memeing me in this itt memeboard, there is no symbol drawing t-this is just my style

Ok fine but what the hell do I do to make it look 3D without using shading. Because I just drew another eye from a reference, and it still looks like a fucking symbol, even though I drew exactly what I saw.

Oh come on /ic/. Let's not kid ourselves. Yes, perhaps OP is wrong, but that doesn't change much because we do have a problem. So many idiots see other idiots spamming loomis, fundamentals and symbol drawing that they figure thats the cure all critique and use it as a way to make it look like they know what they are talking about. I have no idea how many times I've seen people come down on artists for contrived bullshit. They call out symbol drawing on a low rez character that's part of a bigger picture, they spew loomis when someone tries to draw somebody with an unusual face and they usually act like an assholish god of critique that has somehow managed to justify all his spittle and vitriol by even daring to judge such a shitty piece. It's counterproductive and sad.The worst part is, when they witness entertaining banter of a couple people tearing into a delusional idiot like a punching bag, they grab their gloves and get in line and wait their turn. Somewhere along the line, we went from trying to stick it to delusional fucks to becoming a drunken hammer that only sees nails and doesn't care which ones need to be hit or how hard.

Don't believe me? Watch the next couple draw threads. For every 10 snarky, misguided comments, you'll see 1 well written break down with visual aid and resources.

Like, i follow the proko vids, but I am using pencil, not charcoal. And I've been bitched at saying you don't need shading to show 3D form at the start. And yet when I do exactly what I see, it still looks flat. I'm beginning to get extremely frustrated over this shit.

>>2386514
so.... are you practicing drawing and understanding forms or not? can you draw boxes at every angle? can you shade spheres in different light? this is what you have to do to git gud, and it happens so that people who symbol draw need the help from books like loomis to get this practice.

>>2386640

Loomis is shit tier

>>2386640

Drawing a million cubes isn't going to help me get eyes right. I've been drawing eyes AS THEY ARE, and they still look flat. I am doing this without shading because I was shit on before, saying shading isn't the only thing needed to make them look like 3D forms.

Yet when I draw the eye/look at the eye, all the shapes/etc make it look flat. Why I don't know.

And yet ill probably still get shit on for saying that, but thats how it is.

>>2386661
A good exercise that helped me out was
Peter Han's Week 2 of his dynamic sketching class. You basically draw a bunch of blobs and give them contour lines. Thing is, don't copy his blobs, make shapes that will mind fuck YOU and try to give them contour lines. They have to challenge you so you're forced to think as to where to put the lines.

>>2386677

Is that what I am doing wrong is just adding the contour lines of the forms? Whats the "bare minimum" for a 3D form, seeing as shading isn't totally necessary. Is it just randomly placed lines to show the shape of the form along with the actual outline of the form?

>>2386717
Well, the way it works is to, as to why things look 3D is that there are key elements on the form that make it look 3D. Even animu characters have special values on them to give their shapes a more "3D" look, even if it's very simplified.

Creating these contour lines on these blobs I mentioned help train your mind into see things in 3D. That way, in the future, when drawing figures, you'll notice how incorrect some parts look, simply because you understand 3D more.

>>2386734

like, i tried drawing a couple friends eyes off FB and they just came out looking flat as shit. I'll show them in a moment. And maybe you'll see what I am talking about.

File: hampton cgma lectures.png (330KB, 439x477px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 439x477px

>>2386740
they look flat cause you're making them flat. Just look up dynamic sketching 1 and learn the basics from there. It should help you understand 3D a lot more.

im legit not trying to shitpost, but meh

>>2386773

That's because tracing lines generally still doesn't capture forms well.

Draw some basic shapes, and wrap cross-contour lines around them. Like a 'label'. You're not drawing the eye as a sphere with the lids wrapped around it, you're still symbol drawing the shit out of it.

Slap cross-contour lines on goddamn everything until you get a feeling for it. I think it's one of the best ways to force your mind into seeing things three-dimensionally.

>>2386773
Uh.

