Loomis vs Hampton Figure Drawing

If you have the spark, you don't ask. Someone with the spark would just work through both books, twice, and find out for themselves.

>>2489448
Thank you for not removing the warning.

>>2489448
The better book is the one you find easier to learn from. I personally prefer Hampton but if you find both equally helpful, then use both.

>>2489448
Vilppu

>>2489476
kek didn't even see that
>>2489500
This is what I'm doing now, but Loomis seems to be more practical, immediately giving you some "shortcuts" (like the "cape") to represent bones.
>>2489503
Why is he better?

>>2489785
>>>2489503
>Why is he better?
Probably because he's alive and keeping up with the times, I'd guess,

both have strengths and weaknesses. i'd start with hampton and move to loomis afterward. hampton is more "big picture". the problem with students of loomis is that their figures come out looking very stiff and rigid. they are excellent at construction of individual parts but lack gesture and action.

>>2489785
>Why is he better?
Because the construction approach of hampton and loomis only gets you so far. Sooner or later you just got to know how to feel it.
Show me one god-tier current artist who constructs like hampton everytime he draws a body.

My tip: Study loomis or hampton, but practice vilppu.

Bridgman.

actually he's tough to digest at first so start with hampton. Loomis's instruction is super beginner-tier despite the quality of his finished work. He's worth reading through once or twice, but spend your time on hampton till you're comfy with it then move on to bridgman.

I feel like Hampton is most logical and instructive. Loomis books are a bit denser and harder to follow imho but still great, loomis also covers more stuff. Bridgman is fucking amazing of course but you need to have some understanding and skill already before diving into him otherwise he makes no sense.

Summary
Loomis : accurate proportion, various face
Hampton : understand of 3d shape of human

>>2494138
Thanks family guy