>>2386801

I'll do that, but thats what I was trying to do with the lid/ball of the eye (drawing the lid around it). And I was trying to "curve" around the form. But obviously it's not working.

>>2386773

It seems like you are very impatient and letting the frustrations get the better of you. It's clear in your lines and strokes.

Do this: get an anatomy reference book, look up absolute everything that composes and eye. Construct the eye from the very big and farthest away from viewer, then work down to detail and have everything come forth. What I mean is eye socket > eyeball > lids, etc.

Learn why an eye is what it is and what it does. Do it a ton over until you know everything about the eye. Get your mind to understand the function and form of the eye until it becomes second-nature to you. Learn how values strike the parts of the eye. Learn what is only visible to the viewer on the surface. Do it until you have this shit down easy and can draw an eye very decently on demand. Do construction and composition then worry about value after. After you're done, if you think anything negatively, move onto to the next or take a break until you have new eyes and a blank mind to come back to. If you're still reeling about it, find ways to relax and then focus.

If you STILL can't do it, nigga, you gotta get them demons out.

I'm the anon who posted the Hampton image, and all I gotta say is that I'm surprised at other people coming in and trying to help. Why does this place get bad rep again?

>>2386805

I've watched the eye construction vid from proko. I've gone through his shit a million times, shit never wants to stick/click.

What about the whole curves/lines/lineweight ordeal? I know about the peter han exerrcises/drawabox exercises. But how many times do I have to do them before they actually start to work? My curves/lines are still wobbly as shit most of the time.

>>2386815
Heads can be kind of complex, anon.
If proko isn't doing it for you, look up Hampton's anatomy course from CGMA (you can easily find this via google search), or grab Vilppu's videos from the Book thread and watch all 3 parts of the Head section in the anatomy course.

Both Hampton and Vilppu treat the eye like a ball. Basically, they go about it the way this >>2386805 anon said, but forming basic shapes to create an eye.

It's going to be A LOT of info, but don't fear it. You may have to attempt the head several times, fail, and re-watch the lectures a few times.

>>2386820

Yeah I know, it took me forever just to get the fucking CIRCLE down to even put anything resembling a lay in down for the head. Because my circle was always lopsided/uneven. And it still is most of the time.

I've got all the loomis books, the vilppu pdf/videos. Even then I still continue to fail. It's beyond frustrating that I still can't get passed this shit.

>>2386821
Just learn basics first via Dynamic Sketching and Perspective. Some of these courses you're watching treat you, assuming you understand your basics. Hence why it may be going over your head.

>>2386821
Honestly it just sounds like you're missing the fundamental element: Line.

If you can't draw a clean, non-wobbly line with ease and confidence, as well as (near) perfect circles, squares, ovals, and free-form shape (pretty much any 2d shape, then of course make an accurate sphere is going to be pain.

You really have to lay importance on the bare basics of drawing, because only then does everything start to fall in place.

Do daily line excercises. Fill entire pages with straight/curved line, circle, ellipse, and free-form shape excercises. It's tedious and can take weeks or months, depending on how dedicated you are, but it improves your control over your pencil remarkably.

Don't jump ahead, anon. Learn the very basics. Once you've obtain that, it'll come you a lot faster. From my personal experience, I remember watching Hampton's lectures and not understanding shit he said. 6 months later, after doing more basic studies, suddenly everything was clicking.

You're not a lot on this frustration. It's always funny to see how things never change, how beginners all complain about the same thing but when they stick to it, they come out with amazing things. Just keep at it, don't let these things boggle you down.

>>2386837

the problem is, obviously i need to work on hand steadiness, etc. But I actually want to DRAW things, not bore myself to death learning these things, to a point where I lose interest in trying to improve. You can only draw so many lines/cubes/spheres until you say fuck it.

are you going to post pics

>>2386902
sorry man, you're never going to be good unless you learn the boring stuff

theoretically (1) you understand everything about boring cubes spheres cylinders, then (2) you git gud so you never shitpost like this

unless you show us your progress, all we can tell you is to keep drawing boring forms
stop being so stubborn and help us help you

>>2386902

There's not really anything we can do to help you then, if your not willing to do the work you don't reap the rewards.

The fact is studying fundamentals is the fast majority of improving art, if you cant do that then you won't ever be a decent artist.

We can't bend reality for you and give you magic drawing powers.

>>2386429
Stop drawing eyes you spastic. Draw simple shapes from life. Get some fucking cans vases and bottles and grind still lifes like you're supposed to

>>2386920

jesus christ

I never said I wasn't willing to put in the work.

But who the fuck wants to spend their drawing time doing NOTHING but that shit?

>>2386925


you can do half line/ellipse practice and half figure practice and you will still improve

doing only basics will make you improve faster however. That's just how reality works we cant change it for you.

If your stuck you just have to grind it out, take a break every half hour and come back, repeat forever

I'm going to be honest though if this frustrated at the beginner phase when you should be improving rapidly your gonna have tough times ahead.

>>2386925
you're basically saying "i fucking basic stuff, so stop telling me to go jogging. all I want is to do 400 yd sprints, and I can't get out of the couch, but why are you morons telling me to go jog? all I want to do is sprints, so tell me how to do sprints."

what other analogies? "i want to make a fucking wedding cake, but I don't know how to even bake. so stop telling me the science of baking, because I just want to make a fucking wedding cake."

maybe im not good at this

File: aruu study.png (165KB, 600x412px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 600x412px

>>2386925
>But who the fuck wants to spend their drawing time doing NOTHING but that shit?

Unfortunately, there's no better way to approach it. It's a shitty and frustrating method, but it's the only way to git gud. You need to understand shapes a lot if you're gonna wanna say, get into design. Once you get into design, you can start making shitty animu or cute gaming characters. Once you design said characters, you may realize they still look like shit, and that's when you start studying anatomy or whatever.

Here's a fur artists I look up to you, cause fuck you I love drawing furry shit. And even furries will tell you, if you wanna learn how to draw furries, you need to learn your fundamentals. No matter where you go, you're gonna get the same answer. Only differences is, /ic/ was willing to help guide you in the right direction with incredible sources. Don't let it go to waste.

This fur artists went by via Loomis method.
You're not reading books like Loomis to draw like them, you're reading them to learn How To Draw.

>>2386925
Nigga it ain't even that hard desu. I have ADD and I was (and still am) able to kick myself in the ass grinding the base level shit. If you try to skip to all the complicated shit right off the bat, you'll progress three times slower and eventually hit a platue (like your current obstacle), and when that happens you'll regret how much time you've wasted ignoring the basic fundamentals.

You can't build a sturdy house without a solid foundation. Can't draw a circle or ellipse? Good luck drawing a sphere. Can't comprehend perspective innately (without having to put plot lines and marks all over the place)? Good luck making a sphere that looks convincingly 3-dimensional. Can't make every primitive shape in 3d convincingly? Good luck constructing a 3-dimensional person without reference.

The sad, hard truth that you need to grow up and realize is that "gitting gud" takes loads of work, discipline, and patience. There are no shortcuts, there is no quickfix technique that's going to boost you to being able to do something you want to do, and you can't make something look convincingly 3-dimensional without practicing circles, lines, and curves.

>>2386956
how dare you call aruurara furshit artist? hes tasteful kemono artist.

>>2386977
kemono, furry, same thing.
Actually, I get where you're coming from. I'm going more for kemono than furry. I don't know why, but I find kemono really appealing. Guess I'm a furfag at heart. Luckily, the guy is very talkative and will answer some questions. And surprise, his studies involve Loomis and other books /ic/ recommends.

So, I guess the only type of people to make these kinds of topics are ones who get frustrated with their studies?

>>2386902

The trick is juggling both doing personal projects and studying things that you need fundamentally.

If you learn construction, you can quickly work those lines/cubes/spheres into "actually drawing things". It still amazes me how useful knowing basic shapes is when you're trying to draw something.

I think a good way to learn is spend a few hours on your fundamentals, then do a personal project where you apply what you learned to a more finished product. That way you get the satisfaction of doing what you want in addition to the sort of studying necessary to figure shit out.